New favorite candidate: Pete Buttigieg

[rjay]

For the last two years my favorite candidates have been Elizabeth Warren for her vast policy resumé, Kamala Harris for her steely focus and energy, and Beto O'Rourke for his ability to energize a crowd. All of these are incredibly important traits, but I think what they lack is a philosopher's soul. For that I give you: Pete Buttigieg.



If, like me, you like to listen to podcasts while driving or working, you can listen to the March 1st episode on itunes, or catch it in your podcast app.

Pod Save America by Crooked Media on Apple Podcasts

I am just catching on to this guy over the last week. I am impressed.

I don't know if he can win it, but it would not surprise me at all if he was one of the final four.

 

[BWG]

Saw him on Bill Mahr's show Friday (before I found this thread and read ya'lls comments). I liked the way he spoke (sharp, articulate, presidential) and the content of what he said. He'll definitely get a long hard look from me. But it's way, way too early for an 'all in'.

 

[Roadvirus]

Saw him on Bill Mahr's show Friday (before I found this thread and read ya'lls comments). I liked the way he spoke (sharp, articulate, presidential) and the content of what he said. He'll definitely get a long hard look from me. But it's way, way too early for an 'all in'.

If this guy had any self-respect, he wouldn't have gone onto Bill Maher's show.

 

[$1000]

That's the point. His being gay is the least most interesting thing about him. He's unashamed of it but it's not his calling card either. It just...is

The most interesting thing about him is that he's a young bougie white guy. From what I've seen in interviews, he brings zero unique policies to the table. His political record is... not good, and he doesn't really have a business record to fall back on. I also see raising a huge amount of corporate money very quickly as a red flag; that makes me LESS likely to vote for a candidate. And you don't get $7 million without big corporate backers when you have low name recognition. He's basically a more palatable version of Beto.

Overall I think that his appeal will be limited to other bourgeois urban and suburban white liberals. If he does win the nomination, I think that Trump has a good chance of destroying him in the rust belt states that the Dems need to win back. There's just nothing there to counterbalance his aggressive gun control and social policies when appealing to working class whites, and I don't think that he's a candidate whom minorities will get excited about. He represents what the UMC whites who control the conversation in the DNC want to see the party become.

 

[Perotista]

Sorry but voting third party IS voting for Trump . Fool yourself if that works but it’s fact

You're completely wrong. The real funny part of this is that the Trump people have accused me of the same thing. That a vote for a third party candidate was a vote for Hillary. You just turned that around. Apparently you didn't read this:

Voting for a Third Party is Not the Same as Voting For Trump, and It's Not "White Privilege" :: Politics :: Third Party :: Paste

Fact is if there are 26 people voting to decide the election between Trump and Clinton, the vote count so is Trump 10, Hillary 10. I cast my vote for third party leaving 5 left to vote. Without those 5 the vote count now is Trump 10, Clinton 10 third party 1. Trump's and Clinton's vote totals didn't change. What did is that there are now only 5 people left to decide the election instead of 6.

The real vote popular vote total for 2016 was Hillary 48%, Trump 46%, Third party 6%. If what you state was true, those 6% who voted third party were actually voting for Trump, he would have ended up with 52% of the total vote.

There is also the problem, at least with independents who voted for Trump 46-42 over Hillary with 12% voting third party. Of independents disliking and not wanting Hillary more than they disliked and didn't want Trump. On election day among independents who decided the 2016 election, independents had a favorable view of Hillary of 27%, unfavorable of 70%. With Trump it was 40% favorable, 57% unfavorable. Questions 10 and 11.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/l37rosbwjp/econTabReport_lv.pdf

Being that 12% of independents voted third party, they really, really disliked both major party candidates. If they had voted for one or the other major party candidates, being Trump held the higher favorable view among them by 13 points, most would have voted for Trump. In reality the third party voters actually helped Hillary. This was proved by the CNN exit polls. Among those voters which viewed both candidates unfavorable, those which didn't want neither one to become the next president, some 18% of those who voted. They voted for Trump as the lesser of two evils, the candidate they least wanted to lose. those who disliked both Trump and Hillary went to Trump 47% to Hillary's 30% with 23% voting third party.

https://www.cnn.com/election/2016/results/exit-polls

Also very interesting is when CNN in their exit polls asked third party voters whom they would have voted for in just a two person race, no third party candidates, the answer was 19% Trump, 16% Clinton, 65% wouldn't have voted. As I stated, all those votes for a third party candidate actually ended up helping Hillary.

