Tulsi Gabbard attacks the DNC

[brooklynite]

Link to tweet

[PatSeg]

16. Welcome to DU

I am relatively new to New Hampshire and though it IS pretty white, it is not always conservative friendly. Both our senators are Democrats AND women. We have two congressional representatives and they are Democrats as well. I'm not sure how we ended up with Sununu as governor, but I don't think he'll get reelected. Senator Maggie Hassan was governor before Sununu.

It is a rather odd state, quite unlike any place I've lived before, but it does seem to usually lean left, with some Libertarians mixed in who can go either republican or Democratic.

[NurseJackie]

2. Had it previously been recognized by the DNC?

If so, when?

[ritapria]

3. Is the Boston Globe NH Poll recognized by the DNC ?

[LongtimeAZDem]

5. Now: "Tulsi Gabbard attacks the DNC"; Coming Up Next: "Fire can hurt you"

[QualTest]

6. Is/Was this a recognized poll by the DNC?

Will it be used for the rankings of other candidates?

Not trying to be obtuse, simply fair.

[B Stieg]

7. Gabbard is polling at 1.3%, nationally (RCP Average)...nt

[Me.]

9. An Election Tradition

Not Winning = Blaming Dems

Tulsi's smart, unless she's delusional she knows she's not a big hit with the Dems especially as she's always dissing all manner of Dems, so why would she think constant carping is a winning formula?

[LiberalLovinLug]

14. She had a plan going in. She saw an untapped demographic

I don't doubt her beliefs, and her passion about not starting unnecessary wars. I think we all share that same belief.

It is shared by independents and even many Republicans. I think she watched the last primary and saw that there was a divide growing between the progressive left and the status quo more conservative Dems. She also watched the DNC put their fingers on the scale for the establishment candidate. And she watched the fall out that came from that. And she thought she'd exploit that. I am not writing this in support of her, but just to deconstruct her plan.

Her plan was to go after a demographic that no one on either side was going after. At least not as aggressively. That is, frustrated Democrats that don't see enough progressive leadership that want someone to start criticizing the party, plus an emerging younger more progressive base, plus independents who admire her maverick nature and that she's not afraid to criticize her own party, plus veterans who share her concern about war's cost, plus Never Trumpers that are still uncomfortable with voting for a traditional Democrat. Plus a few former Sanders supporters that think she is a younger more attractive version of the "free radical" in the party.

And it's not like that is a dumb idea...if you are shooting to win the general. I think if there was a magic wand waved and fast forward and she was our candidate for 2020, she'd actually have a great chance. Maybe better than any other candidate, because she has won over not only disaffected Democrats but Independents and even Republicans, with endorsements from Bannon and Carlson. And as long as most every Democratic voter still adhered to the rule, "vote blue no matter who", Trump would be in deep doo doo. They'd have to start churning out fake scandals for her too little, too late IMO.

And IF she ran and won, she'd take with her many other Democrats because of people voting straight ticket.

BUT....a big BUT. She has to first win the primaries. Its very very difficult against not only the party establishment, but the MSM establishment as well, who don't really know what to do with her.

But IMO I think she miscalculated. There are enough "free radicals" running this time. There are candidates like Sanders and Warren. Who are much more savvy when criticizing the Democratic party. Know how to pick their spots. Maybe that is experience. Also reps like AOC are stealing her thunder as the new young up n coming progressives. AOC also is very smart at poking the establishment of the party in a much more careful frugal way. And AOC has already publicly backed Sanders. I think if both Sanders and Warren were not running, Tulsi may be doing very well, but for now, progressives have two very good candidates who are both doing well.

She seems to be a bit desperate now and getting more and more critical. There comes a point when its just too much. When the other side can use you for their own propaganda purposes. I only hope Tulsi's own hubris does not push her to overstep and use her platform to damage our chances in 2020. That she will eventually see she can't win and step back and shut up.

[PatSeg]

17. If she did win the nomination,

yes, there is a good chance she could win the general, but she will win the nomination when pigs fly. Most Democrats have a very low opinion of her and it is getting worse all the time.

[LiberalLovinLug]

20. I agree. She has burned too many bridges.

But I do think she was smart, maybe not nice, but smart, about targeting a demographic that no one else was. And that could carry a candidate to victory against Trump. Her plan counted on connecting right away, and being a front runner. It didn't happen for her, and while I believe she has only the best intentions for the country, and its appalling and absurd the push to re-define her as working for Putin or Trump, she should realize that she has no chance, and hopefully decides not to fire too many holes in the ship on her way back to land.

Time will tell if we all were the stupid ones that rejected her. If Trump actually won in 2020, we may all lament not running a candidate like Tulsi who could have bridged The Great Divide, and dragged with her a majority of voters, as well as D seats.

