Tulsi Gabbard

Tulsi Gabbard Says the DNC Didn't Even Ask Her To Speak

"I was not invited to participate in any way."


Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii) won two pledged delegates during the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries and stayed in the race longer than Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.), former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D–Minn.). By centering her campaign on a powerful criticism of interventionist foreign policy—a critique that appealed to libertarians, the left, and even many Trump voters—Gabbard was virtually the only presidential aspirant to court people outside the Democratic Party's current base.

But don't expect to hear from her during the last night of the Democratic National Convention: According to Gabbard, the DNC did not even ask her to participate in its programming.

As The Week's Matthew Walther noted, Gabbard was the only candidate to be denied a speaking slot despite winning delegates, which is quite the slight.

"It is strange to think that only four years ago Gabbard was still considered a rising star in the Democratic Party," wrote Walther. "At the DNC in 2016, it was Gabbard who was chosen to nominate Sen. Bernie Sanders as the official second-place finisher in the delegate tally, the role taken on Tuesday night by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. These days Gabbard is a pariah in her party."

Gabbard is not seeking reelection to her House seat. That's a shame. Independent thinking is likely to be in short supply when the 117th Congress is seated.

NEXT: Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey Donates $10 Million to Ibram X. Kendi, Who Wants To Make Racism Unconstitutional

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 Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It's quite in line with orthodox Stalinist thinking. She didn't toe the line and change her views like Kamala Chameleon did. The democrat party has no principles, morals, ethics, or any solid foundation to stand on - they just like power and will do harm to those in their way.

    1. I know I've called you out on many things before but I'm going to have to agree with you on this one.

      1. Is there anyone besides Tony that actually defends the Democrats here? I think we can all agree they are terrible.

        1. Agreed.

          1. That's FUNNY!

            1. Why?

              1. You rushed to defend against the term liberal tyranny just a few days ago.

                1. Making­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Cash more than $15k to $18k consistently just by doing basic online work. I have gotten $18376 a month ago just by working on the web. Its a simple and basic occupation to do from home and its profit are greatly improved than customary office work. Each individual can join this activity now just by pursue this link……..go to this site home media tech tab for more detail support your hear Here══════❥❥❥❥ CLICK HERE

            1. I Quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I'm working online! My work didn't exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new…JGf after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn't be happier.

              Here’s what I do…........>> Click here

    2. Although the Republican Party is the same way!

      1. Yes. Remember Ron Paul was also not invited to speak at the 2012 Republican convention. Ironically, basically for the exact same reason that Tulsi wasn't allowed to speak at the DNC- they make Raytheon cry. 🙁

        1. Mittens was such an ungracious ass.

          1. I basically make about $12,000-$18,000 a month online. It’s enough to comfortably replace my I was amazed how easy it was after I tried it .MNg This is what I've been doing old jobs income, especially considering I only work about 10-13 hours a week from home........

            ===========► Click here

        2. actual peace candidates make warmongers look bad

        3. The Democrat anti-war movement died a sudden death when Bush, Jr. left office.

      2. They’re not the same. I’m not saying the GOP is great. In fact they’re are a huge disaster at this point on many different levels. But there is really no comparison between the kind of Marxist insanity of the DNC and the general failure of the GOP.

        If the alternative to a bad republican wasn’t almost always a far left tyrannical democrat in every political race, it would be a lot easier to weed out the bad republicans.

    3. "Ka mala mala mala chameleon..."

      1. You're two 'mala's short.

    4. She was the only one who could have beaten Trump.

  2. Surprised that a neocon publication would care about Tulsi not being allowed to speak.

    1. Reason? The Week?

      1. - Tulsi never accepted the mentally deranged brand of John Bircherism- Reason fully supported it and even offered their own insane make believe

        - Reason writers wrote three articles bemoaning the demise of the Weekly Standard, while ignoring former Reason writer and anti-war activist, Justin Raimondo's passing

        - Reason writers were all about impeaching the president for delaying military aid to Ukraine- Tulsi thought the whole exercise was a waste of time and voted "present"

        Sure Reason doesn't claim to be a neocon rag, but it sure reads like one nowadays

        1. You know I am as antiwar as they come, but that doesn't seem like a very convincing list to prove that Reason went neocon. I think Raimondo's passing was ignored because he sadly went all Trump crazy in his last few years. However, that's not excuse and he should have been acknowledged. As for Tulsi, Reason was very friendly toward Tulsi when she was running. And the Ukraine was more about Trump using his office to investigate his political opponents.

