Would Pete Buttigieg would beaten Trump?

[Can't Back Down When Punched!]

No, and in hindsight I think Biden was the best pick for the Dems. Bernie would have been a wildcard, but my guess is he wouldn't be able to make up for the lack of Lincoln Project types with low-propensity voters, and probably lose the election. Warren would have gotten crushed, Harris probably wouldn't have won either, and Bloomberg would have been awful.

Buttigieg would have done worse with black voters, for one. He'd also struggle in the context of the pandemic, as in "what does the mayor of South Bend know about getting a national crisis under control." He would be seen as too young and inexperienced, and a little...smug.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

No, he was a vanity candidate for woke wine cave soccer moms. In the Democratic primary that was enough for a plurality win in Iowa, but not enough in the general election.

[Motorcity]

Harris was weak in Iowa and Buttigieg was strong in Iowa, and we needed Ernst seat to have a 51/49 Senate, instead we got a tied Senate and a power sharing agreement.  Harris was overdose as a Veep candidate.

But, she has to grow into the job of Veep, the last Veep to make a difference was Al Gore. Biden, Cheney and Pence didn't do much

What?

Cheney was easily the most influential VP ever. He directly pushed the Bush adminstration in several areas. Just about every Democrat/comedian/political cartoonist accused him of being the power behind the throne.

Biden was very instrumental in the early Obama agenda. Obamacare would not have passed without him.

Yeah, Pence did nothing but wait for the day Trump had an heart attack.

[Motorcity]

No, he was a vanity candidate for woke wine cave soccer moms. In the Democratic primary that was enough for a plurality win in Iowa, but not enough in the general election.

Buttigieg didn't even win a plurality of voters, just delegates. Bernie Sanders won the most raw votes in Iowa. But of course, Iowa has to use their crazy complicated caucus system that is kinda like a mini electoral college.

And Buttigieg only did as well as he did in Iowa and New Hampshire because Biden gave up on these states and the senators (Sanders, Warren, Klobuchar) were in DC all of January for the Trump trail

[vileplume]

Yes, as would any major Democrat except maybe Warren. Around this time last year, he was actually the candidate of choice for all the Democrats and Never Trump Republicans I know across several Sun Belt states. His path would have been the exact same as Biden's in the general, I think.

Who were those people demographically (age, educational attainment, occupation, etc.)? I really don't think he would've done better with nonwhite voters than Warren would've- I just can't see older, more socially conservative voters of color supporting a younger, upscale, white gay man against other D candidates or against 45.

Both Warren and Buttigieg would've bombed (relative to typical Democratic performances) with non-white voters and Trump would've beaten both in the electoral college comfortably. However Buttigieg would've performed a lot better than Warren would have with Romney 2012 voters who turned against the GOP in 2016 (think a Cindy McCain, Laura Bush type demographic).

I've said it before and I'll say it again other than perhaps Bloomberg (due to him likely drawing a credible challenge from the left, splitting the vote) Warren would've been the worst non-joke candidate that the Democrats could've nominated as I can't see her appealing to anyone who is not already a solid Democratic voter. Too lefty for the #suburbanmoderates^TM, too woke for the #rustbeltpopulists^TM whilst totally lacking in any real appeal to non-white voters. Buttigieg would at least get the 1st group.

[MRS. MEE SUM CHU]

Yes, as would any major Democrat except maybe Warren. Around this time last year, he was actually the candidate of choice for all the Democrats and Never Trump Republicans I know across several Sun Belt states. His path would have been the exact same as Biden's in the general, I think.

Who were those people demographically (age, educational attainment, occupation, etc.)? I really don't think he would've done better with nonwhite voters than Warren would've- I just can't see older, more socially conservative voters of color supporting a younger, upscale, white gay man against other D candidates or against 45.

Both Warren and Buttigieg would've bombed (relative to typical Democratic performances) with non-white voters and Trump would've beaten both in the electoral college comfortably. However Buttigieg would've performed a lot better than Warren would have with Romney 2012 voters who turned against the GOP in 2016 (think a Cindy McCain, Laura Bush type demographic).

