Debates 2020

Tulsi Gabbard Slams Kamala Harris' Foreign Policy: 'She as President Will Continue the Status Quo Regime-Change Wars'

At tonight's debate, Gabbard continued her laser-like focus on the need to end America's overseas wars.


Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii) continued her laser-like focus on foreign policy at tonight's Democratic debate, criticizing her own party's record on war, and tussling with Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.) over her vision for a less interventionist posture abroad.

"The Democratic Party is not the party of, by, and for the people," Gabbard said in response to a question about her criticism of the Democratic party. "It's a party that has been and continues to be influenced by the foreign policy establishment… by the military-industrial complex and other corporate interests."

Gabbard said that, if elected president, she would refrain from continuing the "Bush-Clinton" foreign policy legacy of waging war to change political regimes abroad.

In a moment of manufactured drama, debate moderators prompted Harris to clap back at Gabbard. Harris said that Gabbard "buddied up to Steve Bannon to get a meeting with Trump," adding, "She failed to call a war criminal what he is, a war criminal," Harris said in what was likely a reference to Gabbard meeting with Syrian President Bashar Assad.

These debate stage attacks, according to Gabbard, are evidence that Harris would deliver more of the same when it comes to foreign policy.

Harris' answers "only makes me guess she as president will continue the status quo regime-change wars," Gabbard said, adding that as president, "I am not going to put party interests first."

The Hawaiian representative suggested that the trillions government has spent fighting wars overseas should have been spent on domestic priorities like hospitals and infrastructure—not given back to taxpayers who could spend it on their own priorities.

Still, as America's wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East grind on, it's valuable to have a candidate who effectively and frequently criticize the costs, in dollars and lives, these interventions impose on Americans.

NEXT: Philly Police Union Attacks Eagles Football Player for Opposing Police Brutality

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Anyone else catch Sanders saying we should be going after the oil companies with criminal charges? What the hell are these assholes smoking?

    1. Jet fuel, at least.

    2. Meh-Bernie is full of it-a lot like Trump. He would probably be the least damaging of the batch since his ideas are so batshit crazy, I doubt many dems would support them.

      1. No, he’s dangerous. Gabbard, Buttigieg, or evening Booker are preferable. I can never vote for a candidate who believes in AGW, because that is something in which a Prez can actually create serious mischief. Hence, Trump.

  2. Harris said that Gabbard “buddied up to Steve Bannon to get a meeting with Trump,” adding, “She failed to call a war criminal what he is, a war criminal,”

    You lost to a congresswoman from Hawaii, and your family hates you for calling them pot smoking Jamaicans. How does that make you feel?

  3. Oh, Tulsi was back in the debate? I thought the DNC put her on their shit list the last time she gutted Willie Brown’s whore.


  4. Looks like Gabbard is using a lot of Trump’s talking points.

    1. It’s no surprise that Putin’s two favorite American politicians have a similar message.


  5. If Gabbard gets on the Democrat ballot as Prez it will be because of the None of the Above voters, the people who got Trump on the Republican ballot as Prez.

    It won’t be the party faithfuls.

    1. Which is why she won’t. Dems don’t really let anyone but the party faithfuls win.

  6. I thought Kaaamala up and quit already? Is she just in it as the heel now?

    1. I think so. I noticed that she and Klobuchar were back peddling as fast as they could whenever the casters asked them about some of their more aggressive statements against Biden and Buttigieg (respectively). Kamala especially looked really weak, every time someone pressed her on something she started stammering like she didn’t expect she’d have to answer serious questions

    2. Ha ha ha ha….funny..
      Very good

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.