It feels like a lifetime ago, but back in the 2020 primary cycle, Tulsi Gabbard was the name that just wouldn't quit. While the heavyweights like Biden and Sanders were duking it out for the soul of the party, the Congresswoman from Hawaii was running a campaign that defied almost every traditional political rule. People often ask, did any democrats vote for tulsi, or was her support just a mirage of internet bots and crossover Republicans?
The short answer: Yes. Thousands of them did. But the "how" and the "why" are where things get weirdly interesting.
The Numbers Don't Lie (Even if They're Small)
If you look at the raw data from the 2020 Democratic primaries, Gabbard didn't just exist on Twitter; she showed up on actual ballots. She wasn't winning states—far from it—but she was siphoning off a distinct slice of the electorate.
In the New Hampshire primary, which is usually the first real "vibe check" for a candidate's viability, Gabbard pulled in about 3.3% of the vote. That sounds like a rounding error until you realize that was over 9,000 individual human beings standing in the snow to cast a vote for her. She actually outlasted several "serious" candidates like Andrew Yang, Deval Patrick, and Michael Bennet in that specific contest.
Then came Super Tuesday. While the media had basically stopped mentioning her name unless it was to ask when she’d drop out, she managed to pull a rabbit out of a hat in American Samoa. She didn't just get votes there; she came in second place with roughly 29.3% of the vote. That performance earned her two pledged delegates. It’s a tiny number, but it meant she had a seat at the table—mathematically speaking—longer than most people expected.
Who Exactly Were These Tulsi Voters?
You can’t really put a Tulsi voter in a neat little box. They weren't your "Establishment Blue" types who watch MSNBC every night. Honestly, if you supported Tulsi in 2020, you probably had a bit of an anti-establishment streak.
🔗 Read more: Trump Eliminate Department of Education: What Most People Get Wrong
The Anti-War Crowd
This was her bread and butter. Because of her background as an Iraq War veteran and her seat on the Foreign Affairs Committee, she spoke about "regime change wars" in a way that resonated with a very specific part of the Democratic base. These were often the same people who felt Hillary Clinton was too hawkish in 2016. They valued her "dove" stance on interventionism more than they cared about her lack of a traditional healthcare plan.
The Sanders Crossover
There's a lot of overlap here. Back in 2016, Tulsi famously resigned from her post at the DNC to endorse Bernie Sanders. A lot of Bernie fans never forgot that. When 2020 rolled around, some of those "Bernie Bros" (and sisters) stayed loyal to Tulsi, seeing her as the only other candidate who wasn't part of the "corporate" Democratic machine.
The "Political Orphans"
She also attracted people who felt alienated by the party’s drift toward identity politics. Tulsi often talked about "common sense" and unity, which appealed to moderate Democrats in rural areas who felt the national party was ignoring them.
The Delegate Mystery
One of the most frequent misconceptions is that she ended the race with zero support. But as I mentioned, those two delegates from American Samoa were a big deal for her campaign's morale.
To put that in perspective, here is how the "bottom tier" of the 2020 race actually shook out in terms of delegates:
💡 You might also like: Trump Derangement Syndrome Definition: What Most People Get Wrong
- Tulsi Gabbard: 2 delegates
- Cory Booker: 0 delegates
- Kamala Harris: 0 delegates (before becoming VP)
- Andrew Yang: 0 delegates
It's a strange quirk of history that a candidate who was frequently accused of being a "Russian asset" or a GOP plant actually walked away with more delegates than some of the party's current stars.
Why the Party Turned on Her
The relationship between Gabbard and the Democratic leadership wasn't just cold—it was radioactive. The moment she challenged the DNC’s management of the 2016 primary, she was basically marked.
By 2020, the tension reached a boiling point when Hillary Clinton suggested in a podcast that a certain female candidate (clearly implying Tulsi) was being "groomed" by Russia to be a third-party spoiler. Tulsi didn't take it lying down; she sued for defamation. That lawsuit was eventually dropped, but the damage was done. For many mainstream Democrats, the "Russian asset" label stuck, making it socially risky to admit you were voting for her.
What Happened After the Primaries?
Eventually, even the most stubborn campaigns have to face reality. On March 19, 2020, Tulsi finally suspended her campaign. In a move that surprised some of her more "fringe" supporters, she actually endorsed Joe Biden. She said it was clear the voters had chosen him and she wanted to help defeat Donald Trump.
Of course, we know how the story ends. Since then, Tulsi has officially left the Democratic Party, citing its "elitist cabal" and "warmongering" tendencies. She’s now a frequent fixture on conservative media and has moved significantly to the right on several social issues.
📖 Related: Trump Declared War on Chicago: What Really Happened and Why It Matters
The Takeaway for Today
So, did any Democrats vote for Tulsi? Absolutely. They were a mix of anti-war activists, disaffected Sanders supporters, and people who just liked her "outsider" vibe.
If you're looking back at this piece of political history, here’s how to actually use this info:
- Look at the margins: When people talk about "unity" in a party, remember that even a "1% candidate" represents hundreds of thousands of voters whose concerns (like non-interventionism) might not be getting addressed by the frontrunners.
- Check the local results: National polls are a blunt instrument. Gabbard's 3% in New Hampshire or 1% in California tells a much more nuanced story about regional dissatisfaction than a single national "0% to 1%" poll ever could.
- Trace the evolution: Tulsi’s 2020 run was the bridge that led many voters from the left-wing of the Democratic party toward the "independent" or "New Right" space we see today.
Whether you loved her or couldn't stand her, you've got to admit she played the game differently. She wasn't just a footnote; she was a symptom of a much larger shift in American politics that we’re still feeling the effects of right now.
To get a clearer picture of how these voting blocks moved, you can actually dig into the certified precinct-level results from the 2020 New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries. Comparing her 2020 totals with where those same "protest votes" went in the 2024 cycle provides a fascinating look at voter migration in real-time.
Actionable Insight: If you're researching 2020 voting patterns, don't just look at the winners. Use the Federal Election Commission (FEC) database to see where Tulsi's "small-dollar" donors were located. You'll often find they clustered in areas that later showed significant shifts in partisan leaning during the general election.