Jump to content

Talk:Tulsi Gabbard: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Tulsi Gabbard/Archive 7) (bot
 
(39 intermediate revisions by 22 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talkheader|archive_age=6|archive_units=months}}
{{Talkheader}}

{{American politics AE |1RR=no|Consensus required = no |BRD = yes}}
{{American politics AE |1RR=no|Consensus required = no |BRD = yes}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=B|living=yes|activepol=yes|listas=Gabbard, Tulsi|1=
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=B|living=yes|activepol=yes|listas=Gabbard, Tulsi|1=
Line 10: Line 9:
{{WikiProject Military history|class=B|B-Class-1=yes|B-Class-2=yes|B-Class-3=yes|B-Class-4=yes|B-Class-5=yes|US-task-force=yes|Middle-Eastern-task-force=yes|Post-Cold-War-task-force=yes|Logistics-and-medicine-task-force=yes}}
{{WikiProject Military history|class=B|B-Class-1=yes|B-Class-2=yes|B-Class-3=yes|B-Class-4=yes|B-Class-5=yes|US-task-force=yes|Middle-Eastern-task-force=yes|Post-Cold-War-task-force=yes|Logistics-and-medicine-task-force=yes}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Mid|American-importance=High|American=yes}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Mid|American-importance=High|American=yes}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Low|USPE=yes|USPE-importance=Mid|USState-Legislatures=yes|USState-Legislatures-importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject U.S. Congress|subject=Person|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject U.S. Congress|subject=Person|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism|importance=Mid}}
Line 16: Line 16:
}}
}}
{{annual readership|scale=log}}
{{annual readership|scale=log}}
{{Top 25 report|Jul 28 2019 (5th)|Oct 13 2019 (10th)|Oct 20 2019 (15th)|Mar 1 2020 (23rd)}}
{{Top 25 report|Jul 28 2019 (5th)|Oct 13 2019 (10th)|Oct 20 2019 (15th)|Mar 1 2020 (23rd)|Aug 25 2024 (9th)}}
{{US English}}
{{US English}}
{{Calm|#FFCCCC}}
{{Calm|#FFCCCC}}
Line 61: Line 61:


Can we get rid of the Conservative designation for someone who has a Liberal Ideology? <ref>(74th percentile) GovTract.us</ref> [[Special:Contributions/23.122.176.75|23.122.176.75]] ([[User talk:23.122.176.75|talk]]) 21:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) ObviousGuy 14:36, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Can we get rid of the Conservative designation for someone who has a Liberal Ideology? <ref>(74th percentile) GovTract.us</ref> [[Special:Contributions/23.122.176.75|23.122.176.75]] ([[User talk:23.122.176.75|talk]]) 21:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) ObviousGuy 14:36, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

:She is both. People can be both. [[Special:Contributions/176.223.172.2|176.223.172.2]] ([[User talk:176.223.172.2|talk]]) 14:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}
{{reflist-talk}}


== Misleading sentence about imigration ==
== Lead section redundancies ==

"Gabbard has expressed support for increased border security and voted with Republicans for vetting of Iraqi and Syrian refugees."

When I first read this, I interpreted is as saying that Gibbard went against her own party to support a Republican bill. But when I checked out the source, it turns out that this was a bipartican bill on which she voted yes along with 47 of her Democratic colleagues, and which only a small minority of her party opposed. I think this should be edited to avoid confusion. [[Special:Contributions/2001:2020:C313:D2B8:0:0:56:B066|2001:2020:C313:D2B8:0:0:56:B066]] ([[User talk:2001:2020:C313:D2B8:0:0:56:B066|talk]]) 13:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)