I've said it before and I'll say it again other than perhaps Bloomberg (due to him likely drawing a credible challenge from the left, splitting the vote) Warren would've been the worst non-joke candidate that the Democrats could've nominated as I can't see her appealing to anyone who is not already a solid Democratic voter. Too lefty for the #suburbanmoderates^TM, too woke for the #rustbeltpopulists^TM whilst totally lacking in any real appeal to non-white voters. Buttigieg would at least get the 1st group.

Warren's primary support base was much more multiracial than Buttigieg's.

A Jan 2020 Emerson [national] poll found that ~20% of Warren supporters were black.

source, link to data

Racial breakdown of supporters by candidate-

Biden: 19% Latino 32% white 41% black 3% Asian 4% Other
Sanders: 21% Latino 54% white 15% black 8% Asian 3% Other
Warren: 5% Latino 64% white 22% black 3% Asian 6% Other
Yang: 21% Latino 26% white 28% black 21% Asian 4% Other
Buttigieg: 0% Latino 85% white 13% black 2% Asian
Bloomberg: 29% Latino 51% white 21% black   
Klobuchar: 41% Latino 59% white 0% black   
Gabbard: 100%   white

[vileplume]

Yes, as would any major Democrat except maybe Warren. Around this time last year, he was actually the candidate of choice for all the Democrats and Never Trump Republicans I know across several Sun Belt states. His path would have been the exact same as Biden's in the general, I think.

Who were those people demographically (age, educational attainment, occupation, etc.)? I really don't think he would've done better with nonwhite voters than Warren would've- I just can't see older, more socially conservative voters of color supporting a younger, upscale, white gay man against other D candidates or against 45.

Both Warren and Buttigieg would've bombed (relative to typical Democratic performances) with non-white voters and Trump would've beaten both in the electoral college comfortably. However Buttigieg would've performed a lot better than Warren would have with Romney 2012 voters who turned against the GOP in 2016 (think a Cindy McCain, Laura Bush type demographic).

I've said it before and I'll say it again other than perhaps Bloomberg (due to him likely drawing a credible challenge from the left, splitting the vote) Warren would've been the worst non-joke candidate that the Democrats could've nominated as I can't see her appealing to anyone who is not already a solid Democratic voter. Too lefty for the #suburbanmoderates^TM, too woke for the #rustbeltpopulists^TM whilst totally lacking in any real appeal to non-white voters. Buttigieg would at least get the 1st group.

Warren's primary support base was much more multiracial than Buttigieg's.

A Jan 2020 Emerson [national] poll found that ~20% of Warren supporters were black.

source, link to data

Racial breakdown of supporters by candidate-

Biden: 19% Latino 32% white 41% black 3% Asian 4% Other
Sanders: 21% Latino 54% white 15% black 8% Asian 3% Other
Warren: 5% Latino 64% white 22% black 3% Asian 6% Other
Yang: 21% Latino 26% white 28% black 21% Asian 4% Other
Buttigieg: 0% Latino 85% white 13% black 2% Asian
Bloomberg: 29% Latino 51% white 21% black   
Klobuchar: 41% Latino 59% white 0% black   
Gabbard: 100%   white

Neither had a multiracial support base, both were extremely heavily white and both would've fared badly (compared to how Democrats typically perform) with them vs. Trump in the general. It's just that Buttigieg would've played better with white suburban moderates than Warren, ergo he would've done better than her overall.

[Schumer can go f*** himself!]

Pete Buttigieg Elizabeth Warren Mike Bloomberg was possibly the weakest possible candidate who could have been run against Trump. Trump could have died of Covid in October and still easily beaten that clown

FTFY

Fixed Correctly. That said, Warren would've fared better than Pete.

Bloomberg would’ve done much worse than Warren, but unlike Pete, Warren would’ve lost by a pretty decisive margin.

[Crucial_Waukesha]

Harris was weak in Iowa and Buttigieg was strong in Iowa, and we needed Ernst seat to have a 51/49 Senate, instead we got a tied Senate and a power sharing agreement.  Harris was overdose as a Veep candidate.

