Tulsi is the darling of the Breitbart/Infowars crowd.
Not really. They'd throw her under the bus just as quickly as the establishment dems did if she was debating Trump. Most of em anyway.
People who are serious about ending the endless military spending and unconstitutional foreign occupation like her for her position on working to end it. And there are those who understand that the nomination process is rigged on both theoretical sides, the RNC and the DNC. Other than that, she's your standard Democrat.
The neocons on the Dem side are basically giving her the same treatment that the neocons on the Republican side gave to Ron Paul.
Gabbard is actually the best democrat to run against Trump. If the dems had an once of common sense they'd nominate her. Then you'd see just how quickly the folks on the so-called right turn on her. Neither Sanders or Biden will debate Trump in a civilized, adult manner, and Trump will gladly do the same in return. Gabbard would force a serious debate, even if the debate moderators tried to keep it Romper Roomish, which they always do.
If they were to put Gabbard up against Trump, it'd scare the crap outta the Republicans. Fact of the matter is that Trump is a big-government spender. His 2021 fiscal budget is the largest in American history. I see no difference in him or any other democrat. Gabbard, on the other hand would actually try to do what Trump ran on yet reneged on. And that's bring em home and stop all of that waste.
Unfortunately, the emperialist neocons have a rather strong foothold in both parties. Both parties want to keep the endless military spending going. And, so, the printing press keeps rolling and the dollar keeps tanking along with whatever little bit of purchasing power we once had.
End of the day, though it's like this. She isn't running to get elected. She's doing something totally different. She's playing a completely different game than the rest of em.
It's not always about just trying to hurry up and get elected. Sometimes it's about changing the course of history. Changing the discussion. It's a process of continuing growth.