:{{done}}, thank you for bringing this to the talk page. [[User:Eruditess|Eruditess]] ([[User talk:Eruditess|talk]]) 05:13, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
There is mention in the first lead paragraph about her leaving the Democratic party and becoming an Independent as well as another mention of it in the final lead section paragraph. I am thinking about trying to consolidate it to just one occurrence/mention for the lead as it isn't really necessary for repeated information in the lead. Should be more concise. Any editors object or have any other thoughts on how to handle? I'm not thinking about removing all the content in the later mention but maybe just eliminating the fact it mentions she leaves the Democratic party in October 2022. [[User:Eruditess|Eruditess]] ([[User talk:Eruditess|talk]]) 21:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
:Marking as {{done}} as a nice editor carried this request out. -[[User:Eruditess|Eruditess]] ([[User talk:Eruditess|talk]]) 17:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2024 ==
== Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2024 ==


{{edit semi-protected|Tulsi Gabbard|answered=yes}}
{{edit semi-protected|Tulsi Gabbard|answered=yes}}
I would remove Footnote 25 and put "source needed." Cited article about Trump's potential Vice Presidential Selections does not even mention Gabbard and s not a source to back up the assertion. [[Special:Contributions/134.197.135.158|134.197.135.158]] ([[User talk:134.197.135.158|talk]]) 05:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
This sentence is poorly written and easily misunderstood...X:


:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> Statement removed. [[User:AlphaBetaGamma|ABG]] <small> ([[User talk:AlphaBetaGamma|Talk/Report any mistakes here]]) </small> 05:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
"During her term of office, Gabbard successfully led opposition to, and protests of, a state bill that would have legalized same-sex civil unions,"


== Should this be included? ==
Change to something something like...Y:


A close relative has just died in a shooting.
During her term of office, Gabbard successfully led opposition and protests to a state bill that would have legalized same-sex civil unions. [[Special:Contributions/2403:6200:8810:9F7E:6C73:5833:52F2:32C4|2403:6200:8810:9F7E:6C73:5833:52F2:32C4]] ([[User talk:2403:6200:8810:9F7E:6C73:5833:52F2:32C4|talk]]) 00:56, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
:{{Done}}. [[User:A. Randomdude0000|A. Randomdude0000]] ([[User talk:A. Randomdude0000|talk]]) 01:14, 21 March 2024 (UTC)


https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2024/06/01/prominent-gabbard-family-mourns-retired-uh-professor-writer-murdered-samoa/ [[Special:Contributions/176.223.172.2|176.223.172.2]] ([[User talk:176.223.172.2|talk]]) 14:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
== Vegetarian not Vegan ==


:Only if it becomes relevant to her niece's biography. (I don't think it was a shooting btw.) [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 23:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Tulsi has described herself as Vegetarian, and not Vegan, as correctly reported by New Yorker and Indo-American
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/06/what-does-tulsi-gabbard-believe
https://archive.ph/20121105052532/http://www.indoamerican-news.com/archives/12109
The NY Times article "Tulasi thinks we are doomed" claiming her as Vegan, was an article written in bad taste with an attacking negative tone, and potentially libelous claims, and does not mention primary source for "Vegan" claim.


== Misleading statement about ancestry/ethnicity ==
Hence it is violation of WP:BLP to refer her as Vegan, when she has never called herself Vegan.
It should be Vegetarian and not Vegan.
I can provide more WP:RS sources for Vegetarian, if any editor wants. Thanks. [[User:RogerYg|RogerYg]] ([[User talk:RogerYg|talk]]) 10:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)


The article states: “Gabbard, who is of Samoan descent and 26% Southeast Asian”. However Gabbard herself has clarified repeatedly that she is of European and Samoan descent, with her parents being mostly European. The southeast asian reference relates to genetic studies showing that Samoans migrated from southeast Asia long in the past. This would be like saying an American native was of Chinese descent; perhaps technically true if considering ice age migration and genetic similarities, but completely misleading in regards to direct ancestry and cultural heritage. The statement is also redundant in that the southeast asian genetics refers to her Samoan heritage, and omits her majority European heritage. The statement should be changed to “Gabbard, who is of European and Samoan descent”. References could be updated to the 2012 Huffington Post article and/or campaign website where she clearly states her European and Samoan ancestry. [[Special:Contributions/2601:600:8E00:666F:8C4D:40FA:39B7:A64F|2601:600:8E00:666F:8C4D:40FA:39B7:A64F]] ([[User talk:2601:600:8E00:666F:8C4D:40FA:39B7:A64F|talk]]) 06:58, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Hi [[User:Jonathan Deamer]], I only want to replace Vegan with Vegetarian, to comply with WP:BLP. I don't have an issue with any other content for now. I was going to add Vegetarian with New Yorker reference, just before your revert. Thanks. [[User:RogerYg|RogerYg]] ([[User talk:RogerYg|talk]]) 10:36, 22 March 2024 (UTC)


