I switched from Biden to Gabbard or Castro

[metroins]

I actually still like Biden a lot, and I will not say anything bad about him or why I switched.

However, I think Castro came off as very "presidential" and I looked more into his stances and I just like him a lot. I (very moderate) also really like Tulsi, my wife (very far left) and my mom (far right) all like Tulsi. I think she can beat Trump due to her personality and strength. I do not identify with anybody in the first debate.

I donated to both Castro and Tulsi tonight, hopefully Tulsi and Castro can gain some steam and keep going.

This post is not at all to be negative about Biden, I'm just trying to say I liked the way these two candidates performed. I'll vote for any democrat that wins the primary.

[PatrickforO]

1. I thought Gabbard had a very good debate tonight. Castro as well.

Of course the media spun it differently, but I think the winners of tonight's debate were Booker, Castro, and Gabbard.

Yang and Inslee also made some very good points.

[metroins]

7. I agree with all of your statements. nt

[brush]

31. Gabbard is a DINO, has appeared on FOX multiple times attacking Obama and...

and rushed to meet with trump when he was elected. And then there is her cozying up to Assad and Putin.

You need to do some research.

[PatrickforO]

37. I'm thinking about it. Gabbard isn't going to make it deep in the primary,

Last edited Fri Aug 2, 2019, 02:11 AM - Edit history (1)

of course, so our discussion here is a bit of a moot point.

Still, it bothers me that someone who went and served this country in the forever war, then came back and was duly elected to the US Congress by the people of HI (and HI is pretty blue), is now labeled here as a DINO.

I can remember asking before, "Say, I've noticed lots of negativity on here towards Tulsi Gabbard. Why is that?" I received answers similar to what you have said in the post above. She is apparently guilty of 'cozying up.'

Now, I wonder why.

Let's do a bit of exploring what is in front of our eyes. First, as regards this site, there are many on here who absolutely despise Bernie, and Gabbard did resign as co-chair of the DNC to endorse Bernie in 2016. Unforgivable, and utterly horrible for about a third of the people on here, I think.

Now, I was a big Bernie supporter too, because I never thought the centrist philosophy was good for the American people or for our party. And, yes, I know Bernie is not a Democrat, and I'm supporting Warren now because she most closely matches my own philosophy. What lost me for Bernie was how many of his supporters stayed away from the polls or voted Stein. That was bad.

OK, so around here, for the majority, Bernie is anathema. It is true 2016 was a rancorous primary, and we could in fact write a book about it.

Gabbard was a soldier. She went and served this country in the forever war. Now she is anti-war. I saw a NBC hit-piece just yesterday on here condemning her for 'cozying up' to Assad. NBC said she was being promoted by 'known Russian' social media trolls. However, about two posts later in the thread, this NBC article was debunked. Apparently the guy running this particular troll farm has Republican, not Russian connections, though the line between those two is very...shall we say tenuous.

So she said, "Assad is not the enemy of the United States." Let's take that in the context of Gabbard's belief that we should not build an alliance to strike Syria and deepen the wars in the Mid-East. Since Russia and China were also opposed to military intervention, and at the time the US was touting it, naturally Gabbard was associated with Russia. I'd very much disagree with that association because Gabbard took a position based on her understanding of the uselessness and needless death and destruction in the wars in which she herself participated, this makes her some kind of a Russian asset. You want Russian asset, look at Trump and Moscow Mitch. Gabbard, not so much.

To my mind, the biggest strike against Gabbard is her hard-line anti-LGBTQ rhetoric before she fell into line with the Democratic platform. I'm far more inclined to be troubled by this than by anything else about this candidate.

So, Gabbard. Where do I stand? I stand with Warren because I think she'd make an excellent president. However, I will support any of the other candidates should they be nominated as our party's candidate, including Gabbard. That won't happen, but I have not seen or heard anything that convinces me Gabbard is some kind of Russian asset, or pals around with Assad, or is a Democrat in name only. I just haven't. She served this country honorably, and continues to serve the people of her state.

Should Gabbard be nominated, though, I would have some concern about her strength on social justice, her understanding of domestic policy and her tendencies toward excessive isolation.

Just a couple more thoughts. I always like to play a little game called Cui Bono, which is who stands to benefit from burying Gabbard in this primary? Let's make a short list:

1. The military industrial complex - the last thing firms like Boeing, Lockheed, Raytheon, Ball and other military contractors want is for us to elect a president who is fervently anti-war. Lots of money is changing hands with these forever wars, and this year's 'defense' budget was $733 billion. They don't want cuts because it is bad for their shareholder profits.

