Pete Buttigieg

[Elixir]

There is no "Republican swing" that is going to vote for the Democratic nominee no matter how white and male and no-gay that nominee is.

Yeah... and the reverse. Some of the pitfalls for democrats that the talking heads pronounce, make me scratch my head. Like "Bernie's votes on gun control will hurt him". Huh wut? People will think he's too conservative about guns, so they'll vote for Donald Fucking Trump??? Ya sure ya betcha.

I really believe that 99% of those who see Trump for what he is, would vote for their second least favorite person in the country, just to get the orange asshole out of there.

 

[Toni]

I don't see the point in trying to cater to working class whites, they already got the guy they wanted, and he's still on the ticket. Why vote for a Trump-like Democrat when you can just vote for the real deal?

I don't really agree. I think plenty of Trump supporters are really disillusioned with him.

I do really think that Democrats need to work harder to re-engage working class whites (and Asians and Hispanic voters), particularly in fly-over country. But engage, I mean demonstrate some ability to grasp and empathize with the concerns of Average Middle America, the struggles of small towns and farmers, and to address those concerns in a constructive, non-condescending way.

These concerns are not really very different than those of working class urban people or, actually, everyone.

People are concerned about their families, their economic future and preserving their way of life, and providing a better future for their children.

To varying degrees, this includes concerns about getting the best education possible, without incurring crippling debt, having excellent, affordable healthcare for themselves and their families and to some degree for all, a clean environment, safe and affordable housing, safe and affordable transportation, safe and affordable food, a fair and just legal system and legislature.

 

[Toni]

There is no "Republican swing" that is going to vote for the Democratic nominee no matter how white and male and no-gay that nominee is.

Yeah... and the reverse. Some of the pitfalls for democrats that the talking heads pronounce, make me scratch my head. Like "Bernie's votes on gun control will hurt him". Huh wut? People will think he's too conservative about guns, so they'll vote for Donald Fucking Trump??? Ya sure ya betcha.

I really believe that 99% of those who see Trump for what he is, would vote for their second least favorite person in the country, just to get the orange asshole out of there.

Yes, if I had to face the choice of voting for Bernie or Trump, I'd chose Bernie but with strong objections. He's too old first of all, which is also a concern re: Biden and Warren. But moreover, he's pretty ineffective at anything other than rabble rousing. I see him as a slightly left and less amoral version of Trump. Frankly, depending on who his Veep was, I'd probably spend his entire term hoping that nature would take its course and we'd get someone better as soon after he took office as possible.

 

[Toni]

and that would be Kamala Harris.

To bring it back on topic: Kamala - Mayor Pete ticket?

I'd rather it be Harris/Klobuchar or Harris/Booker or even Harris/Biden or Harris/Warren or Harris/Hickenlooper.

I think Pete is too young and so is Beto.

 

[PyramidHead]

There is no "Republican swing" that is going to vote for the Democratic nominee no matter how white and male and no-gay that nominee is.

Yeah... and the reverse. Some of the pitfalls for democrats that the talking heads pronounce, make me scratch my head. Like "Bernie's votes on gun control will hurt him". Huh wut? People will think he's too conservative about guns, so they'll vote for Donald Fucking Trump??? Ya sure ya betcha.

I really believe that 99% of those who see Trump for what he is, would vote for their second least favorite person in the country, just to get the orange asshole out of there.

Yes, if I had to face the choice of voting for Bernie or Trump, I'd chose Bernie but with strong objections. He's too old first of all, which is also a concern re: Biden and Warren. But moreover, he's pretty ineffective at anything other than rabble rousing. I see him as a slightly left and less amoral version of Trump. Frankly, depending on who his Veep was, I'd probably spend his entire term hoping that nature would take its course and we'd get someone better as soon after he took office as possible.

Are you the same person who just posted this:

People are concerned about their families, their economic future and preserving their way of life, and providing a better future for their children.