 

[Perotista]

Ok, so I gave this guy the full listen, and here's what I came away with. I agree with those that are suggesting he's smarter and more articulate than anyone else in the dimwit field thus far, I also agree that his relative unknowns are helpful to him right now, but he will struggle when the machine politics start targeting him. My summary would be this. He's articulate and much better than Sanders and Warren when it comes to "selling" the socialist/progressive ideas of todays democrat party, which translates well to independent voters who are unable to look past the presentation. He is, however, a socialist gun-grabbing, global warming, censor free-speech, reform the electoral college, add more justices to the supreme court liberal we're all been used to seeing. IN fact, if you look at his positions on things, they align perfectly with the same stupid talking points and unimaginably ridiculous pipe-dream positions as someone like AOC, although much better wrapped, and tagged.


Here's what I think: I think he is bright, might be able to adjust, but I think that in truth the machine will eat him alive and he won't even break out of the first few primaries in tact and will be forced to postpone his run. If I'm wrong, Trump should fear him, as even though I see through his charismatic charm, (Like I did Obama) many independents will not be able to, and he will present a danger to not only Trump, but America in-general. I also did find him a little naïve about what he's in for, (and to his credit he did admit as much) but I just felt not to the degree that was warranted. His little "I'm Mr. Jones goes to Washington" routine will only get him so far, in truth, he may just be to nice a guy to hold a major office. Which, is good in my opinion because he represents the same level of stupid when it comes to America killing policy as the current crop of dimwits, but bad in a way because I have always pulled for the underdog, especially likeable ones such as he.

But make no mistake, he may be likeable, but still dangerous at the same time.. Obama was exactly like this, although I like this guy a bit more than I did Obama at the same time.

In any event, does anyone seriously believe he makes it out of the primaries, or even to the 1st primary in IA?



Tim-

You pointed out some great points. I do agree our presidential elections are basically beauty contests with likability, charisma and charm right at the top of the list when it comes to the independent voter. Obama had charisma and charm all over McCain and Romney, he won twice. G.W. Bush, not the most charismatic guy, but he did have that down home feeling about him vs. the statues of Gore and Kerry. Bush had more charm at least. Bill Clinton had charisma, the down home feeling, was very likable all over both Dole and G.H.W. Bush. G.H.W. was very charismatic either like his son, but Dukakis came over looking like a doofus at times. At least G.H.W. looked presidential which is also important. Reagan had the charisma, charm, likability down pat, easily over Carter and Mondale and so on. Likability, charm, charisma are important to independents. Much so than any political party loyalist.

 

[Lesh]

Sorry but voting third party serves no purpose other than to ensure that one or the other of the two main candidates get elected.

We saw it with Ross Perot in 92, we saw it with Nader in 2000, and we even saw it with Jill Stein in 2016. Had the people who voted for Stein instead voted for Clinton...Trump would not be President today

If you think voting third party is making some kind of statement, the only statement you are making is that you don't care what direction your country goes in

 

[Surrealistik]

The most interesting thing about him is that he's a young bougie white guy. From what I've seen in interviews, he brings zero unique policies to the table. His political record is... not good, and he doesn't really have a business record to fall back on. I also see raising a huge amount of corporate money very quickly as a red flag; that makes me LESS likely to vote for a candidate. And you don't get $7 million without big corporate backers when you have low name recognition. He's basically a more palatable version of Beto.

Overall I think that his appeal will be limited to other bourgeois urban and suburban white liberals. If he does win the nomination, I think that Trump has a good chance of destroying him in the rust belt states that the Dems need to win back. There's just nothing there to counterbalance his aggressive gun control and social policies when appealing to working class whites, and I don't think that he's a candidate whom minorities will get excited about. He represents what the UMC whites who control the conversation in the DNC want to see the party become.

Besides the fact that Pete is obviously intelligent and articulate, I generally agree with this assessment. I don't see much to get excited about policywise and I definitely don't think he has a chance against Trump.

That having been said, I don't see how he has a path to winning the nomination, so he's probably nothing to worry about.

 

[slick]

If the GOP doesn't primary Trump I'm going to have to switch my party declaration before the midterm. If they primary Trump, I'll see who it is and consider than person first.

I am going to consider Buttigieg very carefully no matter what.

He's a 'morning glory' in 3 months he'll be forgotten entirely. Don't you remember the fast out of the shoot front runners of
the past like Herman Cain & Ben Carson who got an awfully intense amount of hype early on. Both actually held the lead in some polls then eventually their uniqueness wore off!

 

[justabubba]

He's a 'morning glory' in 3 months he'll be forgotten entirely. Don't you remember the fast out of the shoot front runners of
the past like Herman Cain & Ben Carson who got an awfully intense amount of hype early on. Both actually held the lead in some polls then eventually their uniqueness wore off!

or Obama
suddenly thrust upon America's political stage and then nothing
whatever became of him

 

[bubbabgone]

There's a lot of Comey-like slipperiness to the Butt-man.
Way too much false earnestness and self-victimization in the guy's presentation.
There was no reason to pick a fight with Pence.
Not a great way to develop a reputation for the campaign trail.
Not sure he'll wear well over time with repeated viewing.

