On the topic of endorsements, today Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez officially endorses Bernie Sanders for president alongside Ilhan Omar who had endorsed him earlier this week. Sanders has now received half of the squads endorsements, Ayanna Pressley and Rashida Tlaib have yet to give their endorsements. I suspect Pressley will most likely endorse Warren as she hails from the same state but both endorsements are still up in the air.

Aoc's statement:

Omar's statement:

Rumor is Tlaib is leaning Bernie, even Omar thought she was going to endorse him. I suspect she's waiting for a more strategic time for it.

Unlike Trump, who's David Duke endorsement made perfect sense because they're both racist fuckheads, I don't think Tulsi is white supremacist, not at all. That said, she gets a disturbing amount of support from not merely the right, but specifically the FAR-right, as in the proudly fascist right, because of some of the rhetoric she chooses and some of the strategy she uses.

Here's just one example of that, Steve Bannon, back when he was in the White House as the chief strategist:
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/307106-bannon-set-up-trump-gabbard-meeting

I hate to make the crowd size thing into some kind of dick measuring contest (especially since Bernie partially achieved this with the help of AOC) but Bernie has the crowd size record again, 26,000 now.

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/19/bernie-sanders-ocasio-cortez-endorsement-rally-051491

This article also mentions that Tlaib is believed to be leaning towards Bernie for endorsement.

I don't know what his deal is, or why he would support a pretty progressive woman of color, but it's irrelevant, and just yet another cheap shot to smear her and her supporters. And yeah, she very firmly made it clear she denounces him, what more can Tulsi do? She can't help any despicable people that support her for whatever unknown reasons.

Decent politicians can garner support from horrible people. Apparently the Ohio mass shooter was a big Warren fan too..

And yeah.. Also this information is like several months old is it not? Why the hell is it popping back in the news cycle now? 

Oh: Additionally Hillary Clinton also seems to have some sort of relationship with ex KKK leader Robert Byrd, some other California KKK leader also endorsed her, and was also a Goldwater Girl so I really wouldn't go down that road..

So Tulsi should just pack it in based on one asshat white supremacist endorsing her for some obscure reason (which she has zero control over, and which she made it abundantly clear she denounced several months ago)? Yep just give it all up Tulsi! Screw fighting for an end to our endless regime change wars. Screw fighting the corporate establishment and trying to beat Trump.

David Duke endorsed her so game over! Let's just hand the reigns over to corporatism Neolib centrists or keep the reality show host in office! Let's just keep the wheels turning, business as usual! 

Really?

Wow.. if that's really all it took, nothing would ever change in this country!

Well, there is a simple explanation for it. The modern american politics has accepted military intervention as a normal tool of politics. It replaces diplomacy and is used to form the global politics or even to influence economy (look at all the business dealings around the Iraq war). There are remaining politics waves, that are anti-war. One is the white suprematist, because they are usually isolationists.

Now Tulsi Gabbard doesn't want isolationism, she has her standing on war because of a sense of honor of the soldiers, and military intervention to topple some country leader that is misliked in US administration or for business deals is not exactly fitting this sense of honor. If you listen to her speaking this honor is nearly everything she talks about.

But that she is against most military intervention for other reasons doesn't matter as much for the far-right, because there is practically no other politician who clearly stands against war. Some might, but nobody even dares to clearly stand against these interventions in this political climate and they choose different topics to put their energy into. As Tulsi is the only choice against interventionists wars, they choose to support her.

That is by the way also the explanation for her support from the left. She isn't a classical left politician, but there are still pacifist leftist that want to fight war. Again Tulsi Gabbard is their best choice, although she reaches her stand from a different set of values.

No. Tulsi Gabbard isn't simply "against military intervention", she's also voted to restrict Syrian refugees from entering the United States, as has been pointed out on this thread before. And also opposes any form of universal health care that is universal enough to include undocumented immigrants. And other stuff. These stances are unique among the Democratic candidates for president and they form a picture of isolationism. Which might explain why most of her support comes from people who voted for Trump in 2016 and why the Trump White House would considered giving her a cabinet-level role in the first place.

It's not just this endorsement and putting aside the fact that I don't really agree with her stances on some major issues but it's just that she ain't gonna win the nomination. I think everybody besides Buttigieg, Harris, Sanders, Warren, Biden and maybe O'Rourke and Yang should just drop out rn. If you're polling a 2% or lower still there's just realistically no point to continuing.

Allow me to respectfully disagree. I don't put much stock in polls so that's part of where my disagreement comes from, but i think Tulsi's message needs to be heard and I'm very sceptical about her being that low in the polls with how hard mainstream media goes after her. I'm pretty sure internal polling is showing something else entirely but that's besides my point.

I will say however you're wrong on who should drop out entirely. Harris can go, she's done and she's slipping. She's out. Beto is done as well. Pete is trying to catch Biden's falling support cause Biden is clearly on his way out, its really not looking good for him since he's bleeding money. Tulsi's message is needed so she stays, everyone else that you said should drop out tho, they can go.

Tulsi is by far the best on foreign policy out of anyone in the race. Keep in mind that everyone in the race is pretty bad on it, even the better ones. Her message is one that everyone needs to hear and she's gonna be pulling everyone left on it. I mean, we had her argument with pete where I see people believing Pete because he came off as aggressive when if you really listened he was saying "he's not for endless war by being for endless war". Funny I know. 

Also I went to the bernie rally, It was so good, Nina Turner is such a blessing and I love how no filter she is. I'm inspired all over again. Bernie's gonna win which means we're gonna win!

A very interesting article.

https://medium.com/@m_weddle/biden-falling-spawns-a-sanders-warren-contest-461187f954

I mean let's be honest, I know she's like 99% not going to win ha, but regardless, that doesn't mean she should just give up. If the only the candidates with a legitimate shot carried on from this point that would basically only leave Biden, Warren, Sanders anyway. 

You never know what could transpire, we still have a whole year, and Tulsi fill a niche that most of the other candidates don't - she's got the somewhat libertarian angle along with essentially being the only anti-war/intervention candidate. A lot can change in a year, especially given her unique appeal. I don't think Bernie was anywhere as popular as he was in October 2015, but a year later he was suddenly leading a populist movement in the Dems and wen toe-to-toe with Clinton. 

There's also the bigger picture factor that she's gaining experience and recognition for either a future run, or possible for a spot as VP/Secretary of state, etc..