same people who were cape'n for Hillary and her past LGBTQ views are now making the judgment on Tulsi. The difference is the record. When Hillary was first lady she had the "super predators" comment, and then as a Senator in NY was in a state where stop and frisk ran rampant, and on a national level was all for the for-profit prison system. It was only after Obama and BLM where she made a point to start her 2016 campaign SPEECH about the prison industrial complex, but not in policy.

Tulsi on the other hand acknowledges how she was incubated in that hatred but instead was shown a way out, based on her experience in the military and how she can see the destruction of those types of views. AND she reinforced this in her voting records.

1. going into 2020, where you are hoping to appeal to the other side of the aisle and that constituency - the Deplorables - isn't it easier to do so from the perspective of a person who was once on that side of a discussion and saw a way out of it?

2. Tulsi is an interesting candidate in that she checks off A LOT of boxes that help for superficial and deeper level appeal:

- Woman candidate
- Person of color
- Former military
- Progressive platform
- Sanders adjacent
- "Real" Democrat
- clean of 2016 DNC mess
- Against interventionalist foreign policy
- for reinvestment in America infrastructure and working class
- convert on LGBTQ perspective

I mean....there is a lot to like about Tulsi as a candidate. At this point I am not mad at anyone being in the fold and conversation since it will bring a lot of things to the table. Looking forward to it, but no writing anybody off. That's what primaries are for.