Pete Buttigieg 2020 campaign megathread

[Koharu]

So, uh, why doesn't Pete have an issues or policy page on his website? It's hard to make any sort of decisions without that.

https://meetpete.org/index.html

Quite an impressive issues page if you ask me. Type in anything you want and it pulls his answers from thousands of video clips.

Huh. That's a completely different website than what comes up first when I search for him, which is peteforamerica.com which doesn't have issues at all.

Still, glad there's something out there, though videos suck. Horrible for accessibility overall and frustrating for most people who would rather read. Oh, well. Thank you!

[Confused Democrat]

So, uh, why doesn't Pete have an issues or policy page on his website? It's hard to make any sort of decisions without that.

https://meetpete.org/index.html

Quite an impressive issues page if you ask me. Type in anything you want and it pulls his answers from thousands of video clips.

Huh. That's a completely different website than what comes up first when I search for him, which is peteforamerica.com which doesn't have issues at all.

Still, glad there's something out there, though videos suck. Horrible for accessibility overall and frustrating for most people who would rather read. Oh, well. Thank you!

His team is working on rolling out the issues page on his official site this week.

[jacobmeteorite]

He has no foreign experience, so that will def hinder his VP chances

[James Monroe]

LOL

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1121137511538069504

Does our beloved mayor endorse this woo-woo lunatic plan that is killing the unconscious through unlawful and un-empirical tested product? This woman is a danger to reason and stability to our nation. Everyone should become a skeptic and just debunked this privileged person career.

[Progressive Pessimist]

LOL

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1121137511538069504

Does our beloved mayor endorse this woo-woo lunatic plan that is killing the unconscious through unlawful and un-empirical tested product? This woman is a danger to reason and stability to our nation. Everyone should become a skeptic and just debunked this privileged person career.

I've been flirting with supporting Buttigieg for a little while now, but yeah, this is not the person you want to associate with if you want to appeal to voters who shake their fist at "coastal elitists." On the plus side, if Gwyneth Paltrow is with Buttigieg, she isn't afflicting the other Democratic candidates by her being associated with them. She really should just stay out of politics. I usually don't say that about celebrities, but she has earned her reputation as a snake oil saleswoman, which is not very helpful to any politician.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

I will say it right now, I will vote for Buttigieg if only him and Biden remain. I want nothing more then to stop Biden.

[ProudModerate2]

https://twitter.com/Franklin_Graham/status/1121070184922525701


Some commentary on this ...
Former Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum reacts to a tweet Rev. Franklin Graham posted about 2020 Democratic hopeful Pete Buttigieg's sexual orientation.

Click here to watch video: https://us.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/04/26/reverend-graham-pete-buttigieg-gay-tweet-santorum-newday-vpx.cnn

[Crumpets]

LOL

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1121137511538069504

Ugh. Why do my top two favorite candidates have to be endorsed by Carolyn Maloney and Gwenyth Paltrow? Am I secretly a science hater? At least she was good in Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

A coalition of black, brown, and (some) white working/middle class people (in Bernie's case) sounds much more convincing to me than a bunch of white meritocrats (in Pete's case).  In fact, I struggle to understand what could be so broadly appealing about a gentrifier like Pete.  Certainly, he can't expect the demographics he's left behind as mayor, namely poor people and minorities, to turn out for him in droves in the general.

I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you said this because you heard "meritocrat" used as an insult on some podcast and have no idea what it means as opposed to actually being batsh!t insane enough to think meritocracy is an inherently bad thing

Even if you think Sanders would have a hard time he’d do better than Buttigieg. Pete is showing himself to be the candidate for wealthy virtue signaling white liberals who fetishize Bush 43’s presidency because of Trump’s tone.

You know, I've noticed some folks on Atlas have increasingly tried to delegitimize some liberals they by attacking them for being white.  Not gonna lie, that's pretty racist.  Plus, something tells me you guys would react a bit differently if Tim Ryan or Joe Biden said a candidate expressing support for slavery reparations had shown themselves to be the candidate of "virtue signaling to black liberals."

