MI-Sen 2026: Peters retiring

[Schumer can go f*** himself!]

Very disturbing news. I'm not worried too much about Pete losing the election, because for all his faults he is talented and will likely beat whatever ghoul he's up against in a midterm, but this is another slap in the face to the growing number of people who used to be Democrats. It's only going to get harder to win these people back. And the Dems must win them back, there is no future without at least some of the Obama-Trump, Hillary-Trump, or Biden-Trump voters. Who else can they even persuade at this point?

Pete could absolutely lose to someone like Huizenga or Rogers. GOP just needs a non-crazy normie but MAGA friendly enough Republican who will point out Pete an Ivy leaguer who isn't one of them.

Nah

[DaleCooper]

Very disturbing news. I'm not worried too much about Pete losing the election, because for all his faults he is talented and will likely beat whatever ghoul he's up against in a midterm, but this is another slap in the face to the growing number of people who used to be Democrats. It's only going to get harder to win these people back. And the Dems must win them back, there is no future without at least some of the Obama-Trump, Hillary-Trump, or Biden-Trump voters. Who else can they even persuade at this point?

Pete could absolutely lose to someone like Huizenga or Rogers. GOP just needs a non-crazy normie but MAGA friendly enough Republican who will point out Pete an Ivy leaguer who isn't one of them.

He could lose, but he would at least be competitive even in the worst case scenario. He isn't incompetent so he will do everything he can to win, which is more than can be said about a lot of Democrats.

That said, this race would not be competitive at all in 2026 if Democrats were running a serious candidate that respected the people of Michigan.

[Devils30]

Very disturbing news. I'm not worried too much about Pete losing the election, because for all his faults he is talented and will likely beat whatever ghoul he's up against in a midterm, but this is another slap in the face to the growing number of people who used to be Democrats. It's only going to get harder to win these people back. And the Dems must win them back, there is no future without at least some of the Obama-Trump, Hillary-Trump, or Biden-Trump voters. Who else can they even persuade at this point?

Pete could absolutely lose to someone like Huizenga or Rogers. GOP just needs a non-crazy normie but MAGA friendly enough Republican who will point out Pete an Ivy leaguer who isn't one of them.

He could lose, but he would at least be competitive even in the worst case scenario. He isn't incompetent so he will do everything he can to win, which is more than can be said about a lot of Democrats.

That said, this race would not be competitive at all in 2026 if Democrats were running a serious candidate that respected the people of Michigan.

Yep. Scholten or Stevens losing in a Trump midterm feels extremely unlikely. Dems are just beholden to their Ivy elites (Pete) and special interest groups (notice the USAID sh**tshow).

[Roll Roons]

I suspect a lot of the animus towards Pete is not towards him personally, but his potential candidacy being symbolic of the fact that Democrats are completely uncompetitive in so much of the country.

Assuming Pete runs, his candidacy represents the fact that his home state is no longer winnable for Democrats, so in order to help realize his ambitions, he feels the need to carpetbag to one that is.

Obviously he has other flaws that would make him a bad candidate (lack of demonstrated appeal beyond college-educated white liberals, ties to a very unpopular administration) but that’s my theory.

[Devils30]

I suspect a lot of the animus towards Pete is not towards him personally, but his potential candidacy being symbolic of the fact that Democrats are completely uncompetitive in so much of the country.

Assuming Pete runs, his candidacy represents the fact that his home state is no longer winnable for Democrats, so in order to help realize his ambitions, he feels the need to carpetbag to one that is.

Obviously he has other flaws that would make him a bad candidate (lack of demonstrated appeal being college-educated white liberals, ties to a very unpopular administration) but that’s my theory.

Yes. His 2020 was entirely based on getting 26% in IA and 24% in NH but being in the single digits in SC. In many rural SC counties he was 1-3%, just not the right person at the right time for Dems. His views are very mainstream, this isn't a toxic leftist like AOC but he is just the wrong fit for the party today.