          1. "I think Raimondo’s passing was ignored because he sadly went all Trump crazy in his last few years. However, that’s not excuse and he should have been acknowledged."

            Strange, because when he went all Obama crazy in 2008, I remember him getting a few mentions at Reason. I guess he was allowed to be partisan, but only for within the parameters defined by the New York Times.

            Explain me this, why did CounterPunch (left-wing antiwar blog) mourn Raimondo's passing then if he was such a Trump sycophant? Even National fucking Review wrote an article (by Michael Brendan Doherty) bemoaning his passing. This from the publication that denounced him as an "Unpatriotic Conservative" (by Frum). There is no excuse.

            1. I think they ignored Raimondo's death because the last few years he was really throwing the BS card down hard on Gillespie. Raimondo and I communicated a little about a year before he died and his support for Trump was rooted in his desire to minimize US involvement and he thought Trump would be more antiwar than anybody else that was running. I was deeply disappointed that Raimondo's passing was unremarked by Reason staff. Especially when they take the time to note Garrett Foster.

              1. Raimondo was correct. While Trump's record is disappointing he's still the least interventionist president in many decades. HRC was already promising new wars before the election. Justin was a hero to people like me no matter what the current politics. I read his blogs for 20 years and Reason should be ashamed for ignoring his passing because Orange Man Bad. He was a big L and a small l libertarian but didn't subscribe to the lefty, woke "libertarianism" Reason is selling. They also seem to have completely forgotten about Julian Assange because he embarrassed their favored candidate. Really sad to see a publication I've been reading for decades turn into a lefty rag with no respect for their own past.

                1. I am no fan of Trump (well any politician for that matter) but at least, for the most part we are not more embroiled in misguided foreign affairs than we were before he took office. Of course, who would actually know what the hell is going on in the world by reading US papers. If it doesn't contain the words Trump or Covid (preferably both) it barely makes it into print. The day that Beirut blew up it was pg3 in the Minneapolis rag. Front page was how bad it was that high school football players might have to wait for spring to play out the season. I really don't know how much more of this insanity I can take

          2. "...And the Ukraine was more about Trump using his office to investigate his political opponents."

            Well, you firing on no cylinders at all.
            Biden was not a 'political opponent'; he was a former VP who had engaged in (at least) unethical behavior to benefit his feckless son.
            So you are, once again:

            1. "Biden was not a 'political opponent'"

              But, yet, here we have Trump and Biden running against each other for President. It isn't possible to be more of a political opponent, or compete for a bigger political prize.

              1. the questions on ukraine started in 2016. But keep not defending democrats.

          3. Is there anyone besides Tony that actually defends the Democrats here?


            And the Ukraine was more about Trump

            You simply ignore the cronyism? That Ukraine itself had a problem with the arrangement? That Ukraines court also ruled they muddled in the 2016 elections for the democrats? Ukraine was only about trump?


        2. You're smearing the JBS by associating them with tReason.

        3. Tulsi is a pacifist -- no one is perfect.

    2. Reason's not particularly libertarian any more, but they're definitely not neocons.

      1. They sure do love themselves some neocons, though. The crocodile tears over the Weekly Standard was an embarrassing display, on top of numerous embarrassing articles and the embrace of ape shit insane conspiracy theories.

        1. Not to mention endless John McCain tributes.

      2. Who can say? Since the way "neocon" is used around here now. it does not seem to mean anything except at least a vaguely activist foreign policy.

