Pete Buttigieg 2020 campaign megathread

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

A warning from AOC

AOC's warning to Pete Buttigieg

Similarly, in 2004 Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry went after Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who had been doing well in the race, speaking about his opposition to the disastrous war in Iraq. Kerry warned that Dean would be weak on defense after 9/11 and that his candidacy would ensure President George W. Bush's re-election.
Referring to Dean's statement that the US was not safer after Saddam Hussein had been captured, Kerry said: "Someone who talks like this is going to have a hard time convincing the American people that he can keep them safe. This election is too vital for us to lose ... because voters refuse to take a gamble on national security and the steadiness of our leadership." Although Kerry won the nomination, that became the centerpiece of GOP attacks against him.
Democrats who attack from the center don't always think through the potential impact of their words. They operate from a mythical position that they will be able to insulate themselves from the same such attacks if their turn comes in the crossfire. But we have seen from history it doesn't work that way.
The better strategy would be to shore up support for Democratic ideas and policies during the caucuses and primaries, insisting on a debate that centers on those terms rather than Republican points, and not offering the GOP more material going into the fall campaign.
For if they are not careful, the moderates might end up doing exactly what Republicans are hoping for, thereby helping to set up the conditions for President Trump's reelection.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/29/opinions/aoc-warning-to-buttigieg-zelizer/index.html

K

[GP270watch]

AOC slapped GOPete around.

[Confused Democrat]

AOC slapped GOPete around.

Twitter isn’t real life. The vast majority of Americans share Pete’s positions on education and healthcare.

[Donerail]

AOC slapped GOPete around.

Twitter isn’t real life. The vast majority of Americans share Pete’s positions on education and healthcare.

Keep telling yourself that

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

This debate around college tuition that treats universities like libraries or most other free public goods is either insanely dishonest or ignorant.

Where do people think the revenue from charging tuition goes? It pays for the services the university provides; it pays the salaries of faculty and staff, for materials used in textbooks, for food served in dining halls, and most importantly, for a lot of financial aid that schools are able to provide for lower income students. Yes there are pell grants and other small scholarships which people can cobble together for assistance but if you're cutting out tuition from higher-income students you're cutting out a revenue stream that subsidizes lower income students.

Could you subsidize student tuition by raising taxes on these high-income earners? Of course you could. There's this inane argument that forcing higher income students will lead to wealthy people holding resentment against higher education. But this same thing would happen if their taxes would predominantly be propping up universities for lower income people to attend! It happens with nearly other public service.

The idea that rolling college tuition into taxes will eliminate any class conflict around higher education just... doesn't make sense to me.

[America Needs R'hllor]

This debate around college tuition that treats universities like libraries or most other free public goods is either insanely dishonest or ignorant.

Where do people think the revenue from charging tuition goes? It pays for the services the university provides; it pays the salaries of faculty and staff, for materials used in textbooks, for food served in dining halls, and most importantly, for a lot of financial aid that schools are able to provide for lower income students. Yes there are pell grants and other small scholarships which people can cobble together for assistance but if you're cutting out tuition from higher-income students you're cutting out a revenue stream that subsidizes lower income students.

Could you subsidize student tuition by raising taxes on these high-income earners? Of course you could. There's this inane argument that forcing higher income students will lead to wealthy people holding resentment against higher education. But this same thing would happen if their taxes would predominantly be propping up universities for lower income people to attend! It happens with nearly other public service.

The idea that rolling college tuition into taxes will eliminate any class conflict around higher education just... doesn't make sense to me.

Psychologically, I could see taxes being much more infuriating for higher income people than paying for college, since for the latter they feel like they get a reward and for the former they could tell themselves that their money is being "stolen" to subsidize other people. So yeah this argument doesn't hold any water.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

He has been using Republican talking points as of late. I’m coming around to Pete, but his campaign has got to chill on the radical centrist agenda.

You need some talking points that appeal to Rs and R-leaning Indys in the primaries and the GE to win.

Hillary alienated a lot of R-leaning Indys in the Rust Belt ... and lost.

Pete is working those people right now. He’s the candidate with the highest net favourability among Independents.

How else do you guys think Beshear won a Trump+30 state or McCready came close to winning in a solid Trump district ?

You cannot win in the 2020 US of A with far leftist Democratic purity.

You can’t rely on R voters at the expense of your own. Hillary’s strategy in 2016 was to reach out to them, and look what happened: she underperformed Obama in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, allowing Trump to win.