[David Hume]

I suspect a lot of the animus towards Pete is not towards him personally, but his potential candidacy being symbolic of the fact that Democrats are completely uncompetitive in so much of the country.

Assuming Pete runs, his candidacy represents the fact that his home state is no longer winnable for Democrats, so in order to help realize his ambitions, he feels the need to carpetbag to one that is.

Obviously he has other flaws that would make him a bad candidate (lack of demonstrated appeal being college-educated white liberals, ties to a very unpopular administration) but that’s my theory.

I am actually curious why he choose to carpetbag to MI, where he has 0 connection, instead of waiting for a vacancy in states like MA (where he went to college) or MD/VA (where he probably lived as SOT). I think he can only carpetbag once. If he loses in MI, either in primary or general, it would be very hard for him to carpetbag again.

[wbrocks67]

Very disturbing news. I'm not worried too much about Pete losing the election, because for all his faults he is talented and will likely beat whatever ghoul he's up against in a midterm, but this is another slap in the face to the growing number of people who used to be Democrats. It's only going to get harder to win these people back. And the Dems must win them back, there is no future without at least some of the Obama-Trump, Hillary-Trump, or Biden-Trump voters. Who else can they even persuade at this point?

Pete could absolutely lose to someone like Huizenga or Rogers. GOP just needs a non-crazy normie but MAGA friendly enough Republican who will point out Pete an Ivy leaguer who isn't one of them.

He could lose, but he would at least be competitive even in the worst case scenario. He isn't incompetent so he will do everything he can to win, which is more than can be said about a lot of Democrats.

That said, this race would not be competitive at all in 2026 if Democrats were running a serious candidate that respected the people of Michigan.

Yep. Scholten or Stevens losing in a Trump midterm feels extremely unlikely. Dems are just beholden to their Ivy elites (Pete) and special interest groups (notice the USAID sh**tshow).

This thread has gone so far off the rails. The primary has not even HAPPENED yet and people are already sh**tting on Democrats and Democratic voters. Can y'all PLEASE say ANYTHING about Republicans? It's just non stop 24/7 critiques of every single Democrat every which way, it's just become so exhausting.

McMorrow is a mainstream Dem from what I can tell, and now she's not good enough? Some of you have even worse purity tests than the leftists.

[Existing in the context]

I suspect a lot of the animus towards Pete is not towards him personally, but his potential candidacy being symbolic of the fact that Democrats are completely uncompetitive in so much of the country.

Assuming Pete runs, his candidacy represents the fact that his home state is no longer winnable for Democrats, so in order to help realize his ambitions, he feels the need to carpetbag to one that is.

Obviously he has other flaws that would make him a bad candidate (lack of demonstrated appeal being college-educated white liberals, ties to a very unpopular administration) but that’s my theory.

I am actually curious why he choose to carpetbag to MI, where he has 0 connection, instead of waiting for a vacancy in states like MA (where he went to college) or MD/VA (where he probably lived as SOT). I think he can only carpetbag once. If he loses in MI, either in primary or general, it would be very hard for him to carpetbag again.

He wanted the credentials of representing a swing state.

[David Hume]

I suspect a lot of the animus towards Pete is not towards him personally, but his potential candidacy being symbolic of the fact that Democrats are completely uncompetitive in so much of the country.

Assuming Pete runs, his candidacy represents the fact that his home state is no longer winnable for Democrats, so in order to help realize his ambitions, he feels the need to carpetbag to one that is.

Obviously he has other flaws that would make him a bad candidate (lack of demonstrated appeal being college-educated white liberals, ties to a very unpopular administration) but that’s my theory.

I am actually curious why he choose to carpetbag to MI, where he has 0 connection, instead of waiting for a vacancy in states like MA (where he went to college) or MD/VA (where he probably lived as SOT). I think he can only carpetbag once. If he loses in MI, either in primary or general, it would be very hard for him to carpetbag again.

