Tulsi Gabbard, a former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate and Congresswoman who served Hawaii’s second district, announced her decision to leave the Democratic Party in a series of Tweets early Tuesday morning.
“I believe in a government that is of, by, and for the people. Unfortunately, today’s Democratic Party does not. Instead, it stands for a government of, by, and for the powerful elite.”, Gabbard said, referencing woke culture, opposition to nuclear war, and the presence of an elitist cabal in the modern Democratic Party, among other things.
She additionally used her platform to call on “fellow commonsense independent-minded Democrats” to join her in leaving.
Gabbard served in the Hawaii House of Representatives, the Honolulu City Council, and then as a member of Congress before announcing her intention to run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020. While in Congress, she served as a vice chair of the Democratic National Committee, resigning to endorse Bernie Sanders and his campaign for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination. She is notably the first Hindu member of Congress.
As a member of the Democratic Party, Gabbard regularly fielded criticism for having a history of holding positions and associations contrary to the current Democratic mainstream. For example, in the late 90s, Gabbard worked for the Alliance for Traditional Marriage and Values. In addition, she established a reputation in her Congressional career as a foreign policy critic of the Administration of then-President Barack Obama, appearing on prominent conservative media platforms like Fox News to denounce what she saw as an inability of the Administration to denounce “radical Islam.”
In addition to what she posted on Twitter, Gabbard released the first episode of her new YouTube channel, further discussing her reasons for leaving the Democratic Party.
As of this time, Gabbard is independent of any political party. It is unknown if she will remain independent or join the Republicans or any specific third party moving forward. Gabbard has, however, appeared at numerous conservative functions in recent history, including as a guest at the Conservative Political Action Conference.
Tulsi Gabbard has also been the topic of considerable speculation by supporters of third parties. More recently, the Constitution Party invited her to leave the Democratic Party and join its ranks over the past summer.
Closed. Until she does something third party-ish. Campaigning for Republicans does not count as third party-ish.
Why? She’s still an independent
As she turned out not to be joining a third party, discussion on this thread should come to an end.
It’s pretty strange that she’d be campaigning for such an unhinged, radical Trumper as Kari Lake, considering Tulsi ran to replace Trump just two years ago, criticized him for his border and environmental policies, and referred to the man as “Saudi Arabia’s bitch.” She claims she has no plans to join the Republican Party and is content to remain an independent. Maybe she just hates the Democratic Party that much.
Didn’t she do that after she left the Democrats?
Its because Tulsi went to an Arizona GOP event campaigning for all 3 Statewide races
Right now Youtube has a livestream of Tulsi Gabbard campaigning for Kari Lake, Trump Republican candidate for Governor of Arizona
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9KUFP8sq3U
Ourcampaigns.com profile on Tulsi lists a half dozen Trump Republicans that it claims Tulsi Gabbard has endorsed this year. Other than Kari Lake I have not been able to confirm these endorsements – but 2 others are in Arizona, including Blake Masters, Republican candidate for Senate.
Not sure what principles pushed her out of the Democratic Party, but her new alignment seems motivated by the highest political principle – total opportunism.
Per the second half of Ryan’s comment? Most church denominations have more women than men at services, but many fundagelicals groups still don’t let them be pastors. Ditto of course for Catholics and the priesthood, so, that statement really doesn’t mean much.”
Wow, that was a Rorschach test for you. You took this:
“And the people that typically have made sure the family goes to church on Sundays are the mothers moreso than the fathers. ”
And transformed it into this:
“Most church denominations have more women than men at services, but many fundagelicals groups still don’t let them be pastors. Ditto of course for Catholics and the priesthood, so, that statement really doesn’t mean much.”
“Elizabeth Dole ran for president in 2000 and was on W’s shortlist for vice-presidential picks.”
Horrible presidential candidate and horrible Senator, not in terms of what she stood for but actually doing stuff. She did nothing as Senator for North Carolina. Maybe she was 20 years too early, we have a lot of Congressmen nowadays that run around and don’t accomplish anything legislatively. They just talk and Tweet. Just because he’s the one example I know of, there’s plenty in both parties, Rep. Andre Carson of Indianapolis has been in Congress for 14 years and never had a bill of his made into legislation.
SG: “Looking straight at the top, how many women have run for prez in the GOP?”
Well, the first major party presidential candidate was Margaret Chase Smith in 1964, a Republican U.S. senator from Maine. She stuck around until the convention and won 27 delegate votes. The first woman to win an electoral vote was Tonie Nathan running on the 1972 Libertarian ticket with John Hospers, and she got it from a Republican elector. Elizabeth Dole ran for president in 2000 and was on W’s shortlist for vice-presidential picks. The GOP ran Sarah Palin with John McCain in 2008, the first female VP nominee for a major party since Geraldine Ferraro in 1984. More recently, Michele Bachmann ran for president in 2012 and Carly Fiorina in 2016. (I never claimed they were ‘good’ candidates.)
Over the decades, more Democratic women have run for president than Republican women, for sure, but our perspective might be skewed by Hillary Clinton’s nomination in 2016, seeing six Democratic women on the presidential debate stage in 2020–one of whom, unfortunately, happens to be our vice president–and maybe also the LP’s nomination of Jo Jorgensen, while Republicans were stuck with another round of Donald Trump whether they liked it or not. But looking back before the Obama era, Hillary was the only female presidential candidate for the Dems in 2008, and in 2004 it was just Carol Moseley Braun. No Democratic women ran for president in 2000. To be fair Al Gore faced little opposition as Bill Clinton’s VP, but no Democratic women had run in 1992 either.