  3. She was the best of all the Democratic field of candidates. Hope this is another straw that will ultimately end in the demise of the corrupt, player-out two-party system.

    1. “She was the best of all the Democratic field of candidates“

      Yet still horrible on most issues. Which really showcases how malignant the democrats have become.

  4. The DNC is signalling that if they win, they plan more global military interventions and don't want any backtalk from the likes of Gabbard. They let Bernie and AOC in because they are not objectors.

    1. AOC voted for the House bill to prevent the government from withdrawing troops from Afghanistan.

      The myth that wokism has anything to do with a restrained foreign policy has never borne out in reality.

      1. Ask a leftist which party started most the wars in the 20th century and which party ended both Korea and Vietnam.

        1. The Republicans may have ended the Koean War, but it was the Workers Party of Vietnam that ended the Vietnam War (by conquering South Vietnam).

          1. We signed an accord with North Vietnam and pulled out. They then invaded, a year later. It could technically be seen as two different wars.

            1. Dude, the North Vietnamese "invaded" before the French had their berets handed to them at Dien Bien Phu and stayed way after the United States violated the promise to let them vote for reunification in 1956. And the Domino Theory was one of Eisenhower's great disgraces.

              I'll agree that Korea was started by Democrats and allowed to become a stalemate by a Republican but the Donkeys were bullied into the fight by MacArthur, Luce and all the asshole China Firsters on the elephant bench.

              Neither team should ever mention either conflict to bolster their credentials.

  5. I think a smaller military footprint is something many Democrats can get behind. However, there were some other issues with Tulsi Garbard. Past anti-gay positions by her and her father and her families connection to a completely nuts guru. She basically grew up in a cult. Since there was some crazy there, it was safer not to have her speak.

    1. "Past anti-gay positions"
      Biden literally voted for and supported DOMA, so that is the weakest fucking sauce argument of all time

      "her families connection to a completely nuts guru"
      Hindus. They're called Hindus. Religious bigotry masquerading as an argument just demonstrates your ignorance.

      1. You could have just said "she doesn't want us to bomb shit". It would have been more honest

    2. So explain why so many Democrats voted against Trump's planned withdrawal from Afghanistan and why none of them spoke out against Obama's interventions in Libya and Syria?

      1. TDS?

      2. They have a world to subjugate. Their Soviet brethren are out of the struggle, and the CCP can't be expected to do everything.

    3. "I think a smaller military footprint is something many Democrats can get behind."

      I think energy from unicorn farts is a terrific idea! Wanna get together for drinks?

      1. Democrat voters want peace and a smaller military, at least a good portion of them. Democrat politicians not so much.

        1. False. Portions of the Left and Right want peace and a smaller military. Democratic voters are particularly more hawkish than Republican voters nowadays. Why do we have to keep pretending like it's 2006?

        2. That's why they keep voting for the likes of Feinstein, Pelosi, Clinton, and Obama and a near-endless list of others.....they want, ha ha, peace. Good one! They vote for the people that reflect their ideals: American exceptionalism and global interventionism.

          Those ideals "intersect" with the ideals of neo-conservatives.

        3. Democrats care more about where transgenders take a shit than they do about war.

    4. Maybe you missed this part of the article:

      "At the DNC in 2016, it was Gabbard who was chosen to nominate Sen. Bernie Sanders as the official second-place finisher in the delegate tally, the role taken on Tuesday night by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. These days Gabbard is a pariah in her party."

      Why were those "issues" from her past considered "safe" in 2016 but not 2020?

    5. except she was never anti-gay, any more than Obama was. she had mainstream views which are now too far from the woke side.

    6. .....smaller military footprint from the Party of Clinton and Obama with the support of Bush-era neo-cons??

      Besides, from the sound of it, there was a litany of cultish douche-whackery that got nothing but cheers.

    7. She basically grew up in a cult.

      But so did Obama and Romney.

