Staff Reports
Progressives appear to be in quite the pickle regarding their former darling, Tulsi Gabbard, who has now traded her Democratic credentials for a shiny new Republican label. Once lauded for her military service and independent thinking, Gabbard is now the nominee for director of national intelligence under President Trump—a position that has some Democratic senators sweating bullets. While they may have danced on the same legislative floor back in the day, it seems those old team bonds are fraying faster than a cheap polyester suit.
Senator Peter Welch from Vermont finds himself in a quandary. He admits to having liked the Tulsi of yore but must now grapple with the “Tulsi Gabbard 4.0” version that surfaced after she swapped parties. The seasoned lawmaker is promising to give her nomination due diligence, but let’s be honest: giving a benefit of the doubt to Trump’s appointees? That’s about as likely as a cat willingly taking a bath. Questions loom large over whether Gabbard can handle the complexities of 18 intelligence agencies and a staggering budget of $70 billion—figures that make even seasoned politicians gulp nervously.
Ex-CIA officers are panicking over Trump’s picks—and it’s clear why. Former CIA agent Abigail Spanberger just called Tulsi Gabbard a “dangerous choice” for DNI, accusing her of pushing “conspiracy theories” and aligning with dictators. But let’s be real—they’re terrified. These… pic.twitter.com/opZAJYdvGL
— Restricted Daily (@Restricted_on_X) November 14, 2024
As Gabbard evolved from a consistent anti-interventionist to a loud critic of U.S. military involvement abroad, some progressives have started to treat her with skepticism. Her decision to criticize the Democratic National Committee back in 2016, coupled with her trip to Syria to meet with Assad, left many in the left-wing establishment clutching their pearls. Even fellow Democrats have expressed trepidation, with some openly rejecting her as a candidate. For them, it seems loyalty is often defined by party lines, and her departure from the Democratic fold renders her a stranger in a once-familiar land.
A staunch critic of Ukraine aid, Gabbard allegedly finds herself echoing Russian narratives that favor a less interventionist stance. This has made the progressive squad uneasy, with high-profile figures like Senator Elizabeth Warren branding her a hard no amid concerns she might just be carrying water for Vladimir Putin. Never mind the facts—if one ever needed a classic example of the left eating its own, this is it. It seems Gabbard’s newfound stances aren’t getting her any love from the Democrats, who may still be nursing wounds from her past votes against their precious mainstream positions.
Although Gabbard continues to embrace her military background and criticism of U.S. foreign policy, there’s a growing sense that her friends in the Democratic Party are becoming quite elusive. Bernie Sanders once stood up for her amid accusations of being a foreign agent, yet now even he seems hesitant to step into the fray when it comes to backing her nomination. With friends like these, who needs enemies? Gabbard’s transition showcases the volatile nature of partisan politics, where a once-celebrated figure finds herself navigating murky waters among those who now view her with suspicion, all while the Republicans steal a glance at what could be a strategic ally in an increasingly polarized political landscape.