Those voters are unreliable. You don’t win elections by straddling the middle, you win by giving voters something they can believe in and someone they can vote for. Pete’s been listening too much to the Morning Joe crowd as of late, and it’s gonna hurt his campaign in the long run.

Simply reaching out to a voter group such as Hillary's 2016 appeals to the middle aren't guaranteed to work, especially if the group in question doubts the sincerity of the candidate's appeal. That was Hillary's Achilles' heel in the 2016 GE and may well end up being Pete's in the 2020 primaries.  Pete will be much more believable as a centrist than Hillary ever was.

[izixs]

A warning from AOC

AOC's warning to Pete Buttigieg

Similarly, in 2004 Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry went after Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who had been doing well in the race, speaking about his opposition to the disastrous war in Iraq. Kerry warned that Dean would be weak on defense after 9/11 and that his candidacy would ensure President George W. Bush's re-election.
Referring to Dean's statement that the US was not safer after Saddam Hussein had been captured, Kerry said: "Someone who talks like this is going to have a hard time convincing the American people that he can keep them safe. This election is too vital for us to lose ... because voters refuse to take a gamble on national security and the steadiness of our leadership." Although Kerry won the nomination, that became the centerpiece of GOP attacks against him.
Democrats who attack from the center don't always think through the potential impact of their words. They operate from a mythical position that they will be able to insulate themselves from the same such attacks if their turn comes in the crossfire. But we have seen from history it doesn't work that way.
The better strategy would be to shore up support for Democratic ideas and policies during the caucuses and primaries, insisting on a debate that centers on those terms rather than Republican points, and not offering the GOP more material going into the fall campaign.
For if they are not careful, the moderates might end up doing exactly what Republicans are hoping for, thereby helping to set up the conditions for President Trump's reelection.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/29/opinions/aoc-warning-to-buttigieg-zelizer/index.html

This seems like a foolish criticism given that Buttigieg is criticizing AOC's policies from the left, not the center. The criticism isn't "your plan for free college costs too much" but rather "by offering free college to everyone, you're giving things away for free to the rich, which is bad optics and therefore challenging to implement and easy to attack".

Now, arguments for and against means-tested benefits don't break down evenly on a left-right axis, and there are decent arguments for both sides that don't require identifying with the right, the left or the center. But it is totally misleading to equate this to Kerry-Dean debates where the position Kerry was taking was clearly the center position against a position clearly from the "left" (or at least anti-interventionist) perspective. In fact, trying to make an argument about whether to means-test or not an argument about being insufficiently purely left is the real problem.

To means test, or not to means test, that is the question
Whether 'tis nobler in the politic to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous messaging
Or to take arms against a sea of pundits
And by opposing end them. To tax, to keep--
No more--and by a spend to say we end
The heartache, and the thousand tuition bills
That youth is heir to. 'Tis an education
Devoutly to be wished. To tax, to spend--
To spend--perchance to school: ay, there's the rub,
For in that college of sans debt what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this capitalist coil,
Must give us pause. There's the loans
That makes calamity of so long college life.
For who would bear the interest and payments over time,
Th' oppressor's wrong, the rich man's contumely
The pangs of despised job, the law's delay,
The insolence of administrative office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th' unworthy hot takes,
When he himself might his alternative market make
With a bare bond? Who would fardels loans bear,
To grunt and sweat under a dreary life,
But that the dread of something after student loans,
The undiscovered career, from whose bourn
No millennial returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those bills we have
Than fly to opportunities that we know not of?
Thus hesitation does make cowards of us all,
And thus the naive postulate of class resolution
Is slicked and stabbed forth with the pale cast of thought,
An enterprise of great pitch and campaign
With this regard Democratic currents turn awry
And lose the name of action. -- Soft policy now,
The single payer! -- Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all our sins remembered.

====

Okay, I got a little carried away there and it only makes some sense. But yes, to means test or not to means test. There is a claim made in the quoted post: 'Buttigieg is criticizing AOC's policies from the left'. I take issue with this specific characterization for a very simple reason. When one is seeking a classless society, directly or indirectly, the comes a point when someone must admit that withholding a benefit for one class or group of classes can be used as leverage to perpetual class divisions, and thus discouraging the long term construction of solidarity. Or in other words, those on the left have realized that means testing, in general, can and will be used as a tool to reduce benefits for some in order to get that group of people to actively work against those who do benefit. The right has attempted this with social security repeatedly for years.

