US Representative Tulsi Gabbard speaks during Day 2 of the Democratic National Convention at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, July 26, 2016. TIMOTHY A. CLARY / AFP/Getty Images

US Representative Tulsi Gabbard speaks during Day 2 of the Democratic National Convention at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, July 26, 2016. TIMOTHY A. CLARY / AFP/Getty Images

US Representative Tulsi Gabbard speaks during Day 2 of the Democratic National Convention at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, July 26, 2016. TIMOTHY A. CLARY / AFP/Getty Images US Representative Tulsi Gabbard

In my latest Counter Propa article, I explain why there’s only three people in America who can beat Trump in 2020. President Trump’s latest legal defeat prevents him from banning immigrants from seven Muslim majority nations. However, this is a political win for Trump. Many conservatives are already blaming the next attack on Democrats.

Media, and America’s political establishment, can’t seem to accept the fact that Trump will not be defeated by indignation and outrage. For every angry liberal, there’s a happy conservative who likes Trump’s executive orders or policy objectives. Whether or not they work is another story; loyalty is what Trump voters crave.

Trump’s base of voters love him more than ever, because unlike Democratic politicians (who vote against affordable medicine like Senator Cory Booker), President Trump abides by the Republican Party’s purest ideology. Trump wants a border wall, immigrant ban, and many other policies that might never become reality, but millions of people don’t care; they voted for someone who isn’t compromising “pragmatism” for ideological purity.

For this reason, in addition to the fact Hillary Clinton had two FBI criminal investigations, the GOP owns Congress and the White House. As for the establishment, I reminded Senator Warren on YouTube that not long ago, she was silent on numerous issues.

Establishment Democrats will lose in 2020 if they ignore the value system of truly progressive voters. If Democrats rally around a “Pelosi/Schumer” ticket, where Senator Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren are viable options to defeat Trump, Democrats will lose once more. If you think Joe Biden and Cory Booker make a winning team four years from now, then you’re more than ready for eight years of Trump.

FiveThirtyEight didn’t even think Trump would win the Republican nomination.

Now you have Trump battling Nordstrom and making impulsive decisions that score political points among most Republicans. Also, if you think there’s a Republican revolt against Trump, just remember that 53% of white women voted for Trump.

Therefore, the only way to counter Darth Vader is by Luke Skywalker. Democrats need to move a lot further to the left, especially on issues like war and foreign policy. The Democratic Party swallowed up America’s anti-war movement. Democrats replaced a once vocal anti-war movement with social justice warriors who care more about offensive Tweets than over 70 civilians who died during a Syrian airstrike under President Obama.

Democrats need the antithesis of Trump. Bernie Sanders, Nina Turner and Tulsi Gabbard are the antithesis of Trump. Furthermore, each of these progressive icons epitomizes an end to failed U.S. foreign policy quagmires, breaking up Too Big to Fail Banks, and other progressive policy ideals. In addition, both Nina Turner and Tulsi Gabbard broke ties with the DNC to support Bernie Sanders; something Elizabeth Warren failed to emulate.

Congresswoman Gabbard, for example, has already been attacked by The Daily Beast and Washington Post, so we know she’s a threat to the Democratic establishment. In terms of the world’s greatest threat, American regime change is linked to the estimated deaths of 5000,000 people in Iraq. As for Obama sending soldiers to Syria and repeating Bush’s failed policies, Congresswoman Gabbard took matters into her own hands:

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard Returns From Syria with Renewed Calls: End Regime Change War in Syria Now

Washington, DC—Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02) returned to Washington, DC after a week-long visit to Damascus, Aleppo, and Beirut to see and hear firsthand the impact of the war in Syria directly from the Syrian people.

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard released the following statement upon her return:

“My visit to Syria has made it abundantly clear: Our counterproductive regime change war does not serve America’s interest, and it certainly isn’t in the interest of the Syrian people.

“As I visited with people from across the country, and heard heartbreaking stories of how this war has devastated their lives, I was asked, ‘Why is the United States and its allies helping al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups try to take over Syria? Syria did not attack the United States. Al-Qaeda did.’ I had no answer.