He wanted the credentials of representing a swing state.

1, if he wins because of a good environment, that doesn't add much; if he loses, he's done.

2, representing a swing state in the senate is not obviously a plus. Dems may worry that if he becomes pres/vp nominee, his seat would be in danger.

[Existing in the context]

I suspect a lot of the animus towards Pete is not towards him personally, but his potential candidacy being symbolic of the fact that Democrats are completely uncompetitive in so much of the country.

Assuming Pete runs, his candidacy represents the fact that his home state is no longer winnable for Democrats, so in order to help realize his ambitions, he feels the need to carpetbag to one that is.

Obviously he has other flaws that would make him a bad candidate (lack of demonstrated appeal being college-educated white liberals, ties to a very unpopular administration) but that’s my theory.

I am actually curious why he choose to carpetbag to MI, where he has 0 connection, instead of waiting for a vacancy in states like MA (where he went to college) or MD/VA (where he probably lived as SOT). I think he can only carpetbag once. If he loses in MI, either in primary or general, it would be very hard for him to carpetbag again.

He wanted the credentials of representing a swing state.

1, if he wins because of a good environment, that doesn't add much; if he loses, he's done.

2, representing a swing state in the senate is not obviously a plus. Dems may worry that if he becomes pres/vp nominee, his seat would be in danger.

It is a plus when the biggest criticism of your candidacy is inexperience and inability to appeal to voters.

[henster]

Another downside of Pete running is like Kamala he is going to be haunted by all of the lefty positions he took in the 2020 primary. He raised his hand in favor or decriminalizing border crossings and health care for migrants in the debates. And who knows if he answered one of those ACLU questionaries. 

[CentristRepublican]

Very disturbing news. I'm not worried too much about Pete losing the election, because for all his faults he is talented and will likely beat whatever ghoul he's up against in a midterm, but this is another slap in the face to the growing number of people who used to be Democrats. It's only going to get harder to win these people back. And the Dems must win them back, there is no future without at least some of the Obama-Trump, Hillary-Trump, or Biden-Trump voters. Who else can they even persuade at this point?

Pete could absolutely lose to someone like Huizenga or Rogers. GOP just needs a non-crazy normie but MAGA friendly enough Republican who will point out Pete an Ivy leaguer who isn't one of them.

Nah

Devils is absolutely right, we CANNOT afford to get hubristic and risk losing this seat (a v real risk). MI is a swing state that voted for Trump the last election, there's no way to be CERTAIN that 2026 will be a redux 2018 (could be the reverse 2022, even...), and as the last midterms showed, candidate quality does indeed matter. And as Devils said Dems aren't totally immune from bad candidates and the GOP is far from devoid of good ones.

Fwiw my personal thoughts:
- I like Pete, but carpetbagging and running here is absolutely the wrong move for both him and for the Dems as a whole; his campaign has got to be stymied in the primary.
- McMorrow's also absolutely overhyped and Dems can and really should do better than her. Genuinely curious, any compelling reasons to support her aside from her 15 minutes of fame and being the lesser of two mediocrities? We don't need a paper tiger or the candidate of the online left. Pick someone more relatable / proven to be good at retail politics even if they are less glamorous.
- Rogers is a decent candidate, which I suppose is the most one can ask of the MIGOP, but he's not the only option MIGOP has. As far as "do no harm" goes he checks the box, but like...he has been out of office for over a decade atp. Idk, I just think somebody more contemporary could be even better from the MIGOP's perspective. Not worth risking a split vote (and getting another Dixon or wtv) though, so if Rogers runs they prob should just rally around behind him.

[CentristRepublican]

And plenty of quite partisan people have won elections in swing states, as neighboring Wisconsin shows.