I mean...Mayor Pete isn't wrong about that.  Sanders would lose in a landslide to Trump and probably set the party back a decade or two in the process.

What states do you see Trump winning against Sanders that he couldn't win against Clinton?

New Hampshire, Minnesota, Nevada, Maine, Colorado, and Virginia could all easily flip to Trump and Trump would also win every state he won in 2016 if Sanders got the Democratic nomination.    

LOLOLOL. Virginia is gone for republicans. I understand you probably don't want Sanders to be the nominee, but the concern trolling here is plain ridiculous. Furthermore, calling out people who have no policy views and care nothing about moving the democratic party forward and would take a neoconservative hack like Jeff Flake over Trump is not racist. It's obvious RFKfan was referring to people like Peter Daou or Steny Hoyer not a generic white person.

I don’t know who Peter Daou is, but Beto Bro’s post was clearly a general attack on white people who are liberal by implying that being white makes them inherently less committed to pursuing a progressive agenda.  His race-baiting might’ve not been entirely conscious, it was still race-baiting all the same.  If this wasn’t what Beto Bro meant then he should have clarified what he meant and indicated that he’d try to word his posts more clearly going forward.  That he has done neither of these things is telling.

LOLOLOL. Virginia is gone for republicans. I understand you probably don't want Sanders to be the nominee, but the concern trolling here is plain ridiculous. Furthermore, calling out people who have no policy views and care nothing about moving the democratic party forward and would take a neoconservative hack like Jeff Flake over Trump is not racist. It's obvious RFKfan was referring to people like Peter Daou or Steny Hoyer not a generic white person.

This is such a meme. If Trump, a terrible fit for the state, could come within 5% of winning it when Clinton's VP pick was a former Virginian governor and she poured money into the state, then it's definitely not safe for the Dems yet. Democrats have just had quite a few scandals in the state, and while they've been doing well in statewide elections recently it's possible that this could change in the fall. Of the states Clinton won, I would rank Virginia as the third-most likely to flip to Trump, after New Hampshire and Minnesota.

lmao if you think Tim Kaine was the reason why Trump lost VA by 5 points instead of, you know, Donald Trump being himself. VA is one of the only states that trended left in 2016 and the two election cycles with Trump on the ballot have been absolute bloodbaths for the GOP

Also sitting Senator Claire McCaskill would love to tell you all about the transferrability of state-level scandals to highly nationalized federal elections.

New Hampshire, Minnesota, Nevada, Maine, Colorado, and Virginia could all easily flip to Trump and Trump would also win every state he won in 2016 if Sanders got the Democratic nomination.    

None of these outside maybe Nevada or Maine are remotely close to flipping in a Bernie vs. Trump election. Bernie pretty resoundingly beat Clinton in both NH and CO in 2018. He got a stupid number of write-in votes in MN in the 2016 general and that's the only reason why Trump came anywhere close to winning. VA wouldn't vote for Trump if he was running against Ralph Northam in blackface. Even in Maine there social safety net programs are incredibly popular and Bernie (who runs on these mostly in a race-neutral way) could lean on support for those pretty easily.

Even if you think Sanders would have a hard time he’d do better than Buttigieg. Pete is showing himself to be the candidate for wealthy virtue signaling white liberals who fetishize Bush 43’s presidency because of Trump’s tone.

So weird how some people are already convinced of which demographic groups won't ever vote for certain candidates. Just like in 2016 most (but not all) candidates will coalesce around the eventual winner. The idea that POC won't turn out for Buttigieg when most of them don't even know who he is at this point is kinda silly.

Sanders is a uniquely bad fit for Virginia and I could see him depressing turnout in parts of NOVA and also losing votes in NoVA to some corporacratic third party hack like Howard Schultz.  Suburbanites in general are gonna hate him (sometimes more than they hate Trump, sadly) and while you may hate to admit it, the fact is that you guys don’t have a GE path to victory against Trump without improving on Hillary’s suburban numbers (which Sanders can’t do, he’ll be lucky if he even matches them in the event that Schultz runs).  I do think Hillary would only have won Virgina by about 2-3% without Kaine.