:I agree. The category "Southeast Asian" in the genetic test included Samoans. The genealogical research found no Southeast Asian ancestry other than Samoans. We should therefore only mention European and Samoan ancestry.
:Ah I see, thanks for explaining RE: other content (ie. American Samoan)! And for the helpful New Yorker link.
:This was discussed before btw. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 13:10, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
:Which bit of [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons]] specifically do you think this doesn't comply with? I don't think stating someone is vegan is contentious, especially when supported by an RS like NY Times.
:To ensure NPOV, how about something like the following for the first couple of sentences of the personal life section?
:''Gabbard is an [[Samoan Americans|American Samoan]] from [[Hawaii]]. She is a surfer, and has been described variously as a [[vegan]]<ref>{{cite news |last= Bowles |first= Nellie |author-link= Nellie Bowles |title= Tulsi Gabbard Thinks We're Doomed |newspaper= [[The New York Times]] |date= August 2, 2019 |access-date= September 21, 2019 |page= A1 |url= https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/02/us/politics/tulsi-gabbard-2020-presidential-race.html |quote= Ms. Gabbard … would be the first female president, the first American Samoan, the first from Hawaii, the first surfer, the first vegan.}}</ref> and vegetarian<ref>{{Cite news |last=Sanneh |first=Kelefa |date=2017-10-30 |title=What Does Tulsi Gabbard Believe? |url=https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/06/what-does-tulsi-gabbard-believe |access-date=2024-03-22 |work=The New Yorker |language=en-US |issn=0028-792X}}</ref>.'' [[User:Jonathan Deamer|Jonathan Deamer]] ([[User talk:Jonathan Deamer|talk]]) 10:50, 22 March 2024 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2024 ==
New Yorker: "She is also a vegetarian and a practicing Hindu—the first Hindu ever elected to Congress—as well as a lifelong surfer and an accomplished athlete."
<ref name="Sanneh">{{Cite news|last=Sanneh|first=Kelefa|date=October 30, 2017|title=What Does Tulsi Gabbard Believe?|newspaper=New Yorker|url=https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/06/what-does-tulsi-gabbard-believe|url-status=live|access-date=January 13, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607114820/https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/06/what-does-tulsi-gabbard-believe|archive-date=June 7, 2020}}</ref>
:When I read through the cited links here on the talk page and I google "Tulsi Gabbard vegan", they all seem to fall under the same situation. The article labels her a vegan, but her actual quoted interview she calls herself vegetarian. She doesn't seem to refer to herself as a vegan. She just says she doesn't eat animals. Which might mean she drinks milk or uses leather. I suppose it doesn't really matter because we juts report what these sources say. However, I wouldn't mind if we stripped vegan from the lead. [[User:Eruditess|Eruditess]] ([[User talk:Eruditess|talk]]) 04:02, 23 March 2024 (UTC)