Pepperidge Farm remembers "Pat Toomey is way too deep in the Tea Party Kool-Aid to win in hashtag moderate swing state Pennsylvania"

Well he ended up becoming a "moderate" after all 

[wbrocks67]

Very disturbing news. I'm not worried too much about Pete losing the election, because for all his faults he is talented and will likely beat whatever ghoul he's up against in a midterm, but this is another slap in the face to the growing number of people who used to be Democrats. It's only going to get harder to win these people back. And the Dems must win them back, there is no future without at least some of the Obama-Trump, Hillary-Trump, or Biden-Trump voters. Who else can they even persuade at this point?

Pete could absolutely lose to someone like Huizenga or Rogers. GOP just needs a non-crazy normie but MAGA friendly enough Republican who will point out Pete an Ivy leaguer who isn't one of them.

Nah

Devils is absolutely right, we CANNOT afford to get hubristic and risk losing this seat (a v real risk). MI is a swing state that voted for Trump the last election, there's no way to be CERTAIN that 2026 will be a redux 2018 (could be the reverse 2022, even...), and as the last midterms showed, candidate quality does indeed matter. And as Devils said Dems aren't totally immune from bad candidates and the GOP is far from devoid of good ones.

Fwiw my personal thoughts:
- I like Pete, but carpetbagging and running here is absolutely the wrong move for both him and for the Dems as a whole; his campaign has got to be stymied in the primary.
- McMorrow's also absolutely overhyped and Dems can and really should do better than her. Genuinely curious, any compelling reasons to support her aside from her 15 minutes of fame and being the lesser of two mediocrities? We don't need a paper tiger or the candidate of the online left. Pick someone more relatable / proven to be good at retail politics even if they are less glamorous.
- Rogers is a decent candidate, which I suppose is the most one can ask of the MIGOP, but he's not the only option MIGOP has. As far as "do no harm" goes he checks the box, but like...he has been out of office for over a decade atp. Idk, I just think somebody more contemporary could be even better from the MIGOP's perspective. Not worth risking a split vote (and getting another Dixon or wtv) though, so if Rogers runs they prob should just rally around behind him.

Again, I'm not even a huge stan of McMorrow or something but it feels like people are just making stuff up. She seems like a normie Dem. MI'ers can confirm or deny. Where is the proof that she's medicore or on the same level as Pete in any way? Where is she not relatable? Where is she not good at retail campaigning? People need to stop attributing stuff to certain candidates out of thin air.

[Schumer can go f*** himself!]

Very disturbing news. I'm not worried too much about Pete losing the election, because for all his faults he is talented and will likely beat whatever ghoul he's up against in a midterm, but this is another slap in the face to the growing number of people who used to be Democrats. It's only going to get harder to win these people back. And the Dems must win them back, there is no future without at least some of the Obama-Trump, Hillary-Trump, or Biden-Trump voters. Who else can they even persuade at this point?

Pete could absolutely lose to someone like Huizenga or Rogers. GOP just needs a non-crazy normie but MAGA friendly enough Republican who will point out Pete an Ivy leaguer who isn't one of them.

Nah

Devils is absolutely right, we CANNOT afford to get hubristic and risk losing this seat (a v real risk). MI is a swing state that voted for Trump the last election, there's no way to be CERTAIN that 2026 will be a redux 2018 (could be the reverse 2022, even...), and as the last midterms showed, candidate quality does indeed matter. And as Devils said Dems aren't totally immune from bad candidates and the GOP is far from devoid of good ones.

Fwiw my personal thoughts:
- I like Pete, but carpetbagging and running here is absolutely the wrong move for both him and for the Dems as a whole; his campaign has got to be stymied in the primary.
- McMorrow's also absolutely overhyped and Dems can and really should do better than her. Genuinely curious, any compelling reasons to support her aside from her 15 minutes of fame and being the lesser of two mediocrities? We don't need a paper tiger or the candidate of the online left. Pick someone more relatable / proven to be good at retail politics even if they are less glamorous.
- Rogers is a decent candidate, which I suppose is the most one can ask of the MIGOP, but he's not the only option MIGOP has. As far as "do no harm" goes he checks the box, but like...he has been out of office for over a decade atp. Idk, I just think somebody more contemporary could be even better from the MIGOP's perspective. Not worth risking a split vote (and getting another Dixon or wtv) though, so if Rogers runs they prob should just rally around behind him.