To varying degrees, this includes concerns about getting the best education possible, without incurring crippling debt, having excellent, affordable healthcare for themselves and their families and to some degree for all, a clean environment, safe and affordable housing, safe and affordable transportation, safe and affordable food, a fair and just legal system and legislature.

I mean. You're describing Bernie's entire platform and then saying he's "slightly left and less amoral version of Trump". Definitely the strangest thing I've heard in a long time, but it shows how well the media spin on the guy is working when a monstrosity like Booker or Harris is preferable

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sanders is going to be near 80 in January 2021.

 

[PyramidHead]

Sanders is going to be near 80 in January 2021.

Is that necessarily a dealbreaker? Look, the only way Sanders wins is if his campaign strategy is successful. His strategy? Mobilizing a mass popular movement of labor and social progressives who have been apathetic about Democrats since Obama turned out to be a center-right moderate. If we get a president Sanders, that means we also have an energized populace, and that counts for more in the long term than any individual candidate or political office. Plus, we might get Nina Turner to succeed him if she's the VP.

I'd love it if Bernie were younger, but there's nobody else on the left with a shot on goal so he's my compromise pick.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sanders is going to be near 80 in January 2021.

Is that necessarily a dealbreaker?

Yes. Trump broke the record and Biden or Sanders would crush Trump's record. The job is extremely strenuous.

Look, the only way Sanders wins is if his campaign strategy is successful. His strategy? Mobilizing a mass popular movement of labor and social progressives who have been apathetic about Democrats since Obama turned out to be a center-right moderate. If we get a president Sanders, that means we also have an energized populace, and that counts for more in the long term than any individual candidate or political office. Plus, we might get Nina Turner to succeed him if she's the VP.

I'd love it if Bernie were younger, but there's nobody else on the left with a shot on goal so he's my compromise pick.

Good luck.

 

[Derec]

I'd rather it be Harris/Klobuchar or Harris/Booker or even Harris/Biden or Harris/Warren or Harris/Hickenlooper.

Biden is never going to go for vice presidency again. He did that, and got the t-shirt.
And everybody on your list except for Hickenlooper is a lawyer, as is Kamala. I think lawyers are grossly over-represented among Democratic politicians. Dems should give other professions a chance to lead too.

I think Pete is too young and so is Beto.

β will be 48 by the time of the election. That is not too young for the presidency (there have been six presidents younger than him, including last two Democratic presidents), much less the vice presidency.
But he lacks experience - Clinton was a two-term governor when he ran for president, for fuck's sake! Nevertheless, vice presidency might be a good fit for him.
Mayor Pete is quite young - still under 40 come inauguration day. He would be the youngest president if he is elected. But he would be only the 2nd youngest Veep.
And while his experience is as a mayor of a mid-sized city, that is an executive office and he also has experience in the Navy as an intelligence officer. Between him and β, i would certainly prefer him for that reason, but I think both will be on the short list for running mates for many of the other candidates if they win the nomination.

 

[Toni]

I'd rather it be Harris/Klobuchar or Harris/Booker or even Harris/Biden or Harris/Warren or Harris/Hickenlooper.

Biden is never going to go for vice presidency again. He did that, and got the t-shirt.
And everybody on your list except for Hickenlooper is a lawyer, as is Kamala. I think lawyers are grossly over-represented among Democratic politicians. Dems should give other professions a chance to lead too.

I think Pete is too young and so is Beto.

β will be 48 by the time of the election. That is not too young for the presidency (there have been six presidents younger than him, including last two Democratic presidents), much less the vice presidency.
But he lacks experience - Clinton was a two-term governor when he ran for president, for fuck's sake! Nevertheless, vice presidency might be a good fit for him.
Mayor Pete is quite young - still under 40 come inauguration day. He would be the youngest president if he is elected. But he would be only the 2nd youngest Veep.
And while his experience is as a mayor of a mid-sized city, that is an executive office and he also has experience in the Navy as an intelligence officer. Between him and β, i would certainly prefer him for that reason, but I think both will be on the short list for running mates for many of the other candidates if they win the nomination.

