Pete, what were you thinking?

[DURHAM D]

Link to tweet

[Cha]

1. He's not.. Thank you for posting this, Durham..

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[highplainsdem]

9. I agree, Cha. He's not thinking when he makes statements like that. Very disappointing.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

70. Mayor Pete disrespected Hillary for calling her Hillary?! Now, I've heard EVERYTHING!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Stellar]

178. I guess it's better then being known as a predator...

and that screws up your record as well as your life. He will probably correct that.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

183. Well, that's for sure!! Love Mayor Pete... not surprised he's starting to get

the "Bernie treatment" as he begins to climb in the polls. I can't believe he calls Hillary by her first name!! It's an outage I tell you... Pete's finished!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Stellar]

189. LOL, for sure! nt

[Honeycombe8]

299. There's still time! Don't give up hope! There's time for them all to be accused....

of being predators. Never fear.

It's getting to be such that if you're running for anything, there's a "you, too" right around the corner, just for you!

[BlueStater]

109. He's routinely referred to by his first name/nickname.

He probably doesn't think of it as being disrespectful. Meh.

Also, what do their ages have to do with anything?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

185. Zero, it's called the "Bernie treatment"...that's when a progressive begins to climb in the polls.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Jake Stern]

205. It's what's known as "Double Standards"

Guarantee there wouldn't be nearly as much outrage if Cory Booker had referred to Hillary Clinton by her first name.

[pangaia]

253. Ummm.. just his calling her Hillary doesn't bother me so much....

If for no other reason than just about everyone calls her Hillary,.. like Bernie, Barack, etc.....for better or for worse....
It is almost .. eh I don;t know what it is almost :&gt ))

His criticism of her does bother me, however.

But I understanding your feeling about it for sure...

[thesquanderer]

270. Heck, she *campaigned* as Hillary.

Tons of people here refer to her as Hillary as well.

If she were actually in the 2020 race, then I could see it a bit differently. But she's not.

[pangaia]

280. ++

[tymorial]

254. With all due respect Cha... her name and age difference?

Give me a break. I will never get behind this argument or that statement of fact is somehow wrong. Clinton has said wrong things and there is no arguing against this. I supported her of course but a lot of people were and are bothered by remarks she has made. Pointing them out does not a bad candidate make. If that gets this post deleted so be it. I stand by this 100%

[Cha]

265. Yeah, well a lot of us are "bothered by remarks"

Buttigieg has made..

I stand by this..

Link to tweet

[msongs]

2. did he do something? nt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

187. Yeah, he's a progressive who's kickin ass in the polls... therefore he's guilty!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[rogue emissary]

3. I think he's going for the "I hate Hillary" crowd.

Pretty sure Bernie and Gabbard have those voters wrapped up.

[Cha]

7. Definitely.

Link to tweet

[lunamagica]

25. This is disgusting Cha. According to trump, the big peoblems in our economy and democracy were

created by immigration and POC. MAGA meant "Make America Whiter".

Shame on Buttigieg. I hope this kills his chances.

[Cha]

29. "According to trump, the big peoblems in our economy and democracy were created by immigration and

POC. MAGA meant "Make America Whiter"."

That's right, Luna! Buttigieg is puffing up trump and Dissing Hillary.

I don't care if the quote is 2 1/2 months old.. it's in this campaign cycle.

Lots on twitter aren't impressed with him now, either.. if you read the tweets under the original..

Link to tweet

[lunamagica]

32. Right, Cha. Saying that the quote is irrelevant bercause is a month old is laugahble

Good to see that many feel the way we do. I hope this is it for him

[betsuni]

40. When people still claim HRC is racist because of a word she said in a speech decades ago,

we can damn well chat about something somebody said a couple of months ago.

Excuse me for a moment:

[lunamagica]

41. IKR? But the rules are always different for Hillary.

[Me.]

145. Totally There With You Betsuni

[mcar]

192. Just a little double standard there

[calimary]

285. Yeah no shit.

[calimary]

295. Yep. No freakin' kidding, betsuni.

Haters gonna hate. And in this particular case, I will NEVER understand why.

[delisen]

73. Revealng his bias for and against

[calimary]

284. And what the hell is so wrong about saying America was already great?

It certainly was before The Asset got his hands on it.