Respectfully, the fact that you’re criticizing Buttigieg for carpetbagging while in the same post calling frigging Mike Rogers a decent candidate really says it all

[Eastern Washington Democrat]

Frankly I think most of you guys are being slightly ridiculous and pessimistic when it comes to Pete.

He's one of the most effective communicators in the entire Democratic Party, during his 2020 primary run he did quite well with rural and white voters (groups Ds need to turnaround their declining support among, fast), and has a compelling background that can appeal to a wide variety of constituencies (veteran, gay, married with two young kids).

With regards to the carpetbagging issue, he could easily just say, "Like many busy young families, we needed to move to be closer to family. I grew up 15 minutes from Michigan and my husband's family has been here for generations - Midwest Values are My Values."

[Spectator]

Frankly I think most of you guys are being slightly ridiculous and pessimistic when it comes to Pete.

He's one of the most effective communicators in the entire Democratic Party, during his 2020 primary run he did quite well with rural and white voters (groups Ds need to turnaround their declining support among, fast), and has a compelling background that can appeal to a wide variety of constituencies (veteran, gay, married with two young kids).

With regards to the carpetbagging issue, he could easily just say, "Like many busy young families, we needed to move to be closer to family. I grew up 15 minutes from Michigan and my husband's family has been here for generations - Midwest Values are My Values."

If Dems want to think the voters are stupid enough to but that, sure.

[henster]

Frankly I think most of you guys are being slightly ridiculous and pessimistic when it comes to Pete.

He's one of the most effective communicators in the entire Democratic Party, during his 2020 primary run he did quite well with rural and white voters (groups Ds need to turnaround their declining support among, fast), and has a compelling background that can appeal to a wide variety of constituencies (veteran, gay, married with two young kids).

With regards to the carpetbagging issue, he could easily just say, "Like many busy young families, we needed to move to be closer to family. I grew up 15 minutes from Michigan and my husband's family has been here for generations - Midwest Values are My Values."

You are basing this off of two primaries that were a fraction of the total electorate in those states. He has never won a statewide GE ever so his entire appeal is hypothetical.

[Roll Roons]

Snip

Respectfully, the fact that you’re criticizing Buttigieg for carpetbagging while in the same post calling frigging Mike Rogers a decent candidate really says it all

Oh, come on. I know you have this weird hate boner for Rogers but these situations are not comparable in the slightest.

Yes, Rogers did move to Florida after retiring from the House, but Michigan is where he was born and raised and where he was elected as a state senator and a Congressman.

Pete is not from Michigan and has never held office there, and the only reason he's even considering this race is that his actual home state is not winnable for Democrats.

[Just Some Guy]

Snip

Respectfully, the fact that you’re criticizing Buttigieg for carpetbagging while in the same post calling frigging Mike Rogers a decent candidate really says it all

Oh, come on. I know you have this weird hate boner for Rogers but these situations are not comparable in the slightest.

Yes, Rogers did move to Florida after retiring from the House, but Michigan is where he was born and raised and where he was elected as a state senator and a Congressman.

Pete is not from Michigan and has never held office there, and the only reason he's even considering this race is that his actual home state is not winnable for Democrats.

And it's not like he didn't try before.

Richard Mourdock kicked his ass(62-37%) back in 2010 in the treasurer race.

[CentristRepublican]

Very disturbing news. I'm not worried too much about Pete losing the election, because for all his faults he is talented and will likely beat whatever ghoul he's up against in a midterm, but this is another slap in the face to the growing number of people who used to be Democrats. It's only going to get harder to win these people back. And the Dems must win them back, there is no future without at least some of the Obama-Trump, Hillary-Trump, or Biden-Trump voters. Who else can they even persuade at this point?

