Strong? She was against it. Then she was for it. And tonight she couldn’t make up her mind when it mattered the most. Not exactly my definition of strength.
strong in the sense of sending an FU to the party establishment. that's been her shtick, and I think that's how her votes will be interpreted
early write-ups coming in about Gabbard's votes: https://reason.com/2019/12/18/tulsi-gabbard-impeachment-present-vote-trump/ Tulsi Gabbard Votes 'Present' on Trump Impeachment, Slams 'Purely Partisan Process' "I come before you to make a stand for the center," said Gabbard in a statement. Robby Soave | 12.18.2019 9:49 PM Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii), a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, voted "present" on the two articles of impeachment against President Trump on Wednesday. This made her virtually the only the Democrat to effectively vote against sending the president's removal to the Senate. Rep. Jeff Van Drew (D–NJ) voted no on impeachment, but is expected to switch parties. Gabbard is the first-ever representative to vote "present" during an impeachment inquiry, according to The Daily Beast. In a statement, Gabbard said that Trump is guilty of wrongdoing, but that she could not endorse a "purely partisan process." "When I cast my vote in support of the impeachment inquiry nearly three months ago, I said that in order to maintain the integrity of this solemn undertaking, it must not become a partisan endeavor," said Gabbard. "Tragically, that's what it has been." Gabbard characterized her actions as a "stand for the center"—a center that neither excuses Trump's wrongdoing, nor supports his ousting mere months before a presidential election. Regardless of whether you agree with Gabbard's stance, it's quite refreshing to see a politician who is willing to go against her own party. The same goes for Rep. Justin Amash (I–Mich.), who left the Republican Party and voted for Trump's impeachment because he puts his limited government principles before partisanship. In these incredibly tribal times, such independent thinking is incredibly rare. Most members of Congress seem obligated to either defend Trump at all costs—no matter how contemptible his behavior—or advocate his immediate removal from office by any means necessary.
I’m sure that’s part of it, but those questioning her motives and end game are just going to use this as further evidence that she’s a loose cannon. And, also, an indecisive mess.
She was against impeachment before she was for it before she's against it before she's for it. Present seems like a good compromise to stay balanced in her flip-floppy land.
I am not sure why there is such an outrage. She has all but said how she was going to vote. Further, she has resigned from her post and she is running against him. "Present" is exactly how she should have voted.
Because outrage is the default position for everything now And I'm outraged at your post for some reason
She is setting herself up for a 3rd party run. Would not be surprised if she has become allied with Trump
She has repeatedly stated she is not running 3rd party, albeit ive always been suspicious of her intents. Given your track record accuracy, I am 100% convinced now she is not running 3rd party.
I’m pretty sure if she runs 3rd party she will only be taking away votes from trump Also , regarding that write up that Os linked that was a pretty favorable piece lol ... but I agree with her words .... now I think it’s partisan due to both sides ... and I have a lot more ire for the republicans than the Dems on this one , but still it IS partisan. I think if you’re a dem and you believe trump is some monster then you should focus on beating him in 2020. You still have the House of Representatives so there is at least somewhat of a check on his power . Worried about damage done to the courts ? Shouldn’t have let the republicans outmaneuver you during the Obama years ... It’s telling that as Low as trumps approval rating is ... congress’ is lower (I think , I hope I’m right lol ) Trump was elected because our system is ****ed up and people know it . Almost half the country voted for Don and he didn’t cheat his way to winning the republican primary for sure . He won because he had a better electoral strategy and the Dems nominated the most Washington insider ever. Do I think he’s an unstable personality that could potentially **** things up for the US .... yeah . But the US is still the largest economy and American business talks ... and he hasn’t plunged us into war yet. This Ukraine thing is concerning for sure , and I do think it reflects very poorly on his decision making. But the assault on his presidency has been on par with the republican’s on Obama’s .... and I ****ing hated watching that. Sorry I got off on a tangent there , but Emmy overall point is the problem is bigger than trump .. the problem is politics . And while you can’t get away from that completely , especially in our two party system, I fear that all both sides are doing is increasing polarization (which imo is really really bad) I agree with tulsi’s Sentiment there . Although I do think she is more of an opportunist and politician than she would like her supporters to think . I’m paranoid
I don't care about anything Gabbard does. Wish her the best in her cult, cant wait till I dont have to listen to Repubs gossip about her like 15 year old girls talking about Kim Kardashian any longer. She should how she wants, do what she wants, as long as I dont have to hear about it.
It might be how she should have voted, but it isn't her reason for why she voted. I'd give her points for the former, but she isn't working for my vote.