What the fuck did Buttigieg mean by that? Hillary was ALWAYS great, too, Mayor Pete. Maybe you should take a lesson and try to measure up.

Fuck! That stupid shitty and entirely unnecessary wisecrack is just damned insulting!

[Cha]

288. Buttigieg's plan to insult and divide is working

perfectly, calimary.

Link to tweet

[calimary]

296. THIS!

[fleabiscuit]

302. Nails it. The great white nope.

[ehrnst]

304. So you don't think Russia or voter suppression had anything to do with Trump getting elected?

Last edited Mon Apr 1, 2019, 09:04 AM - Edit history (1)

Or Gerrymandering has nothing whatsoever to do with making it much harder to elect a Democrat?

The most qualified candidate for POTUS in history was just a shill for Wall Street so she could remain a "comfortable multimillionaire?" That same candidate who actually got affordable health care into existence for kids via CHIP and refused an offer at a law firm after Yale law school to work with Marian Wright Edelman knocking on doors in MS to investigate educational gaps for low income minority children? That candidate?

I guess most of the current Dem candidates (the millionaires in particular) are just "status quo" as well?

And those 30 million that got health care under the ACA have nothing whatsoever to thank the Democratic party for?

Everything that is wrong with country this going back decades is BECAUSE DEMOCRATS?

[ehrnst]

306. You supported my points about your post for me.

Crosscheck not in the media except for Greg Palast? One only needs to google to prove you wrong on that:

Effort to purge millions from voter rolls
https://www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/effort-to-purge-millions-from-voter-rolls-753083459623


The GOP’s Stealth War Against Voters
Will an anti-voter-fraud program designed by one of Trump’s advisers deny tens of thousands their right to vote in November?

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/the-gops-stealth-war-against-voters-247905/

Democrats said nothing? Wrong again.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/officials-investigating-why-126000-voters-were-purged-from-ny-rolls

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-met-bruce-rauner-crosscheck-russian-hackers-20180716-story.html

To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail, eh?


False dillema fallacy: Agree lockstep with all your "little explanations (accusations)" bashing Democrats OR it's saying Democrats are "blaming everyone else under the sun."

[ehrnst]

309. Because it doesn't hammer Democrats for everything wrong in this country?

Your furious claims about the media concerning Interstate Cross check were easily disproven with a simple Google search.

And you say I'm the one that's in denial of daily reality?

Jill Stein talking points don't go far here on DU.

[ehrnst]

313. You seem familiar enough with things here.

[BumRushDaShow]

307. To your query

Everything that is wrong with country this going back decades is BECAUSE DEMOCRATS?

Where did I say this? Can you quote where I said this? Oh wait, it's not in my post, is it?

It's pretty much you wrote here -

All of this started long, long before Trump ever was elected. It dates back to at least the 1980's. Thinking everything was hunky-dory until Trump got into office is the REASON Democrats lost the House, the Senate, the White House, two-thirds of the governorships and 69 out of 99 states houses and legislatures from coast to coast. When the country is in the state I just described and the party's presidential candidate, a comfortable multimillionaire herself, is going around saying that the country is already great and runs on a continuation of business as usual, a desperate population will be tricked into voting for a gas lighting conman like Trump, who -although lying through his teeth- at least is promising them change.

And did you somehow miss 2018 (and the below has obviously been updated since)?

2018 midterms Nov. 19, 2018

The 2018 Midterms Were a Solid Democratic Win, Not a Split Decision
By Ed Kilgore

<...>

Democrats have gained at least 37 net House seats, 14 more than they needed to gain control of the chamber; of the four races still unresolved, they lead in one district (New York’s 22nd) and trail in three (Georgia’s Seventh, New York’s 27th, and Utah’s Fourth). A 38-seat shift would represent the fourth largest in midterms in the last half-century (Democrats won 48 seats in 1974, while Republicans won 52 seats in 1994 and 63 in 2010), and seven more than Democrats won the last time they flipped control of the House, in 2006. When it’s all said and done Democrats will probably have won the national House popular vote by a bit more than 7 points; Republicans won it by just under one percent in 2016, and by a little under 6 percent in 2014.