I'm curious as to why you keep insisting that Biden lost IA and OH because of choosing Harris as VP instead of Buttigieg? He lost by roughly the same margin Clinton did in 2016, in roughly the same places. He also lost by 7-8 points in each. I have a hard time seeing the math of how choosing a VP - who didn't have any notable gaffes or serious missteps - lost Biden two states by that big a margin, and by the same margins as the candidate before him lost by?

I think the simpler explanation is that Trump and his political brand is a popular majority coalition in IA and OH, just like Obama's was from 2008-2012.

[Morgan Kingsley]

Honestly probably not.

[Mr. Smith]

The absolute weakest candidate with no real direction, no campaign until the last two weeks is *checks notes*

President of the United States.

[Whale Psychiatrist]

No, he was a vanity candidate for woke wine cave soccer moms. In the Democratic primary that was enough for a plurality win in Iowa, but not enough in the general election.

"Woke" and "wine cave" in the same sentence let alone the same zip code? I cannot think of a candidate that the woke crowd disliked more, except maybe Bloomberg.

[Schumer can go f*** himself!]

The absolute weakest candidate with no real direction, no campaign until the last two weeks is *checks notes*

President of the United States.

Imagine actually believing this

[Motorcity]

The absolute weakest candidate with no real direction, no campaign until the last two weeks is *checks notes*

President of the United States.

This is probably the most foolish thing I’ve read in a while. And I’m friends with some diehard Trumpists on Facebook

Biden was easily the STRONGEST candidate in the Democratic Primary. He always had the best head to head polls with Trump and was the only candidate that beat Trump in every swing state. Biden and Warren were weak in the sunbelt and Trump led Buttigieg and Klobuchar.

Biden only won by 45k votes across three states (AZ, GA, WI). He easily won 100k Biden-GOP voters in the suburbs

Do you really think this? This thinking is insane. It’s the consensus of the forum that Biden was the best candidate and probably the only one who could have won.

You are wrong

[Calthrina950]

The absolute weakest candidate with no real direction, no campaign until the last two weeks is *checks notes*

President of the United States.

This is probably the most foolish thing I’ve read in a while. And I’m friends with some diehard Trumpists on Facebook

Biden was easily the STRONGEST candidate in the Democratic Primary. He always had the best head to head polls with Trump and was the only candidate that beat Trump in every swing state. Biden and Warren were weak in the sunbelt and Trump led Buttigieg and Klobuchar.

Biden only won by 45k votes across three states (AZ, GA, WI). He easily won 100k Biden-GOP voters in the suburbs

Do you really think this? This thinking is insane. It’s the consensus of the forum that Biden was the best candidate and probably the only one who could have won.

You are wrong

I think you may be misinterpreting his post. To me, it seems like he is posing an argument for why Biden was the best candidate who could be chosen by the Democrats, and that the claims made about him during the primary-that he was weak or losing his grip-turned out not to be true.

[UWS]

Due to Buttigieg’s inability to mobilize ethnic minority voters, which was a major problem during his presidential primary run and which is why he dropped out after the South Carolina primary, Trump would definitely win Georgia and Arizona. Among the Midwestern states, I say Trump wins at least Pennsylvania, which puts him over the top with 279 EVs.

[Motorcity]

The absolute weakest candidate with no real direction, no campaign until the last two weeks is *checks notes*

President of the United States.

This is probably the most foolish thing I’ve read in a while. And I’m friends with some diehard Trumpists on Facebook

Biden was easily the STRONGEST candidate in the Democratic Primary. He always had the best head to head polls with Trump and was the only candidate that beat Trump in every swing state. Biden and Warren were weak in the sunbelt and Trump led Buttigieg and Klobuchar.

Biden only won by 45k votes across three states (AZ, GA, WI). He easily won 100k Biden-GOP voters in the suburbs

Do you really think this? This thinking is insane. It’s the consensus of the forum that Biden was the best candidate and probably the only one who could have won.

You are wrong

I think you may be misinterpreting his post. To me, it seems like he is posing an argument for why Biden was the best candidate who could be chosen by the Democrats, and that the claims made about him during the primary-that he was weak or losing his grip-turned out not to be true.

Oh, that would be different. If that’s what he meant I apologize in advance

If not, I stand by my statement

[terkeypie]

I don’t think so, Iowa caucus will probably think otherwise 😭😭😭