 

[Roadvirus]

Mr. Buttegg! Mr. Buttegg! Roadvirus from DP News Service! Could you tell me why you support suppressing the taped conversations of possible racist and corrupt White police officers in your city, as well as the uncalled for demotion of the city's Black police chief as part of this whole affair?

Secret tapes linger over Buttigieg's meteoric rise | TheHill

Looks like the Dems' rising star may get a little tarnished.

 

[azgreg]

This was a really good announcement speech.

 

[Thorgasm]

I really like this guy.

 

[nekrodev]

For the last two years my favorite candidates have been Elizabeth Warren for her vast policy resumé, Kamala Harris for her steely focus and energy, and Beto O'Rourke for his ability to energize a crowd. All of these are incredibly important traits, but I think what they lack is a philosopher's soul. For that I give you: Pete Buttigieg.



If, like me, you like to listen to podcasts while driving or working, you can listen to the March 1st episode on itunes, or catch it in your podcast app.

Pod Save America by Crooked Media on Apple Podcasts

I wonder why Bernie isn't on your list, but Elizabeth Warren is? Like, so you just don't want ACTUAL change? You want half-measures and someone that won't rock the boat? I really liked what I saw about Pete at first, but he just gets worse and worse the longer it goes on. His insistence on staying away from policy, the way he keeps trotting out religion, etc...

Bernie Sanders literally has all of the qualities from each of the people you listed and has more experience, and has the most consistency of any politician in our history.

 

[SoCal]

I wonder why Bernie isn't on your list, but Elizabeth Warren is? Like, so you just don't want ACTUAL change? You want half-measures and someone that won't rock the boat? I really liked what I saw about Pete at first, but he just gets worse and worse the longer it goes on. His insistence on staying away from policy, the way he keeps trotting out religion, etc...

Bernie Sanders literally has all of the qualities from each of the people you listed and has more experience, and has the most consistency of any politician in our history.

I agree about his policies, but we have to be smart about it.

"Do you know when to be patient, and when to give in to your impatience? It's good to know such things, because the stakes can be quite high at times"

If we rock the boat too far we'll sink the boat. I'd like to see a more moderate candidate with a woman VP, who has a great advantage in a presidential election. She can continue the reforms started in 20', but in a much more radical direction.

After the VP serves a term or two, who knows, America might be ready to elect a Repub president again. We need to have these reforms in place before then, in use and well liked by the electorate.

On the other hand, if Sanders looks like he has the best chance, so much the better, more so with a woman VP...

 

[nekrodev]

I agree about his policies, but we have to be smart about it.

"Do you know when to be patient, and when to give in to your impatience? It's good to know such things, because the stakes can be quite high at times"

If we rock the boat too far we won't get elected. I'd like to see a more moderate with a woman VP, who has a great advantage in a presidential election. She can continue the reforms started in 20', but in a much more radical direction.

After the VP serves a term or two, who knows, America might be ready to elect a Repub president again. We need to have these reforms in place before then, in use and well liked by the electorate.

On the other hand, if Sanders looks like he has the best chance, so much the better, more so with a woman VP...

Sanders is clearly leading the announced candidates, and he could easily pick up Tulsi Gabbard or Kamala Harris or even Pete Buttigieg as VP.

I get some hesitation, but we've literally been pushing in the right direction so little, we're on the verge of sliding backwards right now. we need to make some real progress and catch up to the rest of the world. The fact we're still arguing about guaranteeing healthcare to our citizens or not is just absurd.

 

[SoCal]

Sanders is clearly leading the announced candidates, and he could easily pick up Tulsi Gabbard or Kamala Harris or even Pete Buttigieg as VP.

I get some hesitation, but we've literally been pushing in the right direction so little, we're on the verge of sliding backwards right now. we need to make some real progress and catch up to the rest of the world. The fact we're still arguing about guaranteeing healthcare to our citizens or not is just absurd.

Agreed, but it's far too early to know who'll be looking the best for months...

 

[nekrodev]

Agreed, but it's far too early to know who'll be looking the best for months...

It's not too early if people actually stop dismissing Bernie for stupid reasons.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

There's a lot of Comey-like slipperiness to the Butt-man.
Way too much false earnestness and self-victimization in the guy's presentation.
There was no reason to pick a fight with Pence.
Not a great way to develop a reputation for the campaign trail.
Not sure he'll wear well over time with repeated viewing.

A. Yay! Sly homosexual references about the mayor because you have no substantive criticism of him.
B. There is no self-victimization in his presentation, nor can you cite any.
C. He didn't pick any fight with Pence.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

WHAT a surprise!