2. The more centrist wing of the Democratic party, which is still convinced we cannot win an election with big and progressive ideas, but instead have to kowtow to some mythical white blue collar worker in the midwest. As Moore pointed out last evening on MSNBC, though, and he is right, the real working class is mostly women, young people and people of color. We lost the so called Reagan Democrats decades ago and they aren't coming back. This centrist group is currently backing Biden quite forcefully.

So there you have it. My somewhat complete thoughts on Gabbard. Not a traitor (you want traitor, think Trump and Moscow Mitch). Possibly an isolationist. Possibly still fighting internal battle around LGBTQ rights. Not a pal of Assad. Anti-war. An honorable soldier of the millennial generation we so vitally need to come to the polls next year.

I've found the millennials, since I work with so many of them, think for themselves. They've been screwed by the establishment every which way but loose, and their lives are a constant struggle against heavy student debt loads. They struggle with unaffordable housing, clogged roads and jobs that don't pay enough. They need childcare, healthcare, relief from debt and a better future.

We'd better come in with a big bold vision to galvanize them like JFK did my generation. To my mind, Biden isn't it, neither is Gabbard, Hickenlooper, Delaney, De Blasio, and the others. I think we'd be MUCH better off to run Booker, Castro, Harris or Warren.

[brush]

39. I like your choices. And btw, Gabbard was elected to the House not Senate.

She also was considered for trump's cabinet and is a favorite of Breitbart and Bannon. I don't even get why she's running as a Dem.

[PatrickforO]

49. Oh oh. Faux pas! Thanks for the correction.

[CentralMass]

52. A small point on the Bernie voters who did not vote for Hillary.

It is a fact of life that in every presidential election there are primary voters who don't end up voting for the parties nominee when their candidate loses.

In 2016 it was estimated that 12% (another study said 6%) of Sanders primary voters voted for tRump. In comparison in the 2008 election it was estimated that 24% off Hillary voters voted for McCain. The 2016 study also look at what type of voters the Sanders-tRump voters were and it concluded that were not democrats.

Of note is that in two of the rust belt (blue wall) states, Michigan and Wisconsin that tRump won have open democratic primaries.

[Demsrule86]

34. Neither has a chance at we winning the primary or general.

I would vote for any Democrat in a general...but not all of them can beat Trump. Polls sjow Biden can beat Trump.

[thesquanderer]

36. Actually, I think Gabbard may be the one most capable of beating Trump.

I know, the polls don't show that, but you can't trust the "head-to-head vs. Trump" polls for candidates with very low name recognition.

Gabbard has (admittedly to the disappointment of some here) some amount of right wing appeal. More than that--and perhaps this is really the source of the right-wing appeal that she does have--she has some of that anti-establishment appeal that brought some voters to Trump... and also brought some voters to Sanders. In fact her 2016 support of Sanders and support of numerous similar policies would help her with that contingent as well. She's very telegenic. She's a veteran. I think she would be strong against Trump on the debate stage. Her biggest weakness for some people would be her apparent tolerance for Syria's al-Assad, but Trump and the Republicans are in no position to go after her for that.

I feel better about the possibility of Biden being our nominee after last night's debate, it eased (but did not eliminate) my concern that, despite polls showing he beats Trump by more than anyone else, he wouldn't survive debates with Trump. I am still skeptical that he is the strongest choice. Gabbard is not my first choice, but I'd feel more confident going up against Trump with Gabbard than with Biden. But that's today. We'll see what happens over the next 6+ months.

[Demsrule86]

45. He is the strongest choice because of his influence in blue wall states...and the inability of other

candidates to win these states...if debates were all important Romney would have won...Obama has a bad first debate.

[thesquanderer]

46. Yes. Even master orator Obama had an awful debate performance. But...

...he recovered in the next one. If he hadn't, he could well have lost. I'm not confident that Biden, if he had a bad one, could recover in the next, he's no master orator. Nor would he have the advantage of incumbency.

This is one reason my pick at this point is Elizabeth Warren. She's not perfect. In some ways, I prefer other candidates. But I've seen debate performances from her that make me confident that she can go one-on-one with Trump and come out ahead. I haven't seen that kind of performance yet from Biden. Or many of the others.

[Demsrule86]

48. I have heard Biden on the campaign trail many times...he will be fine...and EW won't win

the rust belt...and her medicare for all stance is disqualifying in a general IMHO. We would end up with a popular vote win and an electoral college loss if she was our nominee...I would vote for her of course. But I don't think she can win...not sure any woman can win after 16.

[Thekaspervote]

54. Unfortunately I agree.. sad but this country isn't ready for a women prez

[Demsrule86]

62. I am sad about it too... I am not sure a woman VP pick is a good idea this year.

I still can't believe Trump won.