Sanders has a better chance of winning Colorado, but I can easily see a scenario where he gets narrow enough margins in places like JeffCo to barely lose the state.  You guys assume the choice is “Trump” or “Sanders,” but it’s not.  Folks can [and will if Sanders is nominated] vote third party or skip the race.  Also, Sanders would only get like 55-60% of the Jewish vote and he’s going to do badly enough with older Jewish voters that I can’t really see a scenario where it’s possible for him to win Florida.  This will decline will also hurt him in places like Pennsylvania.

Btw, one thing no one has mentioned yet is which states Sanders brings to the table that most Democrats wouldn’t win anyway.  I mean, he’ll underperform somewhere like Michigan, Florida, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Virginia, North Carolina, Arizona, etc.  What do we win with him that folks who appeal to a broader coalition wouldn’t win anyway?

I don’t know what McCaskill has to do with anything since I never said the Northam stuff or the VA Dems decision to protect the state’s rapist LG would hurt Sanders.  Also, Hawley didn’t have any scandals, so even if it weren’t a non-sequitor, that would still be a poor example for your point.  

A coalition of black, brown, and (some) white working/middle class people (in Bernie's case) sounds much more convincing to me than a bunch of white meritocrats (in Pete's case).  In fact, I struggle to understand what could be so broadly appealing about a gentrifier like Pete.  Certainly, he can't expect the demographics he's left behind as mayor, namely poor people and minorities, to turn out for him in droves in the general.

I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you said this because you heard "meritocrat" used as an insult on some podcast and have no idea what it means as opposed to actually being batsh!t insane enough to think meritocracy is an inherently bad thing

Okay, first of all, whether or not meritocracy is an ideal we should aspire to is a separate discussion.  The issue at hand is that we do not live in a meritocratic society by any reasonable standard.  People don't begin life on a level playing field.  Research has shown that a number of factors, most prominently parents' wealth and race (in fact, 60% of American wealth is inherited) are the most consequential factors in influencing a person's life chances.  As a result, the upper echelons of society, whether in academia or the beltway or on boards of large corporations, are dominated by people who lived lives of relative privilege.  Conversely, the sorts of people in prison, disproportionately people of color, were born poor and grew up that way.  There are exceptions, of course, but the notion of the American Dream is largely confined to the margins.

The other problem is that Mayor Pete's academic credentials aren't all that relevant or important to the job.  Why should anyone care that he speaks 8 languages or whatever, or that he graduated from Harvard?  The only people it dazzles (i.e. meritocrats) are the sorts who think that smarts and wit inherently makes people better leaders.  I don't think so.  I'm looking for someone who supports good policies, and Mayor Pete quite frankly has a terrible record as mayor in multiple respects.

See, you say that yet you use “meritocrat” as a pejorative.  Also, I’ve only seen anti-Buttigieg Atlas posters mention his academic credentials and I’m pretty sure no one cares how many languages he speaks, but whatever.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I don’t know who Peter Daou is, but Beto Bro’s post was clearly a general attack on white people who are liberal by implying that being white makes them inherently less committed to pursuing a progressive agenda.  His race-baiting might’ve not been entirely conscious, it was still race-baiting all the same.  If this wasn’t what Beto Bro meant then he should have clarified what he meant and indicated that he’d try to word his posts more clearly going forward.  That he has done neither of these things is telling.

How is "virtue signaling white liberals who fetishize Bush 43's presidency because of Trump's tone" a general attack? That seems very specific to me.