 

[roughdraft274]

Mr. Buttegg! Mr. Buttegg! Roadvirus from DP News Service! Could you tell me why you support suppressing the taped conversations of possible racist and corrupt White police officers in your city, as well as the uncalled for demotion of the city's Black police chief as part of this whole affair?

Secret tapes linger over Buttigieg's meteoric rise | TheHill

Looks like the Dems' rising star may get a little tarnished.

The article states very clearly that he isnt releasing the tapes because the issue is in a court case regarding the legality of releasing the tapes. If the court gives the ok then he says he will release them.

Why do you feel the need to lie? Did you not read the article? Do you simply not care about honesty or integrity?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

 

[SoCal]

It's not too early if people actually stop dismissing Bernie for stupid reasons.

Don may only have a hardcore base of 30%, but America is still split almost 50/50 overall. I'd rather not see Sanders getting a 90% approval by Dems during the primary, while he's polling 50 points below Numnuts.

It was one thing for America to take a chance on Don, it's quite another that he's still receiving so much support. America is filled with stupid people and it's much easier to appeal to stupid people's hate and fear than to their better natures...

 

[nekrodev]

Don may only have a hardcore base of 30%, but America is still split almost 50/50 overall. I'd rather not see Sanders getting a 90% approval by Dems during the primary, while he's polling 50 points below Numnuts.

It was one thing for America to take a chance on Don, it's quite another that he's still receiving so much support. America is filled with stupid people and it's much easier to appeal to stupid people's hate and fear than to their better natures...

There's something I don't get. So, based on current polling, Sanders and Biden are virtually tied with between 25-30% of the Democratic voters, with the remaining candidates essentially not even being on the damn board.

Obviously, if Biden wins the primary, it's a huge deal to just get Trump out, but there's no reason to sit here and try to shove someone else up the ladder. Everyone keeps talking about "unity" and **** on the left, but they're more than happy to completely undermine the one announced front-runner.

Bernie Sander's is the most popular politican in America. He polls decently well to amazingly in virtually every demographic, and again, he's the current front-runner, since Former VP McFeely Hands hasn't announced.

Yeah, there's a good 30-40% of this country that is very likely to keep supporting Trump, regardless, but if 2016 showed us anything, it's that Bernie stands a better chance at lower that than anyone like Biden or Hillary ever could.

 

[Cardinal]

I wonder why Bernie isn't on your list, but Elizabeth Warren is? Like, so you just don't want ACTUAL change? You want half-measures and someone that won't rock the boat? I really liked what I saw about Pete at first, but he just gets worse and worse the longer it goes on. His insistence on staying away from policy, the way he keeps trotting out religion, etc...

Bernie Sanders literally has all of the qualities from each of the people you listed and has more experience, and has the most consistency of any politician in our history.

I've always liked Bernie and most likely always will. I'm concerned, however, about the danger of him contributing to the phenomenon of Democrats becoming, as Obama put it, a circular firing squad. If Bernie is the nominee then I'll be quite happy and will do everything I can to get him elected.

Bernie is very smart and has always been ahead of the curve on important social issues, but he's a fighter such that he's becoming divisive within the Democratic party. Democrats will only defeat Trump in 2020 by doing the one thing they're bad at and which Republicans are very good at: setting aside our individual differences and working toward the greater good, which is getting Republicans out of power.

We can have our differences, but let's not beat up on the different Democratic candidates. Whoever wins the Primary must go toe to toe with Trump with a completely united Democratic party behind her or him, or we're toast.

 

[nekrodev]

I've always liked Bernie and most likely always will. I'm concerned, however, about the danger of him contributing to the phenomenon of Democrats becoming, as Obama put it, a circular firing squad. If Bernie is the nominee then I'll be quite happy and will do everything I can to get him elected.

Bernie is very smart and has always been ahead of the curve on important social issues, but he's a fighter such that he's becoming divisive within the Democratic party. Democrats will only defeat Trump in 2020 by doing the one thing they're bad at and which Republicans are very good at: setting aside our individual differences and working toward the greater good, which is getting Republicans out of power.

We can have our differences, but let's not beat up on the different Democratic candidates. Whoever wins the Primary must go toe to toe with Trump with a completely united Democratic party behind her or him, or we're toast.

I've already addressed this in a response to someone else, but it's literally everyone else being divisive by trying to stifle Bernie. Aside from Biden, who he's neck and neck with, he's miles ahead of the other candidates, and yet, there are corporate donors and PACs jumping for Pete or Kamala...I wonder why that is? I wonder why the big money interests aren't interested in the most popular of the current candidates? Could it be because they stand to be 2% less profitable if he gets to make some changes?