Fox News Contributor and Former Democratic presidential candidate ex-Representative Tulsi Gabbard hinted at the possibility of running for president in 2024 during a recent appearance on Fox News’ Hannity last week. Her statements have further fueled conversation among social media supporters that she’s eyeing the 2024 race, speculation which has been ongoing since Gabbard departed from the Democratic Party last year.
During her conversation with Fox News host Sean Hannity, Gabbard and Hannity discussed the potential implications of Democratic Senator Joe Manchin running as an independent candidate aligned with No Labels, a new political organization led by former Democratic fundraiser Nancy Jacobson looking to put a centrist candidate on the ballot in 2024. Gabbard remarked that Democrats are “terrified” of such a prospect and emphasized the importance of allowing voters to choose the candidate who best represents their interests.
“You mentioned No Labels and Joe Manchin. Democrats are terrified of this,” Gabbard said to Hannity. “I think it’s laughable and arrogant that they say, ‘Oh, how dare he be a spoiler. They’re so entitled that they take voters for granted that they think they can call anyone who stands up against them as a political opponent of Joe Biden a spoiler,” she continued. “Voters want options; they want to be able to vote for the best candidate that they believe can do the job.”
In response, Hannity presented a list of Democratic primary and third-party challengers, which included Robert Kennedy Jr., Marianne Williamson, Cornel West, and once again Joe Manchin, and asked Gabbard if she believed they could genuinely pose a challenge to Joe Biden. Gabbard replied, “Poll after poll shows that voters in this country are looking for someone other than Joe Biden and his failed policies to lead this country.” She further stated, “So, absolutely, they should consider all the options put before them.
Hannity then turned the conversation on Gabbard, inquiring whether she would consider being one such candidate. Gabbard expressed her openness to considering a presidential run if she believed it to be the most effective means of serving her country. “Would you ever consider getting in?” asked Hannity. “If there were a way for me to best serve this country in that fashion, I would,” Gabbard stated.
When further asked by Hannity if she would consider the “third party or No Labels option,” Gabbard promptly replied that she did not rule it out. “I’d consider all options,” she stated, adding, “put it that way.”
As a member of the Democratic Party, Tulsi Gabbard represented Hawaii’s 2nd congressional district from 2013 to 2021. She gained significant national recognition during her bid for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, where she stood out for her non-interventionist foreign policy stance intermingled with calls for progressive reforms. However, late last year, Gabbard announced her departure from the Democratic Party, inviting “commonsense independent-minded Democrats” to join her.
“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 initially said upon departing, referencing woke culture, an elitist conspiracy within the Democratic organization, and several other issues.
Although an interesting combination, nominating a ticket of Amash and Gabbard may not be feasible.
“I think a ticket of Justin Amash for President and Tulsi Gabbard for Vice-President would be attractive and effective.”- George Whitfield
Do you see this as a Libertarian ticket or some other organization?
I think a ticket of Justin Amash for President and Tulsi Gabbard for Vice-President would be attractive and effective.
I will suggest that presidential elections occurring in years that begin with 19 or 20 are more informative than those beginning with 18.
1860 – Former Senator from Tennessee John Bell, ran on the Constitutional Union ticket that was a border state compromise coalition of sorts pre-Civil War, won 3 border states and took 3rd in electoral votes behind Lincoln and Breckenridge
1872 – Former Representative from New York Horace Greeley, history books lie to you and say he was the Democratic Party nominee; the Democrats officially did not run a candidate in 1872 and in turn supported Greeley as the anti-Republican option; Greeley was a splinter of Liberal Republicans upset with the Grant Administration’s corruption; won 6 states losing in a landslide
1892 – Former Representative from Iowa James Weaver, Weaver previously ran for the Greenback Party in 1880, taking 306k votes and 3.3% of the vote. In 1892, Weaver represented the Populist Party and took more than 1 million votes for 8.5% and carried 5 western states
John Quincy Adams 1824 31% Former Senator. Then went to House.
2012 – Former Rep. Virgil Goode – Constitution Party – 122,389 votes (0.11%)
2008 – Former Rep. Cynthia McKinney – Green Party – 161,797 votes (0.12%)
1988 – Former Rep. Ron Paul – Libertarian Party – 431,750 votes (0.47%)
1976 – Former Rep. & Sen. Eugene McCarthy – Unaffiliated – 744,763 votes (0.91%)
Former Members of Congress don’t have a good track record as alternative presidential candidates on the November ballot. For those wondering about John Anderson, or perhaps even 1972 American Party candidate John Schmitz, they were both sitting Members when they ran.
This is the whole tire kicking nonsense of: “oh, you would consider me a presidential candidate? wow, I’m flattered to hear someone think so highly of me”. Where’s the supporting organization? She only got 2 delegates in 2020 from American Samoa, it’s not like she’s coming from a position of previously demonstrated strength.
It sounds like she’s angling for the No Labels nod, which in the internal selection politics of who No Labels will nominate is certainly an open question because no one externally knows for certain what it looks like. I think it’s wrong to automatically assume it’s Manchin for President, and they’ll have to select a VP too. You’re also going to have a lot of politicos play footsie with them up to when they nominate, and then some of whom are not selected will back away unless they want to stay in good graces thinking No Labels has a legitimate chance at success and want a Cabinet position.
She definitely is different. Not well known enough to have any significant impact but a different viewpoint which is refreshing in many ways.