If these was ever any doubt that Democrats hate leftists more than they hate conservatives, consider who they can forgive. Let's start with George W. Bush.

All it took was for Dubya to start badmouthing Trump, and suddenly a majority of Democrats like him. His massive war crimes are magically forgiven.



Most of Bush's climb back to popularity came from Democrats and independents. His favorability mark among Democrats has soared from only 11% in February 2009 to a majority 54% now.

Torture, domestic spying, illegal wars, it's all water under the bridge.

But do you know who hasn't been forgiven?

Ralph Nader.

Nader's alleged crime?

Helping Bush get elected. You know, the same guy that Democrats now like as president because he once badmouthed Trump (before campaigned for Trump-like candidates).

Even if Nader was guilty of this crime (he isn't), why is it OK to hate a guy for helping to elect someone that you like?

Someone else that Democrats like is the warmonger John McCain. He turned things around by badmouthing Trump too.

Nader has badmouthed Trump a lot more than Bush, but that's different, apparently.

This essay isn't about Ralph Nader. It's about Tulsi Gabbard.

Hey @realdonaldtrump: being Saudi Arabia’s bitch is not “America First.” — Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) November 21, 2018

When Bush and McCain badmouthed Trump, Democrats celebrated.

But when Gabbard, an actual leftist who isn't a warmonger, badmouthed Trump, the reaction was totally different.



Her visit to Bashar al-Assad in January 2017, along with former Democratic Congressman and presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, was the final straw for enemies whose antipathy toward her had been simmering and craved an attack-line to coalesce around. The meeting was fully in keeping with her broader campaign to discourage reckless regime change misadventures, the same position which caused her to express extreme skepticism of Clinton. Predictably, neoconservatives also joined the rush to denounce her for this apostasy, at which point she was tarred – preposterously – as an unconscionable abettor of Assad’s crimes. Because neoconservatism has slowly ingratiated itself into the mainstream of the Democratic party since Trump’s ascension, the barbs flung by liberals and their newfound neoconservative friends could barely be distinguished.

...Yet even though in this case she was aiming her ire squarely at Trump, liberal journalist types couldn’t help but continue condemning her as a callously unfit messenger due to the Assad episode – as if that had anything to do with her revulsion of Trump’s amoral sycophancy for the Saudi Crown Prince. Again, to equate the two relationships as even remotely on the same moral plane would be absurd.

Big words coming from a woman who pals around with Bashar al-Assad as he chemically gasses women and children... https://t.co/ZJ8qxu2U7s — Meghan McCain (@MeghanMcCain) November 21, 2018

Let's not forget this is the same Member of Congress who @washingtonpost described as "Assad's mouthpiece in Washington" .... perhaps she's not one to talk. https://t.co/Hr0hLGCQ0c — Latimer Ridley (@RidleyLatimer) November 21, 2018

tulsi gabbard has no standing to criticize trump for kowtowing to a middle eastern regime https://t.co/SUIgM2w7b9 — Oliver Willis (@owillis) November 21, 2018

No one hates Gabbard more than DailyKos, who has created a whole list of easily disproven, slanderous lies about Gabbard.



I’ve been very concerned by the way political opponents of Tulsi have tried to distort her record and in many, cases, accuse her of the exact opposite of what her actual record is. One has to wonder what is the motivation behind that kind of dishonesty.

Yes, you do have to wonder about their motivation.

Of course not everyone feels the same way about Tulsi's comment.