I was referring to a subset of white liberals who absolutely do act like the rise of white nationalism in this country lays solely at Trump's feet and that getting him out of office will get rid of it. It won't. White supremacy isn't a fringe political phenomenon it is baked into the DNA of one of the two major political parties in this country. Thinking otherwise is harmful and what led to Trump in the first place. White people ignoring the blatant racism of the GOP machine and thinking if they keep it under the surface it doesn't exist.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I don’t know who Peter Daou is, but Beto Bro’s post was clearly a general attack on white people who are liberal by implying that being white makes them inherently less committed to pursuing a progressive agenda.  His race-baiting might’ve not been entirely conscious, it was still race-baiting all the same.  If this wasn’t what Beto Bro meant then he should have clarified what he meant and indicated that he’d try to word his posts more clearly going forward.  That he has done neither of these things is telling.

How is "virtue signaling white liberals who fetishize Bush 43's presidency because of Trump's tone" a general attack? That seems very specific to me.

I was referring to a subset of white liberals who absolutely do act like the rise of white nationalism in this country lays solely at Trump's feet and that getting him out of office will get rid of it. It won't. White supremacy isn't a fringe political phenomenon it is baked into the DNA of one of the two major political parties in this country. Thinking otherwise is harmful and what led to Trump in the first place. White people ignoring the blatant racism of the GOP machine and thinking if they keep it under the surface it doesn't exist.

Fair enough, thank you for clarifying.  That said, I don’t think that’s the crowd Buttigieg appeals to though.  The folks you’re talking about are, in my admittedly anecdotal experience, generally nostalgia-motivated Biden supporters who think everything will be great if we just elect Obama’s VP b/c, you know, the Republican Party was so responsible and totally didn’t embrace right-wing racism when Obama was in office

[Rookie Yinzer]

I don’t know who Peter Daou is, but Beto Bro’s post was clearly a general attack on white people who are liberal by implying that being white makes them inherently less committed to pursuing a progressive agenda.  His race-baiting might’ve not been entirely conscious, it was still race-baiting all the same.  If this wasn’t what Beto Bro meant then he should have clarified what he meant and indicated that he’d try to word his posts more clearly going forward.  That he has done neither of these things is telling.

How is "virtue signaling white liberals who fetishize Bush 43's presidency because of Trump's tone" a general attack? That seems very specific to me.

I was referring to a subset of white liberals who absolutely do act like the rise of white nationalism in this country lays solely at Trump's feet and that getting him out of office will get rid of it. It won't. White supremacy isn't a fringe political phenomenon it is baked into the DNA of one of the two major political parties in this country. Thinking otherwise is harmful and what led to Trump in the first place. White people ignoring the blatant racism of the GOP machine and thinking if they keep it under the surface it doesn't exist.

Fair enough, thank you for clarifying.  That said, I don’t think that’s the crowd Buttigieg appeals to though.  The folks you’re talking about are, in my admittedly anecdotal experience, generally nostalgia-motivated Biden supporters who think everything will be great if we just elect Obama’s VP b/c, you know, the Republican Party was so responsible and totally didn’t embrace right-wing racism when Obama was in office

Yeah. Buttigieg is appealing to wealthy folks who are completely removed from regular life.

Biden's announcement video reeked of what I was referring to. When he said Trump's Charlottesville video shocked America's conscious, I was like dude half of the country agrees with him. LOL. This type of naivete will not move the ball forward in race relations.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I don’t know who Peter Daou is, but Beto Bro’s post was clearly a general attack on white people who are liberal by implying that being white makes them inherently less committed to pursuing a progressive agenda.  His race-baiting might’ve not been entirely conscious, it was still race-baiting all the same.  If this wasn’t what Beto Bro meant then he should have clarified what he meant and indicated that he’d try to word his posts more clearly going forward.  That he has done neither of these things is telling.

How is "virtue signaling white liberals who fetishize Bush 43's presidency because of Trump's tone" a general attack? That seems very specific to me.