{{edit semi-protected|Tulsi Gabbard|answered=yes}}
:Agree with that. We need to replace Vegan with Vegetarian as per WP:BLP and WP:RS [[User:RogerYg|RogerYg]] ([[User talk:RogerYg|talk]]) 06:58, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Add a line at the end of the opening description about Tulsi that states that after identifying as an "Independent," she has now become a supporter of Donald Trump and is helping prepare him for the Presidential debates. [[Special:Contributions/2603:7000:9340:DCFC:5052:4415:7D18:1722|2603:7000:9340:DCFC:5052:4415:7D18:1722]] ([[User talk:2603:7000:9340:DCFC:5052:4415:7D18:1722|talk]]) 15:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
::@[[User:Eruditess|Eruditess]] I couldn't find "vegan" in the lead, but if it's there I think it's fair to remove and keep coverage to the personal life section (especially given due weight, below).
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:MadGuy7023|MadGuy7023]] ([[User talk:MadGuy7023|talk]]) 16:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
::@[[User:RogerYg|RogerYg]] Rather than replace, I suggest as per [[Wikipedia:Verifiability]] we include both: "If reliable sources disagree with each other, then maintain a neutral point of view and present what the various sources say, giving each side its due weight." On the basis of due weight, further to my suggestion above, perhaps something like "Gabbard is vegetarian, and also reported as being vegan." [[User:Jonathan Deamer|Jonathan Deamer]] ([[User talk:Jonathan Deamer|talk]]) 07:04, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
:::''Okay'', though as per WP:BLP self reported info is Vegetarian, which should get priority, but we can mention about Vegan too. [[User:RogerYg|RogerYg]] ([[User talk:RogerYg|talk]]) 07:15, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
::Also note that the "Departure from the Democratic party" section goes into (well sourced) detail how she became a Trump supporter. It's just not necessarily worthy of the lead. --[[User:GRuban|GRuban]] ([[User talk:GRuban|talk]]) 16:34, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
:{{Done}} [[User:RogerYg|RogerYg]] ([[User talk:RogerYg|talk]]) 07:46, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}


== removal of claim of mother's religion ==
== Frame of Reference ==


"Gabbard has taken more conservative positions on issues such as abortion, foreign policy, transgender rights, and border security."
Regarding the [[Special:diff/1211356649/1211478356|revision of of 19:52, 2 March 2024]], raising the issue as to whether Gabbard's mother was a practicing Hindu and if this was the reason for naming her daughter ''Tulsi'', this [https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/us-canada-news/tulsi-gabbard-the-first-practicing-hindu-in-house-of-representatives/articleshow/17895347.cms?from=mdr story in Times of India] states {{blockquote|She [Tulsi] inherited her interest in Hinduism from her parents, particularly her mother ...}} supporting the claim that the mother gave her children Hindu names based on her own interest in the Hindu religion. Was the mother actually practicing Hindu from the date of birth of her first child? While giving her children Hindu names might suggest that, such a claim was not actually made. [[User:Fabrickator|Fabrickator]] ([[User talk:Fabrickator|talk]]) 07:25, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't doubt that there are sources that can support this, however I am concerned that the statement doesn't accept the possibility that the opposite could be true. What if her positions have been quite consistent, but her former party moved away from them?

<s>The wording is quite strongly critical, yet</s> it might not be that Gabbard actually changed her position much, given the political changes that have happened around her. [[User:SkepticNotCynic|SkepticNotCynic]] ([[User talk:SkepticNotCynic|talk]]) 20:13, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

:The wording of that sentence is factual. It is only critical if you dislike conservative positions and interpret it as criticism. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]]&nbsp;([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 20:36, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