And you see, once you have a means testing system in place, it is ripe to be twisted so people that should be receiving the benefits do not. Sure some that do need them most will still get them, but not everyone who needs them will because the threshold has been shifted over time, or even left flat. Like minimum wage. This pattern of manipulation is well known on the left, and thus most on that end of things recognize that means testing is hardly a 'left' position, but an attempt to manipulate something good into not benefiting everyone that needs it.

And we're getting kind of tired of folks asserting that means testing is the 'left' position.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

AOC slapped GOPete around.

Lol what kind of bubble do you live in where Pete is even close to a Republican

[Morning in Atlas]

Apparently the latest controversy is them taking a Lis Smith about Bannon out-of-context.

The tweet is "praising" Bannon as a "great political operative" after he helped throw AL-SEN to Democrats by nominating Roy Moore. People on Twitter aren't thrilled with it. Not great!

[GP270watch]

AOC slapped GOPete around.

Lol what kind of bubble do you live in where Pete is even close to a Republican

He's a corporate neo-liberal with progressive window dressing.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

AOC slapped GOPete around.

Lol what kind of bubble do you live in where Pete is even close to a Republican

He's a corporate neo-liberal with progressive window dressing.

Even if we all agreed that was actually true, that's still not what a Republican is.

[It’s so Joever]

AOC slapped GOPete around.

Lol what kind of bubble do you live in where Pete is even close to a Republican

Probably the Twitterverse.

[Tender Branson]

https://twitter.com/salsapockbill24/status/1200985770149871616

[GeneralMacArthur]

Hilarious to see AOC calling Pete a Republican for wanting free college for low income kids only.  We all of course remember the legendary McConnell-Graham free college bill.

Honestly she should keep it up, the Sarah Palin of the left is exactly the foil Buttigieg wants.

[Morning in Atlas]

Hilarious to see AOC calling Pete a Republican for wanting free college for low income kids only.  We all of course remember the legendary McConnell-Graham free college bill.

Honestly she should keep it up, the Sarah Palin of the left is exactly the foil Buttigieg wants.

Let's see... AOC wants tuition-free public college (far beyond your blatant distortion of what AOC said). Sarah Palin endorsed a literal neo-Nazi for Congress. These people are surely alike.

You're not fooling anyone here, guy. Blue looks much better on you.

[Tintrlvr]

A warning from AOC

AOC's warning to Pete Buttigieg

Similarly, in 2004 Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry went after Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who had been doing well in the race, speaking about his opposition to the disastrous war in Iraq. Kerry warned that Dean would be weak on defense after 9/11 and that his candidacy would ensure President George W. Bush's re-election.
Referring to Dean's statement that the US was not safer after Saddam Hussein had been captured, Kerry said: "Someone who talks like this is going to have a hard time convincing the American people that he can keep them safe. This election is too vital for us to lose ... because voters refuse to take a gamble on national security and the steadiness of our leadership." Although Kerry won the nomination, that became the centerpiece of GOP attacks against him.
Democrats who attack from the center don't always think through the potential impact of their words. They operate from a mythical position that they will be able to insulate themselves from the same such attacks if their turn comes in the crossfire. But we have seen from history it doesn't work that way.
The better strategy would be to shore up support for Democratic ideas and policies during the caucuses and primaries, insisting on a debate that centers on those terms rather than Republican points, and not offering the GOP more material going into the fall campaign.
For if they are not careful, the moderates might end up doing exactly what Republicans are hoping for, thereby helping to set up the conditions for President Trump's reelection.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/29/opinions/aoc-warning-to-buttigieg-zelizer/index.html

This seems like a foolish criticism given that Buttigieg is criticizing AOC's policies from the left, not the center. The criticism isn't "your plan for free college costs too much" but rather "by offering free college to everyone, you're giving things away for free to the rich, which is bad optics and therefore challenging to implement and easy to attack".

Now, arguments for and against means-tested benefits don't break down evenly on a left-right axis, and there are decent arguments for both sides that don't require identifying with the right, the left or the center. But it is totally misleading to equate this to Kerry-Dean debates where the position Kerry was taking was clearly the center position against a position clearly from the "left" (or at least anti-interventionist) perspective. In fact, trying to make an argument about whether to means-test or not an argument about being insufficiently purely left is the real problem.

