by Amil Imani
Tulsi Gabbard, a former U.S. representative for Hawaii’s 2nd congressional district and a decorated military veteran, has emerged as a fascinating potential candidate for the vice-presidential spot in Donald Trump’s administration. Her background, unorthodox political stances, and broad appeal marked by a unique blend of military experience, legislative understanding, and a distinctive foreign policy stance offer a compelling narrative for her potential role in the Trump administration.
Tulsi Gabbard’s political career has been marked by a strong focus on legislative achievements that resonate with a broad spectrum of constituents. During her tenure in Congress, Tulsi Gabbard demonstrated a multifaceted approach to governance, focusing on several key areas:
Environmental Advocacy: Gabbard cosponsored the Coral Reef Sustainability Through Innovation Act of 2016, aiming to promote coral reef research and conservation through federal grants. She supported green energy policies, including transitioning to near-zero greenhouse gas emissions and 100% clean renewable energy.
Affordable Housing Initiatives: Addressing Hawaii’s high cost of living, Gabbard focused on affordable housing issues, highlighting her commitment to economic development and social welfare.
Health and Food Policy Advocacy: Gabbard was a leading advocate for mandatory labeling of genetically engineered (GE) food, earning recognition from Food Policy Action for her efforts to improve the nation’s food system and fight against the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act.
National Parks Conservation Support: Gabbard was honored with the “Friend of the National Parks” award from the National Parks Conservation Association for her support of the National Park System, underscoring her commitment to preserving the natural and cultural resources of the United States.
Gabbard’s legislative achievements reflect her dedication to serving the needs and interests of her constituents, showcasing her commitment to environmental protection, economic development, and social welfare.
Military Experience and Foreign Policy Stance: Gabbard’s distinguished military career and experience in the United States Army Reserve have shaped her unique foreign policy views, setting her apart from mainstream Democratic or Republican positions. Her service in Iraq and Kuwait has given her a deep understanding of military operations and strategy.
In this regard, her interactions with the Trump administration have also been notable. Gabbard has met with President Trump and has been critical of specific policies while supporting others.
The potential impact of Tulsi Gabbard’s inclusion in the Trump administration must be considered. The speculation around Gabbard’s possible candidacy for the vice-presidential spot in the Trump administration is intriguing. Her ability to appeal to women, military personnel, and Democrats presents a unique opportunity for the Trump campaign to broaden its support base.
Gabbard’s calm and logical approach could balance Trump’s aggressive style, potentially mellowing his rhetoric and making his administration more appealing to a broader range of voters. Her background in Congress and military experience could help reshape the administration’s policy and public engagement approach.
However, Tulsi Gabbard’s relationship with the World Economic Forum has raised serious concerns among conservatives. WEF is a globalist organization established by Klaus Schwab.
Gabbard’s willingness to support authoritarian regimes under certain conditions has both been criticized and contributed to her distinct foreign policy stance.
Gabbard’s foreign policy views are characterized by a critical view of “regime change wars” and an advocacy for a more diplomatic approach to international relations and a focus on environmentalism. She has shown a willingness to support authoritarian regimes in certain contexts, such as her meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, which was controversial due to her defense of his authoritarianism and his use of force against civilians. Additionally, she has expressed support for brutal authoritarian repression in places like Egypt in the name of counter-terrorism, placing her outside of the mainstream of American progressives.
“Gabbard was scrutinized for a 2017 meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, whom the United States government blames for deadly attacks against Syrian civilians during the country’s civil war.”
“Gabbard endorsed independent senator Sanders’ run against Clinton for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination. Gabbard ended her presidential candidacy in March 2020 and immediately endorsed Joe Biden.
Here is a long list of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard’s (2013-2021) Congressional Report Card.
Conclusion
Is Tulsi Gabbard picture-perfect? No, she is not. Can Republican voters trust her should she become a VP nominee? That’s the question that is still lingering. But, hypothetically, let’s assume Trump chooses her as his running mate; what should we expect?