Democrats also climbed out of a very deep hole they had dug for themselves in state elections. They picked up seven net governorships out of 36 on the ballot, giving them 23, even though they lost close, winnable races in Florida, Georgia, Iowa, and Ohio. They also won control of seven state legislative chambers, and made some progress toward busting up Republican “trifecta” control of state governments (they’ll have another chance in 2020):

Entering the 2018 midterm election, Republicans had a +14 state trifecta lead: of 34 states with trifectas, 26 were Republican and eight were Democratic. But after the votes were counted, Democrats increased their trifecta total with a net gain of six, and Republicans declined to 23 trifectas (a net loss of three). States with divided government (i.e., no trifecta for either major party) declined to 13.

Far under the radar screen, Democrats flipped four state attorney general offices, and two secretaries of State.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/11/2018-midterms-democratic-win.html

Time to rejigger your arguments to modern times.

[ehrnst]

311. Attacking a straw man...

No one ran an "everything is great" campaign.

Luckily our current crop of presidential candidates is, for the most part, getting that.

Even the millionaires?

[BumRushDaShow]

314. In response

That's not at all what I wrote.

But it is what you summarized as the conclusion of your missive.

It's pretty much you wrote here -



I wrote what I wrote; not your skewed interpretation of what I wrote.

You "wrote" one set of info to start but then came up with a conclusion that left out a whole bunch of variables.

Democrats won in 2018, in a 'swing' election, in reaction to Trump.

What do you mean by "swing election"? It was a mid-term election that actually had some record turnout bringing about significant results in favor of the Democratic Party's embrace of a grassroots strategy - not just at the federal level but on down the ticket into the state and municipal elections. In essence, the 2018 turnout was unprecedented -

The 2018 midterms had the highest turnout since before World War I
How Trump made political engagement great again.
By Ella [e-mail] Dec 10, 2018, 7:30am EST

Americans are more civically engaged than they have been in more than 100 years.

The two years between President Donald Trump’s win in 2016 and the 2018 midterms ushered in a new era of political engagement in America, not seen since the early 1900s and the 1960s civil rights and anti-war movements.

That culminated in November’s midterm elections. While House Democrats picked up 40 seats in a wave election (they didn’t fare nearly as well in the Senate), an important number to focus on is the sheer number of people who voted in 2018, compared to past midterms.

50.1 percent of the voting-eligible population in the US turned out to cast their ballots in this year’s midterms, according to the United States Elections Project, a database about the United States electoral system run by University of Florida political science professor Michael McDonald. In raw numbers, that means 118,044,470 votes were cast.

The oft-mentioned "the party who controls the WH always loses seats in the mid-terms" "swing" suggestion is not always significant and usually includes a major drop in voter turnout. This past election had the opposite underlying effect of a record mid-year turnout.

The problem with that is that it can just as easily swing back the other way. We need sustained wins that are not dependent on how big of a failure the other party is. It's time to address the reality I laid out in my original comment. You can't run an "everything is great" campaign in an environment like that. Luckily our current crop of presidential candidates is, for the most part, getting that.

I don't disagree with that, but that is not what you were originally arguing. You pretty much dismissed what just happened 5 months ago and preferred to go back before the 2016 election with a dig, not even acknowledging any changes, and citing stats that are no longer up to date. There are grassroots orgs out there who are actually teaching people how to run for office and organize for candidates and these people are not GOPers. They are Democrats. They have put an infrastructure in place for the future and that is what will bolster getting votes out when it comes time for the top-of-the-ticket election in 2020.

[NastyRiffraff]

259. I was actually looking at Pete

But comparing Hillary Clinton (unfavorably!!) to Donald Trump is definitely a deal-breaker for me.

Cha

[PeaceFan]

55. He endorsed Hillary anyway.

Superficially it appears like shameless pandering. I am not sure what he was actually thinking when he said it.

[rogue emissary]

216. I know the article reference that he setup an event for her.

The journalist injected their opinion that he wasn't that thrilled with Clinton.

[PeaceFan]

260. He was thrilled enough to go campaigning for her over Bernie.

It's easy to say this stuff after the fact. My guess is he'd probably be talking about what a wonderful job Hillary did had she gotten elected.

[Renew Deal]

242. I think that's a misunderstanding of what he's saying

He’s basically saying that Hillary didn’t realize the election was about change

[rogue emissary]

245. I understood it fine.

He's been critical of her campaign and really should have answered like Hickenlooper's below quote.

div class="excerpt"]
So what did you learn from Secretary Clinton herself, and from the ’16 experience? You spent some time with her, she went out to Colorado a few times.