To means test, or not to means test, that is the question
Whether 'tis nobler in the politic to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous messaging
Or to take arms against a sea of pundits
And by opposing end them. To tax, to keep--
No more--and by a spend to say we end
The heartache, and the thousand tuition bills
That youth is heir to. 'Tis an education
Devoutly to be wished. To tax, to spend--
To spend--perchance to school: ay, there's the rub,
For in that college of sans debt what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this capitalist coil,
Must give us pause. There's the loans
That makes calamity of so long college life.
For who would bear the interest and payments over time,
Th' oppressor's wrong, the rich man's contumely
The pangs of despised job, the law's delay,
The insolence of administrative office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th' unworthy hot takes,
When he himself might his alternative market make
With a bare bond? Who would fardels loans bear,
To grunt and sweat under a dreary life,
But that the dread of something after student loans,
The undiscovered career, from whose bourn
No millennial returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those bills we have
Than fly to opportunities that we know not of?
Thus hesitation does make cowards of us all,
And thus the naive postulate of class resolution
Is slicked and stabbed forth with the pale cast of thought,
An enterprise of great pitch and campaign
With this regard Democratic currents turn awry
And lose the name of action. -- Soft policy now,
The single payer! -- Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all our sins remembered.

====

Okay, I got a little carried away there and it only makes some sense. But yes, to means test or not to means test. There is a claim made in the quoted post: 'Buttigieg is criticizing AOC's policies from the left'. I take issue with this specific characterization for a very simple reason. When one is seeking a classless society, directly or indirectly, the comes a point when someone must admit that withholding a benefit for one class or group of classes can be used as leverage to perpetual class divisions, and thus discouraging the long term construction of solidarity. Or in other words, those on the left have realized that means testing, in general, can and will be used as a tool to reduce benefits for some in order to get that group of people to actively work against those who do benefit. The right has attempted this with social security repeatedly for years.

And you see, once you have a means testing system in place, it is ripe to be twisted so people that should be receiving the benefits do not. Sure some that do need them most will still get them, but not everyone who needs them will because the threshold has been shifted over time, or even left flat. Like minimum wage. This pattern of manipulation is well known on the left, and thus most on that end of things recognize that means testing is hardly a 'left' position, but an attempt to manipulate something good into not benefiting everyone that needs it.

And we're getting kind of tired of folks asserting that means testing is the 'left' position.

Did you read my post or just decide to wax poetic?

[GP270watch]

Even if we all agreed that was actually true, that's still not what a Republican is.

 When they're both roadblocking progressive reforms, I don't care much about their differences. All GOPete would be is a less crappy Republican. We need to do better than that and him.

[Grassroots]

LOL.

This except Kamala's supporters are the online leftists knocking on everyone else's door.

[libertpaulian]

LOL.

This except Kamala's supporters are the online leftists knocking on everyone else's door.

They're amateurs compared to the Bernouts.

[Tender Branson]

Buttipete went to SC today to attend a service at a Black church, followed by a town hall discussion there.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Even if we all agreed that was actually true, that's still not what a Republican is.

 When they're both roadblocking progressive reforms, I don't care much about their differences. All GOPete would be is a less crappy Republican. We need to do better than that and him.

Dude, Pete would pass your progressive reforms lol, just not as many as say Sanders would try to do.

That's Pete. You know what we want to do? We want to repeal your "progressive reforms" that you've already passed. See: Obamacare (which we shouldn't just give up on btw, we still need to repeal and replace).

Please get the difference between left wing and center-right into your head. Thanks (and yes, Pete is left wing. He isn't even center left lol, he's just not far left like Bernie. I'd never vote for Pete).

[Mr. Smith]

Even if we all agreed that was actually true, that's still not what a Republican is.

 When they're both roadblocking progressive reforms, I don't care much about their differences. All GOPete would be is a less crappy Republican. We need to do better than that and him.

Dude, Pete would pass your progressive reforms lol, just not as many as say Sanders would try to do.

That's Pete. You know what we want to do? We want to repeal your "progressive reforms" that you've already passed. See: Obamacare (which we shouldn't just give up on btw, we still need to repeal and replace).

Please get the difference between left wing and center-right into your head. Thanks (and yes, Pete is left wing. He isn't even center left lol, he's just not far left like Bernie. I'd never vote for Pete).

Obamacare was literally what your far-right institutions like Heritage Foundation proposed in the 90's, full-stop.

Try again.

[Hindsight was 2020]

I wonder who would be a good running mate for Pete? His two biggest flaws are inexperience and lack of minority support. I can’t think of anyone off the top of my head that would address these issues

[libertpaulian]

I wonder who would be a good running mate for Pete? His two biggest flaws are inexperience and lack of minority support. I can’t think of anyone off the top of my head that would address these issues

Tammy Duckworth.  Her qualities:

1. from flyover country
2. veteran
3. foreign policy knowledge
4. woman
5. minority
6. US Senator
7. fierce debater