[Thekaspervote]

53. You do realize that the dotard will not debate with any democrat

[thesquanderer]

59. I think he won't be able to resist the appeal of the TV monopolization and

the "huge" ratings it would get... and he is narcissistic enough to believe that he'll "win" the debate no matter who it is. So while I agree that it might not be in his political interest to debate, and that he would have no compunction about not doing it arising from any sense of propriety, I still think that he'll do it.

[real Cannabis calm]

43. I'm not switching loyalties, because we need a prosecutor to put Trump and Barr in prison, but:

Senator Booker was very presidential, as he promoted unity among Democrats.

[UniteFightBack]

2. Well that is exactly what they were trying to do...garner more support and get those donations

rolling in.

[metroins]

6. I guess that's what the whole process is about right now. nt

[womanofthehills]

60. So, you like a women who has the same opinion as Barr about the Mueller report

What's up with that?? She thinks Trump is innocent?????????

[crazytown]

3. You might want to check some of the interviews Tulsi has done at Breitbart.

She granted them one after the last debate. There might be another there tonight.

[metroins]

5. I will check them out and be following her for sure.

I don't mind a democrat talking to republican sources...even as vile as breitbart.

[crazytown]

9. Gabbard was vetted for Trump's cabinet,

on the recommendation of Steve Bannon. They like her over there.

[metroins]

14. So was McMaster

and I liked McMaster, as well as Jim Mattis.

Just because she was up for a GOP job doesn't make her less of a Democrat. Obama had GOP in his administration as well.

[crazytown]

19. Well it is your call of course.

I personally would not have much to do with someone who shares common ground with actors from the alt right.

[Thekaspervote]

55. That is 2 entirely different kettle of fish!

[womanofthehills]

50. She has a questionable past herself - she was a mega anti LGBT person (who later evolved}

Harris (on Rachel's show - a few weeks ago ) - some of the lawyers under Harris made decisions on their own - thinking they did not need to run them past her. She admitted she should have been on top of it. (Harris evolved - look at her Senate work.) Sounds to me like the pot calling the kettle black.

Gabbard was an ardent foe of equality for queer people in her younger years, working for two anti-LGBTQ organizations in the late ’90s that were led by her father. Mike Gabbard, a Hawaii legislator who helped drive the fight against marriage equality in the state, headed up the Alliance for Traditional Marriage and Stop Promoting Homosexuality, which promoted harmful conversion therapy.

The younger Gabbard, elected to the Hawaii legislature herself in 2002 at the age of 21, railed against “homosexual extremists” in 2004, coming out against same-sex civil unions in her state. That same year she opposed anti-bullying legislation meant to protect gay students, arguing that it would teach young people that homosexuality is “normal and natural.”

Years later, while successfully seeking a U.S. House seat in 2012, Gabbard portrayed herself as having evolved and apologized for “very divisive and even disrespectful” positions and comments in the past. And this week she issued a statement apologizing further:

“First, let me say I regret the positions I took in the past, and the things I said. I’m grateful for those in the LGBTQ+ community who have shared their aloha with me throughout my personal journey.”

and further in the article:

Recently, she wrote a Hill op-ed that was lauded by right-wing publications. In the piece she attacked those like Democratic Sens. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii and Kamala Harris of California who sharply questioned Brian Buescher, a religious extremist nominated by Trump to a federal district court vacancy in Nebraska, accusing them of “religious bigotry.” Although Gabbard did not name either senator in the op-ed, the fingerpointing was clear.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/opinion-tulsi-gabbard-lgbtq-rights_n_5c3e250ce4b0922a21d93a93

[applegrove]

4. Gabbard was #1 on google look up tonight. Way to play Russia. Way to play.

[apcalc]

28. Agree, the Russian trolls ' love' Gabbard...Dino. Untrustworthy.

[MBS]

47. Agreed. n/t

[ecstatic]

8. Tulsi benefits from looking TV presidential. That's it.

There's no there there, IMO.

[metroins]

10. She's a congresswoman

With tours in military, she's vegetarian, a yogi and is intelligent.

I also think she has a team behind her that is managed well to make her performance come off so composed. Which to me says leadership skills. I just want to see her get further in the process and make her case to more people.

I don't think we as Democrats should be tearing each other down. I wasn't a huge fan of her attacking Harris.

[msongs]

11. stating the voting record is not tearing down other democrats. nt

[EffieBlack]

21. A vegetarian? Well that seals the deal for me

[metroins]

22. Your post is rude.

[still_one]

24. You do know what the "scarcasm" tag means don't you?

[metroins]

25. That's what made it rude.....

[woodsprite]

12. I'm sure David Duke and Putin approved of her performance. nt

[SaschaHM]

17. Gabbard eargerly voted against providing safe refuge to Syrian refugees.

She may claim to be against "regime change wars", but sending refugees back to die has never stopped wars and none of her cheerleading for Assad has stopped him from gassing, torturing, imprisoning, and murdering his own citizens.

