bashar assad is a secular leader, and the entity that the west should be supporting in his struggle against terrorism and foreign funded state wahhabism in syria. as a secularist, i find the reaction by certain elements in the democratic party to tulsi gabbard's meeting with assad to actually be extremely concerning.
i think these people - duckworth, warren, etc - didn't get the memo, which is that the cold war is over and that the enemy of the west in the 21st century is islam, not russia. biden didn't get the memo either, but he's now in the dustbin of history, to be remembered as one of the worst presidents in the country's history, and this reversion back to the cold war is about to be discarded with. do the democrats want to brand themselves as wanting to hold on to the cold war? do they want to insist on being the party of the past? no thank you.
to the extent that assad has received russian support in his fight against islamic extremism, which is true, it is an embarrassment to the west that the russians had to step in to fight the terrorists because the west wouldn't do it as a result of their alignment with the saudis.
assad is the good guy in this war, and a realignment by the americans towards a policy goal of expanding secularism in the region and away from funding or tolerating saudi wahhabism is long overdue. this is the reason i opposed the invasion of iraq, as it tipped the balance of power away from secularism and towards islamism, which had the predictable outcome of generating a rise of extremism in the region, of which assad ended up as the last bastion of hope in the struggle against - and he won. i would have hoped to hear that from democrats, rather than republicans, but i'll have to take what exists as it develops.
if that's the best argument that the democrats can come up with, in a repeat of their embarrassing and debunked claim after the 2016 election that clinton lost due to russian interference, i hope that gabbard gets confirmed.
with 53 seats, the couple of moderate republicans left will probably not be able to effectively align with a democratic opposition and senate democrats are consequently going to be entirely helpless over the next few years. rather, the balance of power is going to be placed in the center of the republican party, who should have enough votes to block trump's less conservative picks.
i would put out a call for smart senate democrats (i wish kyrsten sinema was still in the senate) to actually try to work with trump against the conservative majority, as that is the point of conflict that is on the brink of developing; the senate is a lot more conservative than trump is and is going to be trying to pull the president further to the right, creating an opening for voices independent of the democratic party to try to usurp a balance of power.
as a secular leftist, i would predict that i'm likely to repeatedly align with trump against this more conservative senate, even if only marginally so.