I was referring to a subset of white liberals who absolutely do act like the rise of white nationalism in this country lays solely at Trump's feet and that getting him out of office will get rid of it. It won't. White supremacy isn't a fringe political phenomenon it is baked into the DNA of one of the two major political parties in this country. Thinking otherwise is harmful and what led to Trump in the first place. White people ignoring the blatant racism of the GOP machine and thinking if they keep it under the surface it doesn't exist.

Fair enough, thank you for clarifying.  That said, I don’t think that’s the crowd Buttigieg appeals to though.  The folks you’re talking about are, in my admittedly anecdotal experience, generally nostalgia-motivated Biden supporters who think everything will be great if we just elect Obama’s VP b/c, you know, the Republican Party was so responsible and totally didn’t embrace right-wing racism when Obama was in office

Yeah. Buttigieg is appealing to wealthy folks who are completely removed from regular life.

Biden's announcement video reeked of what I was referring to. When he said Trump's Charlottesville video shocked America's conscious, I was like dude half of the country agrees with him. LOL. This type of naivete will not move the ball forward in race relations.

I think Buttigieg just appeals to suburbanites and intellectuals in general.  Granted, some are removed from regular life, but every candidate has some awful supporters.  Kinda curious why you like O’Rourke so much more than Buttigieg though tbh. 

Yeah, I hated Biden’s announcement video too.  I suppose the man knows what his base wants to hear

[Spiffy]

https://twitter.com/gideonresnick/status/1121876267396141056?s=21

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

Great move by the campaign to do this now. I still think Pete has some 'splainin to do about his time at McKinsey.

[jhkersting]

Well Buttigieg has been rising a lot  in the polls! It could be a little like Obama in '08.
I made a forecast for the primary and he is rising faster than all candidates. And appears to not be stopping!




https://jhkforecastsetc.com/demprimaryforecast/

[Tender Branson]

Trump said he prefers Pete to be his opponent in the general election:

President Trump said Thursday night that he’s “rooting for” Pete Buttigieg when he was asked to give his impressions of some of the top Democratic presidential contenders.

At the end of a 45-minute live interview with Fox News’s Sean Hannity, the host asked Trump to offer his thoughts on the slate of candidates who want to take him on in 2020.

Trump did not elaborate on why Buttigieg is his favored candidate and didn’t have anything negative to say about the young South Bend, Ind., mayor, other than that he doubted he’d win the crowded primary.

“I hope he would,” Trump said. “I’m rooting for him, but he is not going to make it.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-tells-hannity-hes-rooting-for-pete-buttigieg/2019/04/25/02849e16-67c7-11e9-82ba-fcfeff232e8f_story.html

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

I could easily see Buttigieg being the runner up to Sanders or Biden in the primary and then winning the nomination and defeating Pence in 2024 after Sanders or Biden lost the general to Trump.  This could be the most likely way he becomes president. 

By 2024, progressives will dominate the Democratic Party, this is Pete's only shot.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I could easily see Buttigieg being the runner up to Sanders or Biden in the primary and then winning the nomination and defeating Pence in 2024 after Sanders or Biden lost the general to Trump.  This could be the most likely way he becomes president. 

By 2024, progressives will dominate the Democratic Party, this is Pete's only shot.

Err...Buttigieg is a progressive.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Trump said he prefers Pete to be his opponent in the general election:

President Trump said Thursday night that he’s “rooting for” Pete Buttigieg when he was asked to give his impressions of some of the top Democratic presidential contenders.

At the end of a 45-minute live interview with Fox News’s Sean Hannity, the host asked Trump to offer his thoughts on the slate of candidates who want to take him on in 2020.

Trump did not elaborate on why Buttigieg is his favored candidate and didn’t have anything negative to say about the young South Bend, Ind., mayor, other than that he doubted he’d win the crowded primary.

“I hope he would,” Trump said. “I’m rooting for him, but he is not going to make it.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-tells-hannity-hes-rooting-for-pete-buttigieg/2019/04/25/02849e16-67c7-11e9-82ba-fcfeff232e8f_story.html

I think I would prefer for Trump to be cocky in a general election than for him to be worried and take his opponent seriously like with Biden.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I could easily see Buttigieg being the runner up to Sanders or Biden in the primary and then winning the nomination and defeating Pence in 2024 after Sanders or Biden lost the general to Trump.  This could be the most likely way he becomes president. 

