I am going to write a thread here that makes an electability argument for Tulsi. Not to take away anything from Bernie. This is simply an electability argument for Tulsi, on her own terms, which you won't get from corporate media because of their relentless marginalization
1) She was right about impeachment, 99% of the rest of the Democratic Party was wrong. She was right on both strategic grounds -- saying it would embolden Trump, which it has -- and substantive grounds: warning about the adverse and largely ignored foreign policy consequences
Trump is going to use the failed impeachment to tarnish virtually every other Dem who signed on to that doomed, idiotic project. With some justification, he can paint Dems as relentlessly determined to overturning the last election. It's a Brexit Redux scenario
Tulsi can say: "Listen Donald. I oppose you on substantive and rational grounds. Here are your failings. I don't jump on the bandwagon with every hysterical Dem Resistance boondoggle. You can't accuse me of being a reflexive partisan. I even met with you in Trump Tower."
2) Tulsi has consistently taken on the Dem Establishment. They loathe her. The try to "erase" her despite her being a woman of color combat veteran, which they'd giddily celebrate in almost every other circumstance. You know who also took on their party's establishment? Trump
Trump ultimately signed on with the mainstream GOP/Paul Ryan agenda. But he won in 2016 partly due to the perception that he wasn't a generic Republican, and in fact had drawn the hatred of many Republicans. Voters like this because it conveys independence. Parties are loathed.
Will some Dems always resent Tulsi for a variety of reasons? Sure. But once the choice is her versus Trump, Dems are not going to back Trump. Negative polarization would largely overwhelm these resentments, just as it does every election cycle. (See again: 2016 GOP primaries)
Trump prevailed because of the novelty/excitement generated by a candidate defeating his own party's establishment (the Bushes) and then defeating the other party's establishment (the Clintons). Is Tulsi being in a feud with Hillary a liability, or an asset? 😂
3) Uniquely, Tulsi has synthesized a popular left-wing policy platform with a popular moderate/conservative cultural sensibility. This is the ideal mix for the general electorate. Trump cannot use crazy Culture War-style attacks on her because she is not a Culture War participant
True, she is not an ideological socialist activist. That is not her background. But she still speaks of the "working class," and the many ways in which the powerful elite (including Trump) are screwing ordinary Americans by hoarding wealth.
By always pivoting to foreign policy she explains how our national priorities are profoundly warped: $5 million per hour in Afghanistan but no money for healthcare. And her foreign policy prescriptions derive from first-hand experience in a failed war, not musing on TV like Trump
Single-payer plus? That's her healthcare proposal. It avoids GOP accusations that she's going to abolish everyone's private insurance overnight. (Sure, you can criticize that from the left.) But it means everyone's automatically enrolled in a public plan. It's politically astute
4) Tulsi is fluent in the language of non-partisanship but that doesn't mean she's a typical milquetoast centrist: quite the opposite. I can't tell you how many libertarians/conservatives I've met who now favor single payer because of her. She changes the *framing* of politics
Have mainstream Dems generally done a good job framing politics lately? Russiagate? Mueller? Impeachment? Hillary? Lunatic Resistance theatrics? There is every reason in the world to think her different framing would be vastly superior
5) "Donald, I mentioned having met you in Trump Tower after you were elected. I wished you the best. But you lied. You hired all the neocon warmongers I advised you not to hire. And look at where we are now. Still squandering trillions in the Middle East. Donald, you're fired."
Imagine Trump trying to pick a dumb nickname for Tulsi, a cool-headed Iraq War vet still serving in the Army National Guard. It would just come across as ridiculous. It would backfire. Trump does not have the capacity to meaningfully take on Tulsi. She disarms him.
6) Don't know if this strictly pertains to "electability" but it'd be nice to have a candidate who doesn't indulge in partisan gamesmanship if she thinks it's going to increase the likelihood of nuclear war. I don't know, seems pretty good for humanity.
7) Then of course you have the "first female president" thing but she accomplishes this historic feat not by bragging about how wonderful it is that she's a woman, but simply being herself. Unlike many other female Dems, she doesn't transparently pander on the identity stuff.
Does she have liabilities that a massive GOP oppo-research operation would dig up? Yes. But every candidate has liabilities. Question is whether her assets would overcome her liabilities. Evidence and commonsense suggests it would.
I'll leave it there for now. Again, this is to take away nothing from Bernie who I also think has a very strong electability argument against Trump. But you are never going to hear the Tulsi electability argument on corporate media. Because they despise her. Which is a good thing