“I return to Washington, DC with even greater resolve to end our illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government. I call upon Congress and the new Administration to answer the pleas of the Syrian people immediately and support the Stop Arming Terrorists Act. We must stop directly and indirectly supporting terrorists—directly by providing weapons, training and logistical support to rebel groups affiliated with al-Qaeda and ISIS; and indirectly through Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and Turkey, who, in turn, support these terrorist groups. We must end our war to overthrow the Syrian government and focus our attention on defeating al-Qaeda and ISIS.

“From Iraq to Libya and now in Syria, the U.S. has waged wars of regime change, each resulting in unimaginable suffering, devastating loss of life, and the strengthening of groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS.

“Originally, I had no intention of meeting with Assad, but when given the opportunity, I felt it was important to take it. I think we should be ready to meet with anyone if there’s a chance it can help bring about an end to this war, which is causing the Syrian people so much suffering.

“The U.S. must stop supporting terrorists who are destroying Syria and her people. The U.S. and other countries fueling this war must stop immediately. We must allow the Syrian people to try to recover from this terrible war.”

You think Hillary Clinton, Cory Booker, or Elizabeth Warren would dare travel to Syria and meet with Assad? Of course not, especially since Robert Kagan and other neoconservatives raised money for Democrats. It’s important to note, as well, that Obama spent $500 million training “4 or 5” Syrian rebels. Yes, half a billion dollars for around five Syrian fighters, if you believe that all the money went only to five rebels.

The money, in addition to American soldiers being sent to Syria, don’t correlate to any post-Assad plan.

Democrats do not have a post-Assad plan. Their version of regime change apparently doesn’t need a post-Gaddafi, or Assad strategy. For this reason, Congresswoman Gabbard represents a true anti-perpetual war alternative to Clinton’s socially liberal neocons.

Tulsi Gabbard met with Assad to find a solution to the bloodshed, not to promote Assad or Putin’s view of the world. For centrist Democrats, they simply can’t understand why anyone would break with protocol, for the greater goal of peace.

Tulsi Gabbard put her value system ahead of the Democratic Party, and for this reason, will be able to defeat Trump in 2020.

Future Governor of Ohio Nina Turner, like Gabbard, has always put progressive ideals above politics. As highlighted in The Plain Dealer, former State Senator Turner supported Bernie Sanders before it was popular:

Why Nina Turner’s shift from Hillary Clinton to Bernie Sanders matters: Ohio Politics Roundup

Turn and Bern: Former State Sen. Nina Turner, a top Ohio Democrat with a national profile, made a stunning move Thursday, endorsing Bernie Sanders for the Democratic presidential nomination after months of supportive nods toward Hillary Clinton. Turner said she appreciates his outspokenness on voting rights and wage issues.

Turner is a prominent black leader in a key state. She is a terrific public speaker and no stranger to MSNBC’s prime-time lineup. When she talks, people – particularly progressive Democrats – listen. She can be a very effective surrogate. Her endorsement drew attention from Politico and other national news organizations.

The blowback: Turner told me Thursday that one Clinton supporter said Turner was “doing a disservice to the country.” Turner described the exchange as “very insulting.”

Despite the vapid attempts at intimidation from Clinton loyalists, Nina Turner upheld her belief system and courageously faced the political pressure. Unlike Senator Warren, Turner chose to back the candidate capable of defeating Trump in 2016.

Senator Warren, The Washington Post, Daily Beast, and Clinton voters eventually backed a loser. Someone inform these people that the Electoral College, not the popular vote, is what wins presidential elections.

In addition to Gabbard and Turner, Bernie Sanders offers voters perhaps the greatest contrast to Trump. With Bernie’s political revolution fostering movements like Justice Democrats, his impact on American politics continues to grow. When Bernie Sanders decides to run again, Vermont’s Senator will already have millions of people ready to support his campaign. In addition, powerful voices like Tim Black continue to uncover corruption in both political parties, which further adds to Bernie’s movement.

Trump is impervious to traditional political diatribes or social media outrage. Therefore, public relations firms like The Daily Beast won’t generate enough enthusiasm among all progressives to outweigh Trump’s support from conservatives. Democrats need the polar opposite of Trump; not just a more palatable Hillary Clinton.

If the DNC eventually cheats Bernie again, or Tulsi and Nina, then don’t say I didn’t’ warn you; for the second time. Ironically, there are only three people in America who can defeat Trump and all three are threats to the Democratic Party. Welcome to American politics in 2017.

H. A. Goodman is the creator of CounterPropa.com and the thoughts above are inspired by his new publication.