      1. Mormonism isn’t a cult. You’re just a bigot.

        1. Spinoff religion by a charismatic prophet with an ironic background, fundamentalist wing best known for polygamy and child abuse, formerly attacked Christianity but now wants to be considered just another Protestant denomination, regards women as celestial baby factories, fascination with occult and Masonic imagery, tried to form their own government, disproportionately politically influential, believe in invisible golden tablets and a bogus alternative history of the Jews, ultimately polytheistic and trying to inherit a planet to become a god of another world.

          You sure the LDS aren't a cult?

    8. She’s also dogshit on economic issues.

  6. I'd vote for Tulsi all day. I don't care that she is a flaming commie, she's a female Ron Paul on the war issue. And she's bucked her party a hell of a lot more than Amash ever did. That's why she's hated and why I'd vote for her over any presidential candidate the LP has vomited out for the past three election cycles.

    Tulsi has bigger balls than any man in Congress

    1. Amen, brother.

    2. She was my pick during the (D)ebates.

    3. The thing that struck me about her was there was room for compromise. Some times she came off very canned, but in face of evidence to the contrary, she would at least modify her positions, although not as much as I would have liked.

      As the tenor of politics now is control of the leviathan to smite your enemies, having someone you could work with instead of against seems more productive, as the extremes on both ends have gone completely off the rails and seem to be dominating the conversations.

    4. Hear! Hear!

      That's why I gave Tulsi slightly more money than I gave Ron Paul over two election cycles. Never given a dime to any other pols.

      1. admit it, you were just hoping to meet her and get a picture when she passed through your town

        1. Nah, she is not SIV's type. He likes them with a cloaca.

      2. "That’s why I gave Tulsi slightly more money than I gave Ron Paul over two election cycles."

        I like Tulsi as much as the next guy (probably more) and I donated to her campaign, but she'll never top the old man.

        1. She's cuter than Paul, cut her some slack.

    5. Cannot argue with your logic.

  7. STAY HOME AND STARTING WORK AT HOME EASILY... MORE AND MORE EARNING DAILY BY JUST FOLLOW THESE STEPS, I am a student and i work daily on this site and earn money..HERE? <a HERE? Read More

    1. already working at home dude, going on 6 months soon

  8. Start making cash online work easily from home.i have received a paycheck of $24K in this month by working online from home.i am a student and i just doing this job in my spare HERE? Read More

  9. As a former elected and appointed official of the Democratic Party I believe offering convention time to Rep. Gabbard would have been a mistake. Robby Soave’s objection strengthens my support for that position.

    Respect is to be earned. A participation trophy in this context would have wasted valuable time.

    1. "As a former elected and appointed official of the Democratic Party"

      That explains a lot; no wonder you're an asshole bigot! You have to be one to 'gain' those positions!
      Here I thought you were just some lame piece of lefty shit; instead, you're a card-carrying piece of lefty shit.

      1. Jack Marshall was right about him.


        Arthur is, in a word, nuts, and in two, vile and nuts. “An armed vigilante pursues and kills an innocent teenager along an American street” is a false and misleading characterization presuming intent where no evidence exists. “the armed amateur who fired a fatal bullet into someone for carrying Skittles while black” is outrageous dishonesty, as there is no evidence that race was a motivating factor, nobody has claimed that Zimmerman was anti-Skittles, and again, the characterization is false.

        I don’t even know what (although evidence unknown to the editor at the relevant time indicates there was more truth to the edited message than some conservatives are prepared to acknowledge) is supposed to mean: presumably this is Ratherism.
        To cite the law isn’t to “defend” it. It’s the law. We decide guilt based on the law.

        There should be nothing “conservative” about insisting on fairness and opposing mob justice.

        1. It takes just a few brain cells to know the Rev is a lunatic.

      2. I don’t believe that idiot has ever been elected to anything. Even by faggot progtards.

    2. If you are/were so important, why are you wasting your time here. Shouldn’t you at least be masturbating to the DNC?

      1. If you think holding a position or two in a political party is 'so important,' you must operate at an especially paltry level.