Pete could absolutely lose to someone like Huizenga or Rogers. GOP just needs a non-crazy normie but MAGA friendly enough Republican who will point out Pete an Ivy leaguer who isn't one of them.

Nah

Devils is absolutely right, we CANNOT afford to get hubristic and risk losing this seat (a v real risk). MI is a swing state that voted for Trump the last election, there's no way to be CERTAIN that 2026 will be a redux 2018 (could be the reverse 2022, even...), and as the last midterms showed, candidate quality does indeed matter. And as Devils said Dems aren't totally immune from bad candidates and the GOP is far from devoid of good ones.

Fwiw my personal thoughts:
- I like Pete, but carpetbagging and running here is absolutely the wrong move for both him and for the Dems as a whole; his campaign has got to be stymied in the primary.
- McMorrow's also absolutely overhyped and Dems can and really should do better than her. Genuinely curious, any compelling reasons to support her aside from her 15 minutes of fame and being the lesser of two mediocrities? We don't need a paper tiger or the candidate of the online left. Pick someone more relatable / proven to be good at retail politics even if they are less glamorous.
- Rogers is a decent candidate, which I suppose is the most one can ask of the MIGOP, but he's not the only option MIGOP has. As far as "do no harm" goes he checks the box, but like...he has been out of office for over a decade atp. Idk, I just think somebody more contemporary could be even better from the MIGOP's perspective. Not worth risking a split vote (and getting another Dixon or wtv) though, so if Rogers runs they prob should just rally around behind him.

Respectfully, the fact that you’re criticizing Buttigieg for carpetbagging while in the same post calling frigging Mike Rogers a decent candidate really says it all

Partisan preferences aside, I do stand by the fact that Rogers is at least a stronger candidate than Buttigieg (in Michigan), yes. And the fact that candidate quality can in fact make or break an election in a true swing state like MI, "national environment" notwithstanding.

Like hello. Fetterman won in spite of being frankly a meh candidate (especially post-stroke) in a year that on paper should've been at least nominally GOP friendly. Not because his opponent was scandal-ridden or particularly far-right (at least not overtly so like Mastriano), but because it was an out-of-touch carpetbagger from next door.

If you REALLY fail to see ANY parallels and continue to insist that the GOP doesn't even stand a chance in this race, then that says a whole lot more about you than me.

PS: I also pretty clearly said that while he's good by MIGOP standards today, he's still not the clear best choice or anything. Not sure how you read/interpreted my post to take away something entirely different from that.

[CentristRepublican]

Snip

Respectfully, the fact that you’re criticizing Buttigieg for carpetbagging while in the same post calling frigging Mike Rogers a decent candidate really says it all

Oh, come on. I know you have this weird hate boner for Rogers but these situations are not comparable in the slightest.

Yes, Rogers did move to Florida after retiring from the House, but Michigan is where he was born and raised and where he was elected as a state senator and a Congressman.

Pete is not from Michigan and has never held office there, and the only reason he's even considering this race is that his actual home state is not winnable for Democrats.

Yep, agreed with this as well. Was gonna point out to X the difference between being born and raised in a state (and representing it in Congress for over a decade!) and moving to a state just a few years before seeking elected office therein, but I wasn't sure if his callout of Rogers was re: carpetbagging allegations (which, I agree, are pretty laughable in Rogers' case - really not something he should or could be successfully attacked on) or something else.

[Just Some Guy]

Snip

Respectfully, the fact that you’re criticizing Buttigieg for carpetbagging while in the same post calling frigging Mike Rogers a decent candidate really says it all

Oh, come on. I know you have this weird hate boner for Rogers but these situations are not comparable in the slightest.

