when it comes to championing Progressive values. He's done it longer and with more passion than anybody in the House or Senate - and he's been stunningly consistent and resolute.

>tulsi just started championing a progressive platform after
>2016. completely flipped on major issues with no real
>reasoning.
>
>if conor lamb or tim ryan suddenly started acting like
>alexandria ocasio-cortez...'progressives' would be roasting
>them lol.

I do think that Tulsi's background will be a significant hurdle for her - particularly with Democratic voters who want to re-litigate 2016 and blame Tulsi (along with Russia, Bernie, Jill Stein and Alf) for Hillary's defeat. But she's not trying to be AOC - she has a wholly distinctive identity that is progressive, but it's also post-partisan and independent of standard party dogma in many ways (which incidentally, is also a feature of AOC). Tulsi's approach has a universal message to it - and it's very much global in scope. There is no candidate who is running right now who understands peace & war in a complicated global order better than Tulsi. You've never even heard Warren talk about foreign policy - and if she does - she sounds uncomfortable and wants to pivot to a different domestic item.

When it comes to being "progressive" (whatever that means now) - you could certainly make the case that other candidates (Warren, Bernie) are more progressive. But I don't think you can find a candidate right now that is both progressive and can credibly dissent with party orthodoxy in a way that doesn't just appeal to progressives on the left, but also to independents and a growing voter bloc that is not particularly interested in partisan identity.




-->