By 2024, progressives will dominate the Democratic Party, this is Pete's only shot.

Err...Buttigieg is a progressive.

Nice try. Progressives don't say that it's too early to talk about policy.

[DabbingSanta]

Buttigieg has gone from a nobody to a Tier A/B candidate in four months. Worth watching!

[America Needs R'hllor]

I could easily see Buttigieg being the runner up to Sanders or Biden in the primary and then winning the nomination and defeating Pence in 2024 after Sanders or Biden lost the general to Trump.  This could be the most likely way he becomes president. 

By 2024, progressives will dominate the Democratic Party, this is Pete's only shot.

Err...Buttigieg is a progressive.

Nice try. Progressives don't say that it's too early to talk about policy.

I forgot, when was it that you were given the role of deciding who's a progressive and who's not? Or is that some role Bernie supporters always have, deciding that all these female, black, gay candidates are not progressive?

[John Dule]

I could easily see Buttigieg being the runner up to Sanders or Biden in the primary and then winning the nomination and defeating Pence in 2024 after Sanders or Biden lost the general to Trump.  This could be the most likely way he becomes president. 

By 2024, progressives will dominate the Democratic Party, this is Pete's only shot.

Err...Buttigieg is a progressive.

Nice try. Progressives don't say that it's too early to talk about policy.

I forgot, when was it that you were given the role of deciding who's a progressive and who's not? Or is that some role Bernie supporters always have, deciding that all these female, black, gay candidates are not progressive?

In any case, it's impossible to tell if Buttigieg is progressive or not because he doesn't have any concrete policy proposals. His dogs have a Twitter account but he can't be bothered to upload a few paragraphs on his positions to his campaign page.

[Ronnie]

I could easily see Buttigieg being the runner up to Sanders or Biden in the primary and then winning the nomination and defeating Pence in 2024 after Sanders or Biden lost the general to Trump.  This could be the most likely way he becomes president. 

By 2024, progressives will dominate the Democratic Party, this is Pete's only shot.

Err...Buttigieg is a progressive.

Nice try. Progressives don't say that it's too early to talk about policy.

I forgot, when was it that you were given the role of deciding who's a progressive and who's not? Or is that some role Bernie supporters always have, deciding that all these female, black, gay candidates are not progressive?

I think it's up to us to look at Pete's mayoral record and identify what about it is "progressive".  In my opinion, and you may disagree, progressive policy should be centered around lifting up the more marginalized segments--poor, working class, and poc--to make the country a more egalitarian place.  A progressive mayor would prioritize providing affordable housing, and other resources to marginalized segments of their community.  

Pete's approach wasn't to create more housing opportunities for poor people and people of color; his policy was to create a set of stringent home development standards that disproportionately affected black and brown segments of his community.  They had to follow these rules lest they risk fines from code inspectors, and 1,200 homes in total (most of which were owned by black/brown residents) were bulldozed or renovated to make way for prettier, more expensive neighborhoods.  City inspectors collected a half million dollars in fines in the process.  

The aftermath of this policy of gentrification, much like other cities where this policy was implemented, was in many ways positive for the relatively well-off segments of South Bend.  It also caused South Bend's population to rise after a pretty long slump and unemployment to drop.  But his approach has left poor people behind.  They still suffer from high rates of poverty and crime; more than a quarter of the city is at or below the poverty line and murder rates are way higher than average.  Pete did not center poor people or people of color in his governance of his city; in fact, he exacerbated the problems many of them face.  Why should we expect him to fight for marginalized people as president?

P.S. I don't think it's constructive to insinuate that candidates are progressive because they are female, black or gay.  We need to judge people by their actions.  And Pete's record on housing as mayor is only part of why I don't think he's progressive.