And before Tulsi's Defender tries to say "We need to talk to Dictators". Tulsi is a single congresswoman and has next to no power when it comes to making military decisions. She has no reason to dine with a Dictator and then continue to cheerlead for him.

[Devil Child]

20. Thanks for the post metroins!

Gonna send off another donation Rep. Gabbards way tonight!

[silentEcho]

23. The only Gabbarb supporters I know are yelling that white men are the true ones discriminated

against. I have been asking for the last week what that is about.

[Mike Nelson]

26. I thought they...

… both were impressive, and Yang, too... I thought your decision not to go negative about your previous choice was classy. From the first debate, I liked Amy and Pete... but also Elizabeth and Bullock. I know there are "how left" differences, but we will get someone to govern pretty much how they are able... the Senate/House will decide how progressive.

[calimary]

29. Don't forget Inslee! He actually got some meaningful time tonight.

[Mike Nelson]

30. I agree...

… there are many good candidates. I also did not think they were unusually nasty to each other... they pointed out things that were fair. A long-time, successful politician is going to have a record with political missteps. Nobody compared penis size, as Trump and Rubio did in a Republican debate. Nobody said a woman's face was ugly or another man's hair was bad, as Trump did in a Republican debate. The media should mention that!

[apcalc]

27. Gabbard is untrustworthy. A homophobic Dino, imo.

[MFM008]

32. Gabbard

And Williamson are absolute non starters for me.

[uponit7771]

35. +1

[Hortensis]

33. Okay. As you say, we're on the same team.

[NYMinute]

38. Cool story bro nt

[Tommy_Carcetti]

40. I'm really really curious what Gabbard positively offers over any other candidate

It’s not that she doesn’t have stances I don’t agree with her on.

It’s just her wholehearted embrace of conservative media and her Trump-like coddling of authoritarian figures under the false narrative of “peace” that will never, ever have me trusting her.

[LincolnRossiter]

42. Yeah if I'm judging her by the way I hear the rightwing clowns on my football board talk about her,

she's a no-go for me. They all seem to like her for some reason. I don't know enough about her policy positions to judge whether it's that or something else. But she's definitely this year's darling of the other side.

[LincolnRossiter]

41. Aside from Biden, Castro, Buttigieg, and Warren are my favorites

They're to the left of me on a number of things, but they seem to have the clearest heads, the most policy acumen, the most sincerity, and the most focus. No heartache voting for any of them.

[JustAnotherGen]

44. I leaned over

Towards Biden last night.

He has grit. When I see a pack of banshees going after Gabbard and her 'handling' it as well as Biden did? Eh?

Won't happen. She won't be the nominee. Too wooden for Republican Women who would be first time Democratic Voters.

[UniteFightBack]

51. You are kidding me...you did? Hey I have an idea you should make a thread about it. nt

[Demsrule86]

61. Neither Gabbard nor Castro can win a general...Castro's position on immigration is a loser for us

in the general...and Gabbard won't win either...she is doing badly in polls...both candidates are at or near the bottom and will be out by Iowa in my opinion. I sincerely hope neither win as we will surely lose the general. I would of course vote for them and any other Democratic nominee.

[tirebiter]

56. A lot of other folks have given their opinion of Gabbard so I'll talk

Castro. Appears to be a bright young man but essentially talking open borders isn’t such a winning notion. I’d like for things to be a lot more casual but open borders is DOA.

[Hoyt]

57. Not sure he's for open borders. But we've got some candidates who promote junk called "Economic

Patriotism” which is nothing more than the American First crud we have now.

With regards to Mexico and Central America, unless we help them through trade, we will always be fighting an immigrant war. Similarly, by refusing to help poor countries grow in Asia, Middle East, Africa, we’ll be fighting wars because they would like to share in wealth too.

Fact is, except for the poorest in America who definitely deserve help, we are the upper 5% on Earth.

Not talking about your favorite candidate (he seems reasonable like Obama), unless he’s forced to join the America Firsters by the candidates I’m referring to.

[tirebiter]

58. Decriminalizing all border crossing sounds like open borders to this gringo.

like I said a more casual attitude would be cool but open borders won’t cut it politically.

[Hoyt]

63. So, you are for rounding up people who made it here and sending them back. You are right, though,

there are a lot of Americans who are fine with arresting poor immigrants, throwing people in cages, walls, etc.

If we want to do something, how about helping these countries rather than demonizing them for taking American jobs. Help them, and they don't need to migrate. And, it will help us.

When I hear Democratic candidates talking "Economic Patriotism," tariffs, demonizing poor people in Mexico, it bothers me. Sorry.

[tirebiter]

64. Returning to refugees get a pass requires substantiation of claims

I said more casual not more casualties. There’s a difference, however nuanced it may seem.