Yes, Rogers did move to Florida after retiring from the House, but Michigan is where he was born and raised and where he was elected as a state senator and a Congressman.

Pete is not from Michigan and has never held office there, and the only reason he's even considering this race is that his actual home state is not winnable for Democrats.

Yep, agreed with this as well. Was gonna point out to X the difference between being born and raised in a state (and representing it in Congress for over a decade!) and moving to a state just a few years before seeking elected office therein, but I wasn't sure if his callout of Rogers was re: carpetbagging allegations (which, I agree, are pretty laughable in Rogers' case - really not something he should or could be successfully attacked on) or something else.

Just like Sheehy. Was always a weird line to use against him as well.

[Spectator]

Snip

Respectfully, the fact that you’re criticizing Buttigieg for carpetbagging while in the same post calling frigging Mike Rogers a decent candidate really says it all

Oh, come on. I know you have this weird hate boner for Rogers but these situations are not comparable in the slightest.

Yes, Rogers did move to Florida after retiring from the House, but Michigan is where he was born and raised and where he was elected as a state senator and a Congressman.

Pete is not from Michigan and has never held office there, and the only reason he's even considering this race is that his actual home state is not winnable for Democrats.

Yep, agreed with this as well. Was gonna point out to X the difference between being born and raised in a state (and representing it in Congress for over a decade!) and moving to a state just a few years before seeking elected office therein, but I wasn't sure if his callout of Rogers was re: carpetbagging allegations (which, I agree, are pretty laughable in Rogers' case - really not something he should or could be successfully attacked on) or something else.

Just like Sheehy. Was always a weird line to use against him as well.

Sheehy had lived in Montana for about 10 years at that point which was fairly defensible, but Montana is also a state that strikes me as uniquely skeptical of outsiders. 10 years in most other states is probably just fine. Military service probably also softens the outsider attacks a lot too since you don’t have much say where you can live.

Buttigieg’s hypothetical carpetbagging is pretty egregious and probably much worse than Sam Brown or Tim Sheehy or on par with Dr. Oz. It’s clear he doesn’t care about Michigan for the sake of just representing it in the Senate. It’s literally Scott Brown: his home state is a no-go so he sought greener pastures.

[Just Some Guy]

Snip

Respectfully, the fact that you’re criticizing Buttigieg for carpetbagging while in the same post calling frigging Mike Rogers a decent candidate really says it all

Oh, come on. I know you have this weird hate boner for Rogers but these situations are not comparable in the slightest.

Yes, Rogers did move to Florida after retiring from the House, but Michigan is where he was born and raised and where he was elected as a state senator and a Congressman.

Pete is not from Michigan and has never held office there, and the only reason he's even considering this race is that his actual home state is not winnable for Democrats.

Yep, agreed with this as well. Was gonna point out to X the difference between being born and raised in a state (and representing it in Congress for over a decade!) and moving to a state just a few years before seeking elected office therein, but I wasn't sure if his callout of Rogers was re: carpetbagging allegations (which, I agree, are pretty laughable in Rogers' case - really not something he should or could be successfully attacked on) or something else.

Just like Sheehy. Was always a weird line to use against him as well.

Sheehy had lived in Montana for about 10 years at that point which was fairly defensible, but Montana is also a state that strikes me as uniquely skeptical of outsiders. 10 years in most other states is probably just fine. Military service probably also softens the outsider attacks a lot too since you don’t have much say where you can live.

Buttigieg’s hypothetical carpetbagging is pretty egregious and probably much worse than Sam Brown or Tim Sheehy or on par with Dr. Oz. It’s clear he doesn’t care about Michigan for the sake of just representing it in the Senate. It’s literally Scott Brown: his home state is a no-go so he sought greener pastures.

He's also trying to run for the presidency towards the end of this decade into the next; not really even trying to hide that fact. I do find it funny that he thinks he has a shot though given him being a homosexual. Black men aren't really big fans of that.