        1. Yet you felt it necessary to flash that credential.

          So which is it?

    3. why? Is a military veteran too much of an ignorant yokel? No room for a peace candidate among the cognoscenti?

      1. Why?

        Bigots are on the other side of the aisle, for starters.

    4. Respect is to be earned
      ...but Biden's the nominee.

    5. Yet Harris is the VP nominee. That is one hell of a participation trophy considering her primary performance.

      1. "Yet Harris is the VP nominee. That is one hell of a participation trophy considering her primary performance."

        Affirmative action enthusiasts putting their money where their mouth is.

        1. Yes, they get a lot of bang for their buck from a candidate who can portray multiple ethnicities.

    6. >>>former elected and appointed official of the Democratic Party

      explains the love for polls.

  10. They didn't want uncle Joe up-staged.

    1. That wouldn’t take much.

  11. I guess Kamala isn't as "forgiving" as creepy Uncle Joe. Makes the whole "IT WAS A DEBATE!" ring even more hollow.

  12. The dems are really working hard to bring the hawks and neocons back into their party after 50 years in exile (not that they needed them to bomb or do drone strikes without Congress’s approval). Tulsi would scare them away.

    Bill Weld actually was given a spot at the 1996 GOP convention where he waxed on to a mostly empty room about how great abortion and gays were, but at least he was given a spot.

    1. Bill Weld is history's greatest monster.

      1. Seriously fuck that guy.

        1. Don’t get me started about Bill Weld. I lived in Mass while he was governor and except for favoring law and order, he was as big a prog as the rest of them. He is 180 degree opposite of a libertarian or a conservative, but somehow was given a voice in their parties, and a pretty big voice in the LP. Tulsi has much more in common with the “progressive” democrats than Weld does with the LP or GOP, but the dems shit on her.

          1. "He is 180 degree opposite of a libertarian or a conservative, but somehow was given a voice in their parties, and a pretty big voice in the LP. Tulsi has much more in common with the “progressive” democrats than Weld does with the LP or GOP, but the dems shit on her."

            Well said. Isn't it odd how Democrats are good about ensuring no dissent within their ranks, while the only dissent that the LP will not allow is from actual libertarians who believe in the non-aggression principle?

    2. Reason did all they could to support Weld in the primaries and he was within striking distance of Orange Man but couldn't quite close the deal. If he hadn't endorsed Hilary in 2016 he'd be the GOP standard bearer today. Of course he'd probably endorse Biden.

  13. Gabbard is Cruella d'Evil to the Dems. Just watch the SNL mock debates.

    1. Obama/Clinton have deep ties to Kamala Kop. Her (B)Hollywood connections along with the Smollets are the new Black/Jewish liberal media base for the Dems. This made Kamala Obama’s choice. Obama never wanted Biden.
      But then Tulsi came along and put Kamala down in the best debate takedown since Trump took out Jeb.
      Hillary countered by smearing Tulsi as a Russian asset. She didn’t have the support to overcome the Machine. She won delegates in American Samoa. As part Samoan, she was the last indigenous woman of color in the race. None of that mattered to the Obama machine.
      Then Obama shafted Bernie before Super Tuesday and anointed Joe Biden.
      Biden has promised the donors that nothing will fundamentally change.
      Trump is still the best agent for change, imperfect as he is. He has so far not started any wars, but his Maximum Pressure sanctions have killed thousands.
      I too donated to Ron Paul (still do to his Peace and Liberty Foundation), as well as Tulsi. She was the best candidate on principle, honesty and courage.

  14. LOL as you guys know perfectly well, you can't run with anything that goes counter to the narrative!

  15. On another note, wasn't Mexico supposed to pay for it? Turns out Bannon was planning on paying for it out of his own pocket sometime in the distant future.

  16. In addition to "Donations Needed Constantly" the DNC also stands for "Dissension Not Condoned." One of the main reasons I really began to understand how full of crap the Democrats are is they are quick to call out the Republicans for being so partisan when they are no better. But being partisan is virtue if it's on the issues they deem critical to the lefts agenda.

