The first 2020 presidential Democratic debate is officially behind us. Most will no doubt continue to focus on the performance of perceived front-runners such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D.Mass., or flailing candidates such as former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-Texas.

But I want to talk about how Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, was treated.

Gabbard is not only a hero of the old anti-war liberal crowd, however many of them are left, but has also been a favorite of libertarians, who made up the Ron Paul coalition that energized his presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012.

These libertarians don’t necessarily agree with Gabbard on every issue, far from it, but favor her because she offers a rare voice speaking from an Iraq War veteran’s position on the desperate need for more foreign policy restraint.

The Democratic establishment clearly does not consider presidential outlier Gabbard part of their club, something evident Wednesday night when she was largely ignored by the NBC moderators at every turn, ending up on the bottom end of who received the most speaking time.

Similarly, at one debate during the 2008 Republican primaries, the oft-described “gadfly” Ron Paul was only allowed a few minutes of speaking time during an almost two-hour event. Still, Paul would eventually become a force in that election due in large part to his anti-war message, winning almost every post-debate Fox News poll. And late Wednesday, Gabbard was the runaway winner of a Drudge Report online poll.

Obviously such polls are not scientific, and certainly don’t indicate who will become the presidential nominee. And winning a right-leaning poll of any sort is not necessarily a help to Gabbard in a Democratic primary.

Still, Gabbard got Ron Paul’d on Wednesday night.

Tulsi Gabbard totally got Ron Paul'd tonight. Didn't get to say much. #DemDebate — Julie Borowski (@JulieBorowski) June 27, 2019

Though hardly getting any speaking time, Gabbard still managed to call out the pro-war duo of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and national security adviser John Bolton as the President Trump’s “chickenhawk” cabinet.

Then in an exchange with Rep Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, and against all odds, Gabbard really shined.

Reps. Tim Ryan and Tulsi Gabbard sparred on Wednesday night over the best strategy in Afghanistan https://t.co/KNrGIkHnTf #DemDebate pic.twitter.com/d9Esh9mzOl — CNN (@CNN) June 27, 2019

When asked about our ongoing military presence in Afghanistan, Ryan declared in droning foreign policy establishment fashion that “we must be engaged in this. We must have our State Department engaged. We must have our military engaged to the extent they need to be.”

That’s when Gabbard jumped in. “Is that what you will tell the parents of those two soldiers who were just killed in Afghanistan?” she said. “‘Well, we just have to be engaged.’ As a soldier, I will tell you, that answer is unacceptable.”

“We have to bring our troops home from Afghanistan,” Gabbard continued. “We are in a place in Afghanistan where we have lost so many lives. We've spent so much money.”

An irritated Ryan said that if the U.S. did not stay engaged in the Middle East, "the Taliban will grow and they will have bigger, bolder terrorist acts.”

“When we weren’t in there, they started flying planes into our buildings,” Ryan added.

“The Taliban didn’t attack us on 9/11,” Gabbard shot back. “Al Qaeda did. That's why I and other people joined the military," she continued, "to go after al Qaeda. Not the Taliban."

“The Taliban was there long before we came in and will be there long before we leave,” Gabbard said. “We cannot keep U.S. troops deployed to Afghanistan thinking that we are going to somehow squash this Taliban.”

Ron Paul’s big moment in the 2008 campaign that took him from relative obscurity to popular libertarian icon was his anti-war exchange with the reliably hawkish Rudy Giuliani, the presumed front-runner at that time, who accused Paul of “blaming America” for 9/11 by merely questioning U.S. foreign policy.

The American Conservative’s Jim Antle explained in 2012 what happened after that exchange:

Giuliani’s influence waned ... while Paul became something of a GOP rock star. He ran again for president four years later, this time topping 2 million Republican primary votes.

Sometimes in trying to snuff out a candidate, party establishments get bit — just ask Donald Trump.

Earlier in the night Wednesday, one of the few questions posed directly to Gabbard was about her former socially conservative views years ago on LGBT issues, which she has already repeatedly denounced and apologized for. She noted that during her six years in office she has been a staunch advocate for LGBT causes.

It was a question clearly intended to suggest to viewers Gabbard didn’t really belong on the stage and a shameless attempt to embarrass her. It was also eerily reminiscent of how the establishment treated Ron Paul. During a 2008 Fox News GOP primary debate, moderator Carl Cameron asked Paul in a condescending fashion, “Congressman Paul, yet another question about electability. Do you have any, sir?”

Everyone laughed, including the moderators.

That’s what establishment politicians and their media ancillaries do when they want you to just go away. Ron Paul had the last laugh when he went on to build a movement that endures to this day.

It was clear Wednesday that Democrat leaders and liberal MSNBC hosts wish the noninterventionist congresswoman would just fade into the background, and they tried to accomplish just that. Instead, she’s getting a lot of attention right now.

Could this be Tulsi Gabbard’s “breakout moment?” Only time will tell.

Jack Hunter (@jackhunter74) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog. He is the former political editor of Rare.us and co-authored the 2011 book The Tea Party Goes to Washington with Sen. Rand Paul.