I wasn't really very specific when I objected to ages of Beto and Pete. It is less an age thing (in their case. Biden is too old; Sanders is way too old and I don't mean years, Warren is also getting up there but I do really like her) than it is an experience thing. Beto and Pete don't have tons of experience.

The lawyer thing doesn't bother me, really. I'm not overly concerned with what anybody's profession is as long as they have a decent education and relevant experience.

 

[Elixir]

I'm not overly concerned with what anybody's profession is as long as they have a decent education and relevant experience.

There's a kid of about 16 years who works at the local Sonic drive-through, running burgers out to customers' cars. Not the brightest knife in the drawer or the sharpest bulb... maybe a meal or two short of a Happy Fry. But he loves my dog, fairly reeks of honesty and is manifestly eager to get things right.
I'd vote for him in heartbeat if he were the alternative to Cheato.

Education and experience are all very well and good, but they're not the #1 characteristics I'll be looking for next year.

 

[Derec]

I'm not overly concerned with what anybody's profession is as long as they have a decent education and relevant experience.

There's a kid of about 16 years who works at the local Sonic drive-through, running burgers out to customers' cars. Not the brightest knife in the drawer or the sharpest bulb... maybe a meal or two short of a Happy Fry. But he loves my dog, fairly reeks of honesty and is manifestly eager to get things right.
I'd vote for him in heartbeat if he were the alternative to Cheato.

Education and experience are all very well and good, but they're not the #1 characteristics I'll be looking for next year.

Competence matters. If there is one takeaway from the Trump presidency, that is it. Besides, electing a 16 year old would be blatantly unconstitutional (Article II, Section 1.5).

 

[ZiprHead]

I'm not overly concerned with what anybody's profession is as long as they have a decent education and relevant experience.

There's a kid of about 16 years who works at the local Sonic drive-through, running burgers out to customers' cars. Not the brightest knife in the drawer or the sharpest bulb... maybe a meal or two short of a Happy Fry. But he loves my dog, fairly reeks of honesty and is manifestly eager to get things right.
I'd vote for him in heartbeat if he were the alternative to Cheato.

Education and experience are all very well and good, but they're not the #1 characteristics I'll be looking for next year.

Competence matters. If there is one takeaway from the Trump presidency, that is it. Besides, electing a 16 year old would be blatantly unconstitutional (Article II, Section 1.5).

Thank goodness you're here to inform us that we can't elect a sixteen year old. We could have made a huge mistake.

 

[Derec]

I wasn't really very specific when I objected to ages of Beto and Pete. It is less an age thing (in their case. Biden is too old; Sanders is way too old and I don't mean years, Warren is also getting up there but I do really like her)

What do you mean if not years? That he is cranky? That is part his most endearing quality - authenticity. He does not come across as carefully packaged and polished as most other politicians do.

than it is an experience thing. Beto and Pete don't have tons of experience.

No, which is why they are probably running for vice president or just to enhance name recognition for the next open cycle. You generally do not need as much experience to be considered a viable running mate pick. That said, I think Mayor Pete has a more interesting background than β, esp. being a naval intelligence officer.

The lawyer thing doesn't bother me, really. I'm not overly concerned with what anybody's profession is as long as they have a decent education and relevant experience.

My problem is that Democrats are way too dependent on lawyers for their top tier politicians. Certainly much more than Republicans. Of the last four Republican presidents, none were lawyers, but of last 4 Democratic ones, half were lawyers. Note that polarization is relatively recent, because before 1980 there were more lawyer Republican presidents and more non-lawyer Democratic ones. Both Democratic presidents since 1980, Obama and Clinton, were lawyers, while LBJ and Carter were not. Furthermore, the 2016 Democratic candidate, Hillary, was a lawyer, as were John Kerry (2004), Michael Dukakis (1988) and Walter Mondale (1984). Al Gore (2000) wasn't a lawyer, but even he attended law school without completing it. So, Democratic presidents and nominees have been a bit one note for the last 40-odd years!