:: Thank you, @[[User|Muboshgu]]. I agree that my comment about the statement being critical was irrelevant to the main point, so I have applied a strikethrough to that part of the sentence.
:: Regarding the discussion, it seems reasonable to claim that Gabbard's positions align more with conservative views on some issues than with the current views of her former party. However:
::* Abortion: Abortion is not mentioned in the body of the article, yet the claim of a shift in position since January 2021 is in the lede. Gabbard's recent support for third-trimester restrictions does not represent a new conservative shift. For example she supported the "Born Alive" bill in 2020.
::* Foreign Policy: The Foreign Affairs section of the article does not support the idea that she changed positions since January 2021. Gabbard's critiques are consistent with her long-standing non-interventionist stance on foreign policy.
::* Transgender Rights: The "Protect Women's Sports Act" was introduced in 2020 as the article clearly states. Gabbard began her career supporting "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and has since moved towards supporting LGBT+ rights though not as far as her former party, particularly on issues like transwomen in sports.
::* Border Security: Gabbard has supported stronger border security measures for years, which aligns with her consistent approach rather than a shift in position since January 2021.
:: Her views seem to have remained quite consistent while the political landscape around her has shifted. It might be misleading to claim that she has recently adopted more conservative positions on these issues, a claim that the article as a whole does not seem to support. [[User:SkepticNotCynic|SkepticNotCynic]] ([[User talk:SkepticNotCynic|talk]]) 08:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2024 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Tulsi Gabbard|answered=yes}}
You have her listed as conservative. She is not conservative. She left the Democratic Party because she believes they are going to start a world nuclear war. She is in fact left of center and liberal on almost all her policies she supports. She should be changed from conservative to liberal or at least moderate. She is in no way conservative [[Special:Contributions/2601:982:300:3100:F8A9:DA66:B16F:15E9|2601:982:300:3100:F8A9:DA66:B16F:15E9]] ([[User talk:2601:982:300:3100:F8A9:DA66:B16F:15E9|talk]]) 12:14, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:MadGuy7023|MadGuy7023]] ([[User talk:MadGuy7023|talk]]) 15:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2024 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Tulsi Gabbard|answered=yes}}
You have her listed as conservative. She is not conservative. She left the Democratic Party because she believes they are going to start a world nuclear war. She is in fact left of center and liberal on almost all her policies she supports. She should be changed from conservative to liberal or at least moderate. She is in no way conservative [[Special:Contributions/2600:1002:B187:7FF0:984F:3822:8BBF:4ABE|2600:1002:B187:7FF0:984F:3822:8BBF:4ABE]] ([[User talk:2600:1002:B187:7FF0:984F:3822:8BBF:4ABE|talk]]) 19:58, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:EvergreenFir|'''<span style="color:#8b00ff;">Eve</span><span style="color:#6528c2;">rgr</span><span style="color:#3f5184;">een</span><span style="color:#197947;">Fir</span>''']] [[User talk:EvergreenFir|(talk)]] 20:15, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
::Whoever first wrote her as conservative recently, did that person provide any sour es to support that claim? If not, why the inconsistent requirement? [[Special:Contributions/98.45.134.246|98.45.134.246]] ([[User talk:98.45.134.246|talk]]) 07:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:09, 21 September 2024

Why does this article say that she’s a Democrat if she supports conservative ideology?

[edit]

Why does this article say that she’s a Democrat if she supports conservative ideology? 71.114.123.162 (talk) 08:03, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article says she left the Democratic Party. TFD (talk) 14:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get rid of the Conservative designation for someone who has a Liberal Ideology? [1] 23.122.176.75 (talk) 21:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) ObviousGuy 14:36, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

She is both. People can be both. 176.223.172.2 (talk) 14:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ (74th percentile) GovTract.us

Misleading sentence about imigration

[edit]

"Gabbard has expressed support for increased border security and voted with Republicans for vetting of Iraqi and Syrian refugees."

When I first read this, I interpreted is as saying that Gibbard went against her own party to support a Republican bill. But when I checked out the source, it turns out that this was a bipartican bill on which she voted yes along with 47 of her Democratic colleagues, and which only a small minority of her party opposed. I think this should be edited to avoid confusion. 2001:2020:C313:D2B8:0:0:56:B066 (talk) 13:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thank you for bringing this to the talk page. Eruditess (talk) 05:13, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2024

[edit]

I would remove Footnote 25 and put "source needed." Cited article about Trump's potential Vice Presidential Selections does not even mention Gabbard and s not a source to back up the assertion. 134.197.135.158 (talk) 05:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Statement removed. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 05:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should this be included?

[edit]

A close relative has just died in a shooting.