[PatSeg]

24. I agree

that she has burned too many bridges and I don't see any way she can recover, though post-Trump, she could switch parties. I'm not sure that Hawaii will even want her anymore.

I'm really not sure that she has "only the best intentions for the country". I think she is an ambitious woman who will do almost anything to attain her goals, though I'm not quite sure what she really wants. This could all be an audition for a cable news gig or lecture tour. I really can't see much of a future for her in politics, unless she becomes a republican.

No, I don't think anyone will regret not running a candidate like Gabbard. She is not good for the party and hardly anyone trusts her. This is not what we need right now.

[QualTest]

21. Well...

It seems to me that her big mistake was going after the MIC and the idea of non-stop war, global
policing, and US meddling/aggression. That's just a bridge too far on either side of the ticket.

Can't play with that 3rd rail and not expect to be shot right between the eyes. Immediately!

I admit her response to the non-stop smear and mud campaign has been less than well played,
or artful, and has added fuel to the detractor's fires.

I'm amazed at how far many have gone to negate her, but she has not helped herself either.

Perhaps the folly of youth, and the belief that being right will prevail.
We did once believe that diplomacy worked, and war was bad...

[LiberalLovinLug]

22. "I'm amazed at how far many have gone to negate her, but she has not helped herself either"

This.

I too am taken aback by the appetite to devour her by some. By many. Simply for wanting to reign in the MIC, especially if that position is not a comfortable one with the establishment who are made up of those that voted for the Iraq War, the attack on Libya and Syria. And who have campaign relationships with those in the MIC. Also I'm confused why so many purportedly peace lovers, are against talking to dictators first, instead of shoot first.

I really liked her at first. I loved her courage to speak truth to power....in both parties. But I do think there is some of that "folly of youth" in underestimating the backlash of the "moderate" crowd who by now, along with every Democrat, are operating on edge, and have only so much of an appetite for hearing more criticisms, after these years of GOP attacks. No matter how warranted.

Like Washington veterans Sanders and Warren have learned. You pick your battles. And if you must criticize, you also find good points to balance that. Also, I find Warren and Sanders are better at criticizing only the standing policies, and steer away from getting too personal. Its partly inexperience IMO.

I do think if Trump wins ( I know, we shan't even think it) She is positioning herself better for 2024. Especially if its an establishment candidate, like Biden, who loses. And maybe that is her long game?

[QualTest]

25. Agree

Well said.

[TexasTowelie]

31. ?

I do think if Trump wins ( I know, we shan't even think it) She is positioning herself better for 2024. Especially if its an establishment candidate, like Biden, who loses. And maybe that is her long game

Gabbard stated that she will not be running for Congress in 2020 so I don't see where you are coming up with the idea that she is positioning herself for 2024? That will mark four years where she held no elected office which diminishes whatever base of power some may imagine that she has.

Tulsi's political opportunities are over and she isn't even 40 years old.

[Cha]

23. Gabbard "negates" herself. If she didn't say

crap all the time.. no one would be going after her. This isn't a both sides do it thing.

Link to tweet

[crazytown]

10. I wuz robbed

ho hum

[Jose Garcia]

11. The Bernie Sanders playbook is not a successful strategy

[RainCaster]

12. A butt-hurt whiny DINO. How soon will she go away?

Although I don't mind Putin wasting his rubles on her.

[hlthe2b]

13. I'll bet she'd hit 99% on a

Breitbart poll.

Still doesn't count any more than your cross-over support in an open-primary state... You knew the rules ahead of time, Tulsi. But, maybe your foreign "friends" might intervene.

[trueblue2007]

18. i can't stand her, i wouldn't vote for her

[crazytown]

19. If it was Gabbard (D) v trump

I'd put on a gas mask and vote straight ticket.

[dsc]

26. I am by no means a fan of hers

but is she right about the poll?

[helpisontheway]

28. I think they announced in the beginning which polls they would accept.nt

[apcalc]

27. Tulsi....go pound sand.

[Horizens]

29. It's NOT a DNC certified poll.

The list of certified polls was determined months before the first debate. The Boston Globe is not on the list.

"Qualifying polls will be limited to those sponsored by one or more of the following organizations/institutions:Associated Press, ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Des Moines Register, Fox News, Las Vegas Review Journal, Monmouth University, NBC News, New York Times, National Public Radio (NPR), Quinnipiac University, Reuters, University of New Hampshire, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Washington Post, Winthrop University."

[Churrix]

32. She wants to justify her poor showing

By blaming it on a grand DNC conspiracy.

[IluvPitties]

30. A Democrat she is NOT.