That lack of educational/professional diversity can give rise to a certain groupthink. That groupthink can manifest in in giving perks to the lawyerly guild like the extremely lucrative "punitive damages" (which do not exist in this form anywhere else) or the fact that US is the 2nd most over-lawyered country in the world (after Israel). But the lack of intellectual diversity can infect and affect discussion of all kinds of issues that the government faces.

- - - Updated - - -

Thank goodness you're here to inform us that we can't elect a sixteen year old. We could have made a huge mistake.

You're welcome.

 

[Elixir]

Democratic presidents and nominees have been a bit one note for the last 40-odd years!

WUT? All of the republican presidents are non-lawyers, while half of democrat presidents are. From which you conclude the above... very revealing.
That makes republicans the one-trick pony, not democrats. No wonder republicans are so easily duped by a traitorous conman.

 

[lpetrich]

Derec's claim can easily be tested:  List of Presidents of the United States,  List of Presidents of the United States by previous experience

The most common pre-presidency occupation is lawyer: 26 out of the 44 presidents. Military service is next, at 22. All but five had previously been elected to some public office, and of those five, four of them had been appointed to some high-level position, with three of them having been appointed generals. The remaining one is Donald Trump.

Business had not been a common occupation, however.

The last Republican president to have been a lawyer was Gerald Ford, while the most recent Democratic president, Barack Obama, had been one, as had Bill Clinton.

 

[Derec]

Democratic presidents and nominees have been a bit one note for the last 40-odd years!

WUT? All of the republican presidents are non-lawyers, while half of democrat presidents are. From which you conclude the above... very revealing.
That makes republicans the one-trick pony, not democrats. No wonder republicans are so easily duped by a traitorous conman.

I think you should reread my whole post more carefully. I clearly stated that since 1980 (or "40 odd years"), both Democratic presidents were lawyers. And not only that, but all failed Democratic Party nominees since 1980 were lawyers, with sole exception of Al Gore, and even he went to law school.
So, yes, "one note" definitely stands.

I hope Dems don't nominate yet another lawyer again ...

 

[Derec]

Derec's claim can easily be tested:  List of Presidents of the United States,  List of Presidents of the United States by previous experience

For that you'd have to actually read my claims.

The last Republican president to have been a lawyer was Gerald Ford, while the most recent Democratic president, Barack Obama, had been one, as had Bill Clinton.

And most recent Democratic President or even a nominee not to have been a lawyer was Jimmy Carter, in 1976. That's a long time of just lawyers.

 

[ZiprHead]

Democratic presidents and nominees have been a bit one note for the last 40-odd years!

WUT? All of the republican presidents are non-lawyers, while half of democrat presidents are. From which you conclude the above... very revealing.
That makes republicans the one-trick pony, not democrats. No wonder republicans are so easily duped by a traitorous conman.

I think you should reread my whole post more carefully. I clearly stated that since 1980 (or "40 odd years"), both Democratic presidents were lawyers. And not only that, but all failed Democratic Party nominees since 1980 were lawyers, with sole exception of Al Gore, and even he went to law school.
So, yes, "one note" definitely stands.

I hope Dems don't nominate yet another lawyer again ...

Why? What's wrong with being a lawyer?

 

[Derec]

To get back to Mayor Pete, they do not seem to like him over at Jezebel, the radfem blog.
Pete Buttigieg Increasingly Sounds Like That Guy You Hated in College

Some chick (and yes, I am assuming her gender) named Ashley Reese finds fault with him for doing such things in college as being a whiskey curator or eating organ meats inspired by the literature of James Joyce.
I mean if you got nothing else to get upset about ...

- - - Updated - - -

Why? What's wrong with being a lawyer?

What's wrong is that this particular profession has pretty much monopolized the Democratic presidential nominations for the last 40 years.