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2024/06/01/prominent-gabbard-family-mourns-retired-uh-professor-writer-murdered-samoa/ 176.223.172.2 (talk) 14:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only if it becomes relevant to her niece's biography. (I don't think it was a shooting btw.) TFD (talk) 23:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading statement about ancestry/ethnicity

[edit]

The article states: “Gabbard, who is of Samoan descent and 26% Southeast Asian”. However Gabbard herself has clarified repeatedly that she is of European and Samoan descent, with her parents being mostly European. The southeast asian reference relates to genetic studies showing that Samoans migrated from southeast Asia long in the past. This would be like saying an American native was of Chinese descent; perhaps technically true if considering ice age migration and genetic similarities, but completely misleading in regards to direct ancestry and cultural heritage. The statement is also redundant in that the southeast asian genetics refers to her Samoan heritage, and omits her majority European heritage. The statement should be changed to “Gabbard, who is of European and Samoan descent”. References could be updated to the 2012 Huffington Post article and/or campaign website where she clearly states her European and Samoan ancestry. 2601:600:8E00:666F:8C4D:40FA:39B7:A64F (talk) 06:58, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The category "Southeast Asian" in the genetic test included Samoans. The genealogical research found no Southeast Asian ancestry other than Samoans. We should therefore only mention European and Samoan ancestry.
This was discussed before btw. TFD (talk) 13:10, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2024

[edit]

Add a line at the end of the opening description about Tulsi that states that after identifying as an "Independent," she has now become a supporter of Donald Trump and is helping prepare him for the Presidential debates. 2603:7000:9340:DCFC:5052:4415:7D18:1722 (talk) 15:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. MadGuy7023 (talk) 16:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that the "Departure from the Democratic party" section goes into (well sourced) detail how she became a Trump supporter. It's just not necessarily worthy of the lead. --GRuban (talk) 16:34, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frame of Reference

[edit]

"Gabbard has taken more conservative positions on issues such as abortion, foreign policy, transgender rights, and border security."

I don't doubt that there are sources that can support this, however I am concerned that the statement doesn't accept the possibility that the opposite could be true. What if her positions have been quite consistent, but her former party moved away from them?

The wording is quite strongly critical, yet it might not be that Gabbard actually changed her position much, given the political changes that have happened around her. SkepticNotCynic (talk) 20:13, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The wording of that sentence is factual. It is only critical if you dislike conservative positions and interpret it as criticism. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:36, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, @Muboshgu. I agree that my comment about the statement being critical was irrelevant to the main point, so I have applied a strikethrough to that part of the sentence.
Regarding the discussion, it seems reasonable to claim that Gabbard's positions align more with conservative views on some issues than with the current views of her former party. However:
  • Abortion: Abortion is not mentioned in the body of the article, yet the claim of a shift in position since January 2021 is in the lede. Gabbard's recent support for third-trimester restrictions does not represent a new conservative shift. For example she supported the "Born Alive" bill in 2020.
  • Foreign Policy: The Foreign Affairs section of the article does not support the idea that she changed positions since January 2021. Gabbard's critiques are consistent with her long-standing non-interventionist stance on foreign policy.
  • Transgender Rights: The "Protect Women's Sports Act" was introduced in 2020 as the article clearly states. Gabbard began her career supporting "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and has since moved towards supporting LGBT+ rights though not as far as her former party, particularly on issues like transwomen in sports.
  • Border Security: Gabbard has supported stronger border security measures for years, which aligns with her consistent approach rather than a shift in position since January 2021.
Her views seem to have remained quite consistent while the political landscape around her has shifted. It might be misleading to claim that she has recently adopted more conservative positions on these issues, a claim that the article as a whole does not seem to support. SkepticNotCynic (talk) 08:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2024

[edit]

You have her listed as conservative. She is not conservative. She left the Democratic Party because she believes they are going to start a world nuclear war. She is in fact left of center and liberal on almost all her policies she supports. She should be changed from conservative to liberal or at least moderate. She is in no way conservative 2601:982:300:3100:F8A9:DA66:B16F:15E9 (talk) 12:14, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. MadGuy7023 (talk) 15:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2024

[edit]

You have her listed as conservative. She is not conservative. She left the Democratic Party because she believes they are going to start a world nuclear war. She is in fact left of center and liberal on almost all her policies she supports. She should be changed from conservative to liberal or at least moderate. She is in no way conservative 2600:1002:B187:7FF0:984F:3822:8BBF:4ABE (talk) 19:58, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:15, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whoever first wrote her as conservative recently, did that person provide any sour es to support that claim? If not, why the inconsistent requirement? 98.45.134.246 (talk) 07:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]