My point is not that the two major parties are equally hospitable environments for female presidential bids–I wouldn’t know. It’s that the popular perception of Republicans as the party of stodgy traditionalists who’ve always sought to keep women out of positions of political authority, in contrast to the Democrats who’ve been shattering glass ceilings since the second-wave feminist era, doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Historically, Republican politics haven’t been as phallocentric and devastating to women’s electoral aspirations as progressives or the suburbanite women they’re trying to sway might suppose. Yes, I know you aren’t a Democrat. I’m guessing you agree with the part about Dems, but want to push back on the part about the GOP.
What George said vis a vis Ryan and Jared. Looking straight at the top, how many women have run for prez in the GOP?
Per the second half of Ryan’s comment? Most church denominations have more women than men at services, but many fundagelicals groups still don’t let them be pastors. Ditto of course for Catholics and the priesthood, so, that statement really doesn’t mean much.
And, I’m not a Democrat.
“SG: “GOP has not been women friendly.”
The GOP has a surprising number (binders full, some might say) of minivan moms running for office this election cycle, which is strategically smart for them as they continue to lose support among middle-class, suburban, white women. They certainly struggle for support among Millennial and Gen-Z women, as Republican power holders and brokers are still predominantly out of touch, chronically insensitive Boomer men. But sometimes I think Democratic strategists imagine women sitting around all day contemplating the gender pay gap and their next abortion, and assume those topics drive their politics because they’re “women’s issues,” as though women couldn’t be as concerned about violent crime, food and gas prices, healthcare costs, education standards, and the direction of the culture. Childless, single women in their 20s and wed mothers in their 40s are likely to have very different priorities as well.
If women generally feel unwelcome in the Republican Party, then God help the Libertarians.”
Granted I live in a more conservative place than most, but the local Right to Life people who are grassroots politics powerful are all women. And the people that typically have made sure the family goes to church on Sundays are the mothers moreso than the fathers. That’s true in Southern black society as well when I lived there, albeit they’re Democratic Party loyalists. My wife on most issues if you sat her down and asked her to elaborate would probably lean Democrat, she works in public school education, but you’re never going to convince her abortion is correct.
I agree Jared. The whole “men vs. women on issues” thing that Democrats think exists per their messaging is as it would appear to a professional predominantly white middle to upper-class woman in urban and suburban areas. It doesn’t really apply to a woman living in a trailer.
It is among college-educated women that the Republicans are said to be losing support. Among the other 2/3 of the population, life is a bit different. Ruy Teixiera https://theliberalpatriot.substack.com/ discusses many of these issues in considerable details.
SG: “GOP has not been women friendly.”
The GOP has a surprising number (binders full, some might say) of minivan moms running for office this election cycle, which is strategically smart for them as they continue to lose support among middle-class, suburban, white women. They certainly struggle for support among Millennial and Gen-Z women, as Republican power holders and brokers are still predominantly out of touch, chronically insensitive Boomer men. But sometimes I think Democratic strategists imagine women sitting around all day contemplating the gender pay gap and their next abortion, and assume those topics drive their politics because they’re “women’s issues,” as though women couldn’t be as concerned about violent crime, food and gas prices, healthcare costs, education standards, and the direction of the culture. Childless, single women in their 20s and wed mothers in their 40s are likely to have very different priorities as well.
If women generally feel unwelcome in the Republican Party, then God help the Libertarians.
Joe, highly doubt that. GOP has not been women friendly. New Federalist nails it on the Hindu issue as well. I note that in an expanded version her statement on my blog. That said, New, as I noted, the Mises faction may not be Xn-only Religious Right. I’m totally thinking the way Gene did.
My original blog post includes references to her Swengali guru Chris Butler and other things. She’s been anti-gay (though she eventually went more quiet on that while in Congress) for a long time, and other things. https://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2022/10/whats-next-for-tulsi-gabbard.html (It links to extensive past history of hers, including her love for Zionism, John Hagee and other things.)
“I think she’ll run for the 2024 GOP nomination, and win it.”
Name your price, any price. I’ll take that bet.
I think she’ll run for the 2024 GOP nomination, and win it.
In my conversation with a Democrat Party member about a year ago, they said that Tulsi Gabbard did not have conventional Democrat Party policy positions.
Maybe American Solidarity Party? They are anti-war like CP. Not sure she’s pro life though.
NF – actually the Mises Caucus might try to get Tulsi Gabbard to join The Libertarian Party. Tulsi took a strong antiwar position which got many libertarians interested in her candidacy – including Ron Paul and some in the Ron Paul circles. In 2020 Ron Paul interviewed Tulsi Gabbard and encouraged Libertarians to support her campaign.
The interview is on Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlCeGEkWApk
I was somewhat supportive on her campaign. Earlier this year however she made claims about Nazis in the Ukraine government – after Putin had ordered Russian state military forces to invade Ukraine. Sad to see a someone who was antiwar becoming an apologist for Putin’s aggressive war.
Wow! Interesting development. Being a Hindu seems like a problem for her joining the CP. Since the LP seems to be controlled by a faction that is unlikely to welcome her that doesn’t appear likely either. I just don’t see her as a fit for the Greens or the GOP. It should be interesting to see what she does.