She is one of the smartest policy experts on almost anything. Things that I go do deep dives in. On apprenticeships, and how we’re going to train the workforce of the future, she could go back into the 1980s and go back to the whole evolution of workforce programs in both the federal government and various state governments. Um, but I also saw that, you know, trying to answer all the policy things in the campaign is, it’s a burden. It means you give these long speeches that not everybody buys into.

You know, let’s be honest. Secretary Clinton had a foreign government hack into her email and publicize it. Well, WikiLeaks hacked into it. The foreign government went in and tried to, you know, take down her campaign through, you know, fake news and bots and all that social media effort. She had the FBI actually come out and make allegations ten days before the election, that turned out to be baseless. No one’s ever had that, you know, not to mention billions of dollars in attack ads that had been going on for several years against her. And she still won the popular vote, and she had gotten close to winning the Electoral College. People are quick to criticize her, but, you know, I think by a lot of measures, despite all those obstacles, she almost won.So I’m not gonna criticize her.

[Cha]

269. Wow.. Thank You for that,

rogue emissary!

If Buttigieg plan was to be divisive it worked.

Mahalo for Gov Hickenlooper's response!

[StevieM]

267. Yep. That sums it up nicely. (eom)

[calimary]

287. If he does that, he won't get me.

[mr_lebowski]

4. Oh, that is a major misstep ...

TBH even though it's WP, I think I'd like to hear the recording to make sure this is accurate, and hear the full context.

As it looks ATM, this was NOT a good idea. First major flub-up from PB ... he has time to clarify and recover. Assuming this isn't really how he feels ... cause if so ... major disappointment.

He's been so sure-footed, and you could make something approaching this point ... in a WAY WAY more tactful way ... one that's not going to piss off basically nearly every Democrat ... and give Trump something to crow about.

[Celerity]

12. 2 and half month old article, and he has much more fully fleshed

all this out since then. Watch some of the many videos posted on here lately.

[Control-Z]

52. Do the videos explain these remarks?

If they do I'll give them my time. If not, I won't.

This wasn't a little misspeak. This was a huge, ugly, sentiment. I am so disappointed if it's true. So disappointed.

[Celerity]

56. yes, absolutely they address the entire thing in far more depth

This entire thread here came from from a pull quote from an old tweet and an even older older article that some witter bot chain latched onto in Twitter a few hours ago.

I ran all the comments from the Tweet (now up to 440, they were 280 an hour or so ago) and NONE or almost none came before today, and many are from bots or trolls who are completely misrepresenting Buttigieg, or outright lying. Typical Twitter garbage play. His shooting up in the polls will bring thsi type of shite a lot more I am sure. It happens to all our candidates (I guess its a right of passage for Buttigieg now, lolol), all the time, unfortunately. Twitter is a sewer.

[Control-Z]

60. I would really appreciate it if you

would give us links to just 2 videos that address the issue directly. I don't want 10 links that might possibly have something. I'm willing to watch 2, at the most, to start.

I'll watch more if the first two are persuasive.

I'm sorry if I appear demanding but this is not just with Buttigieg. I'm also wrestling with Klobuchar's treatment of her staff, as an example. I'm not kidding. Treating people badly is a deal breaker for me.

Thank you in advance.

[Celerity]

67. here you go

Last edited Sat Mar 30, 2019, 08:08 AM - Edit history (1)

Pete Buttigieg On Political Honesty, His Black Agenda, Open Homosexuality + More

and here are some articles that also specifically talk about white racism and about social and racial justice being key


How Democrats can defeat Trump and his ugly ideas, according to Pete Buttigieg

Buttigieg: “I don’t want this to slide into the idea that some of these racist behaviors can be excused because they can be connected to economic issues.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128742675



Buttigieg: 'Americans are being radicalized' by Trump administration

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/436340-buttigieg-americans-are-being-radicalized-by-trump-administration

"And I think a lot of Americans are being radicalized by this administration. The experience of disruption that’s gone on, especially in the interior, has obviously made it more fertile to being taken advantage of by people like this president," he said.

Buttigieg added, however, that he thinks "improving our economic condition" and achieving racial and social justice "go hand in hand."