  17. I still secretly hope that Trump will make her his VP pick. It would be trolling on a massive level, and the VP debate would be a rematch of the greatest beat down of the past year. Not gonna happen, but I can dream.

    1. Secretary of Defense?

  18. `I’ve made $66,000 so far this year w0rking 0nline and I’m a full time student.oiu. I’m using an 0nline business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great m0ney.ERd It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found .out about it...........….COPY HERE====►►Money90

  19. Really a shame that Tulsi is leaving. I don't agree with many of her domestic policy positions, but her thoughts on non-intervention appealed to me.

    One thought...she now qualified for a pension (served at least three terms). No surprise she is pulling up stakes now. One more year, and she gets a full military pension. She is set up for life with pension payments at a young age.

    For some reason, I think she will be back.

  20. They don't want people being reminded of how horrible their candidates are by comparison. Young and vibrant vs barely there. She makes Kamala look like a dude.

  21. Wrong color.

  22. Every month start earning more cash from $20,000 to $24,000 by working very simple j0b 0nline from home. I have earned last month $23159 from this by just doing this 0nline w0rk for maximum 3 to 4 hrs a day using my laptop. This home j0b is just awesome and regular earning from this are much times better than other regular 9 to 5 desk j0b. Now every person on this earth can get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow instructions on the given web page......Click here.

  23. Sorry, Tulsi, the Dems just are not into you at all.

  24. Gabbard is not seeking reelection to her House seat. That's a shame.

    Is that what it is? The democrats are awful, almost universally and to a point. Tulsi will have a better life doing whatever brings her happiness, than trying to serve an ungrateful people in a corrupt political body. I wish her all the best.

    1. exactly this. Why any decent human being would waste their life swilling in the national political cesspool is beyond me. It might hurt at first but the Dems did her a favor by casting her aside.

  25. She's not even a Democrat. That would've been the worst waste of air to have her on there.

    I know she's beloved here but she didn't even compete in her primary because everyone knows that she would've lost and handily.

    Just because she was too stupid and stubborn to drop out until waaaay after everyone else doesn't mean she had any business still being in the primary.

    But yes, go on Reason, tearing Dems down. We know this is a bs rag funded by the Kochs that only seeks to elect Rs while pretending to care about fiscal conservatism or any actual lofty ideals.

    1. "She’s not even a Democrat."

      But Bernie Sanders is?

      Anyway, that's kind of the point; the Dems are forcing her out because she dares to toe past the party line on foreign policy and because she had the temerity to point out the hypocrisy of the eventual vice-presidential nominee.

  26. She does have a full schedule speaking to Putin's United Russia party and Assad's Baath party gatherings.

  27. Google easily work and google pays me every hour and every week just $5K to $8K for doing online work from home. I am a universty student and I work n my part time just 2 to 3 hours a day easily from home. Now every one can earn extra cash for doing online home system and make a good life by just open this website and follow instructions on this page………check my site

  28. I'm sorry, Tulsi Gabbard isn't even in this election anymore, and she gets a full article?

    Jo Jorgenson articles when?

    1. I'll probably vote for Jorgensen, but I'd rather read an article about Tulsi, if I'm being honest.

      And Gabbard is in a much better position to actually affect one aspect of public policy and opinion in a more libertarian direction.

      That said, I wouldn't mind reading some more on this site about the LP ticket.

      1. Anything newsworthy happening with the Jorgensen campaign?

        Perhaps, the less said about her anarcho-parody of a runningmate, the better.

        1. Jo was bitten by a bat. All the news fit to print.

    2. There's zero enthusiasm for that lady here. It would be telling, if in 2024 the LP nominated a man and Reason comes out swinging again. But I think they've just given up on libertarian presidential aspirations.

  29. T needs to enlist her for something. like by lunch.

  30. The way they knocked Tulsi out with a cartoon campaign to make her into Cruela, the evil one, was a thing of beauty, if you love character assassination.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.