This year it seems every Democrat with a minimum of name recognition is considering running for president. For the party, the surge of enthusiasm comes with a few risks. The biggest is a messy intra-party fight. And so far, the worst sign of the consequences of that conflict is the early effort to torpedo the nascent campaign of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii.

Gabbard isn’t like the Democrats’ typical candidates. But she’s not one of the restive moderates or the activist socialists, either. On closer inspection, she’s representative of some major new currents in public opinion nationwide.

On no issue is that clearer than foreign policy. Gabbard volunteered to serve in the National Guard shortly after the invasion of Iraq. She was soon deployed — and returned a member of the antiwar wing of her party. That seemed great to Democrats, until Gabbard began to pursue her agenda by meeting with the likes of Bashar al-Assad and Donald Trump himself.

Now the Democrats’ many interventionist hawks are in crisis mode. They see themselves as following squarely within the tough, adult tradition of Barack Obama, and, even more so, Hillary Clinton. And though principle is always involved in staking out positions like this, politics inevitably plays a role — a big one.

Related Articles ‘Environmental justice’ starts by providing more water

Elect Janet Nguyen to represent Assembly District 72

The time for recovery is now: Harry Sidhu

Gig workers like and want flexibility, that’s why they became gig workers

Mixed messages and conflicting ideas in our pandemic age Suddenly, Gabbard’s once-fringey views on finding a path to peace — even if it means striking deals with “bad guys” — is right at the heart of the debate for the Democrats.

Both the hawks and the establishment figures in the Democratic Party see Gabbard as a threat, one that needs to be dealt with as harshly as possible and as soon as possible. So far, Gabbard has managed to parry the “oppo,” but as the field fills up, it will be harder to get a hearing — and pull in funds — if she has to remain on defense for her political sins of the past.

Her real sin in the eyes of the party’s hawks is her willingness to scrap the Obama-Clinton formula on foreign policy, putting them at risk of losing their power and influence. But voters in both parties don’t share the agenda and the incentives of the Democrats’ power elite. If Gabbard is silenced, Democrats will still be hungry for an alternative to warmed-over Clintonism. If they’re not fed, the party faces a grueling primary.