In a hypothetical situation, Tulsi Gabbard’s potential can be seen by some as a game-changer for the Trump administration. Her selection as Trump’s vice president could bring many benefits, including unifying the Republican base, appealing to a broader range of voters, and balancing influence on Trump’s more combative approach to governance.
“Tulsi Gabbard’s odds of becoming the 2024 Republican vice-presidential candidate surged with a leading bookmaker after Donald Trump said she was on his short list during a Fox News town hall on Tuesday.”
Her legislative achievements, military experience, and distinct foreign policy stance make her a compelling candidate for a vice-presidential role. The benefits of her selection, including her broad appeal and potential to influence the administration’s approach, warrant serious consideration.
In short, her candidacy remains speculative, and further developments will provide more insight into the direction of the Trump administration. Gabbard’s unique blend of experiences and perspectives could significantly influence the Trump administration’s policies and approach to governance, setting a new precedent for the role of vice president in American politics.
- Like
- Digg
- Del
- Tumblr
- VKontakte
- Buffer
- Love This
- Odnoklassniki
- Meneame
- Blogger
- Amazon
- Yahoo Mail
- Gmail
- AOL
- Newsvine
- HackerNews
- Evernote
- MySpace
- Mail.ru
- Viadeo
- Line
- Comments
- Yummly
- SMS
- Viber
- Telegram
- Subscribe
- Skype
- Facebook Messenger
- Kakao
- LiveJournal
- Yammer
- Edgar
- Fintel
- Mix
- Instapaper
- Copy Link
6 Responses
If Tulsi looked like Liz Warren or Hilliary, neither you nor Trump nor I nor any straight male reader of NER would give her a second thought.
@AJH ,, And why is that?
Hard to figure out, Howard. She’s attractive unlike the other two.
The problem is – she’s a Democrat and Democrats today are Communists.
If she was serious, which she is not she would have changed parties long ago. She did not.
She used to be for gun confiscation then , “She changed her mind.”
No she didn’t, and neither has RFK Jr.
When Trump is elected put Tulsi in charge of Surfing or the VA.
Put RFK Jr in charge of the FDA, CDC or NAIAD.
“Green energy,” “affordable housing,” only 2 reasons she should not be considered whatsoever1 Her military experience these days probably amounts to a “woke” naive view of the world, including understanding Islam? Another potential disaster in the making! And btw, AJH might just be right?
So green energy (solar, wind, ocean tidal, river-fed turbines, 5th generation nuclear power plants which consume their own waste products, constant steam production to electric energy from geothermal wells, … are useless eventual energy sources?
And the increasing number of homeless are to be short-sheeted because we haven’t yet applied modular, automated, “tiny house” proven technology to multifamily (common kitchen) structures with built-in or satellite primary schools and kindergartens. Residents could receive basic business training as for a distant small village resident.
And, btw, Tulsi has immensely more pertinent experience than had Harry Truman, and arguably, B. Obama, pre-presidency or VPeerage.
I’d be willing to overlook a lot I disagree with in these policy stances, and to consider some as viable [I don’t mind if policies to keep people housed in Hawaii at not insane prices are found, I am fine with truth in labelling laws on food no matter what I think of too much GMO craziness, and so on].
I’m concerned about any pro-WEF positions.
I’m not concerned about willingness to meet with or even support authoritarian rulers. The US has always done so and will again. Foreign policy isn’t supposed to be a game of moral one-upmanship anyway and I’m sick of that nonsense from both parties. The question should be which regimes, for what reasons, how does it affect US interests [or, as a Canadian, at least please consider Western interests writ large a bit], and whether or not her reasons given are based on seeking those interests.
In the case of Syria, nearly 13 years of civil war have resulted in Assad still in power, much much weaker, over a Syria that is a wreck. That could be seen as both a boon [better than ISIS; as a Russian and Iranian client he’s far weaker than in 2011 and Syria is no longer a viable threat to anyone] and a loss [Russians and Iranians even more in power, over a weaker regime albeit] to US interests, but it also suggests that getting rid of him was a tougher nut than anyone thought and maybe the US had little to gain by trying.
For one thing, as in Iraq, it at least temporarily empowered worse enemies.