Pete Buttigieg Says Mike Pence Is ‘At Best Complicit’ In White Nationalism Revival

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/pete-buttigieg-mike-pence-white-nationalism_n_5c9c9722e4b07c886631526b

“But I think the moment you come on board with a project like the Trump campaign or the Trump-Pence administration, you are at best complicit in the process that has given cover for flourishing and the resurgence of white nationalism in our midst,” Buttigieg added.

Pete Buttigieg tells SC voters 2020 presidential race is about justice

https://www.postandcourier.com/politics/pete-buttigieg-tells-sc-voters-presidential-race-is-about-justice/article_2e4d015a-4d82-11e9-854e-071b072ed647.html

snip

“Democracy is on the ballot in 2020,” he said.

Buttigieg said Democrats need more younger leaders who understand racial and social justice as well as more leaders from Republican-dominated states.

“We cannot continue to be regarded as a party that is only for the deepest blue communities,” he said. “There is written nowhere that a state like South Carolina or Indiana or anywhere else has to be conservative forever.”

Buttigieg, who took military training in Columbia before deploying to Afghanistan with the Navy Reserve, said Republicans are not willing to tackle the security issues caused by climate change, computer hackers and white nationalists.

“White nationalism is a deadly threat that has claimed lives as far away as New Zealand and as close to home as Charleston,” he said. “So let’s do something about that.”

[IndianaDave]

79. Celerity - You Have Done an Excellent Service to the Truth Today!

I'm very impressed with your persistence in helping to diffuse the distorted interpretation of Pete's remarks. It's certainly valid for people to question what he said, but some of the conclusions people are drawing are really bizarre. I believe you have helped a lot of folks, but I think we lost some support tonight. Still, you deserve to be complimented for clarifying some really odd interpretations. I think most people will maintain an open mind if they take a little time to see what Pete stands for, and in the end, I'm hopeful that Pete Buttigieg will be our next President.

Also, when you have a chance, please check out Response 63 on this thread. I tried to help. Don't know if it will have any effect.

Best wishes - IndianaDave

[Celerity]

81. awww thanks!

I am just a stickler for truthful and cogent debate. Drive-by soundbites drive me crazy, lol. I am young but I have never seen such a complete package as Buttigieg run before, and he inspires me. I love the intellectual yet well-round life he projects, plus the inclusiveness and the humility he brings.

As I said around a week ago, one would would have to venture to Mars to find a canyon large enough to illustrate the gulf at all levels between Trump and Pete.

[IndianaDave]

82. I Totally Agree with You. I can hardly wait to see Pete debate Trump. Pure Comedy!

[SWBTATTReg]

202. Thanks for posting. I was disappointed to see some DUers jump on M. Pete and yank ...

donations, etc. for a comment in which perhaps he should have gotten the right to clarify? Something called 'benefit of the doubt?'. Especially when you look at his age and his prior comment in that his generation is probably the first generation that will get less/or already is expecting less from their parents/grandparents/etc. So I think if allowed to clarify, I think he'll come w/ a rationale for this statement.

It's always been the reverse. Mom / dad / grandparents / etc. always tried to leave our offspring more than what we had.

[lapucelle]

130. Not sure what Pete's problem with HRC's statement is.

“We’ve seen him insult women, we’ve seen him rate women on their appearance, we’ve seen him embarrass women on Twitter and TV,” Clinton said at Sunday night’s debate. “But it’s not only women.”

“Because he has also targeted immigrants, African-Americans, Latinos, people with disabilities, and so many others,” the Democratic nominee said. “So this is who Donald Trump is.”

“This is not who we are,” Clinton said, with Trump, looking intently at her on stage. “I want to send the message. ... America is already is great. But we are great because we are good, and we will respect each other.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/09/clinton-blasts-trump-we-are-great-because-we-are-good.html

Link to tweet

[betsuni]

137. +1

[lapucelle]

147. I just read the whole article. I doubt I'll be be voting for him

A return to the Clinton and Obama style of centrist incrementalism, he says, will invite disaster just as surely in 2020.

snip=========================================

I [interviewer Bob Moser] mention that the day before, Biden, on his own book tour, had proclaimed himself “the most qualified person in the country to be president.” Buttigieg laughs. “So was Hillary,” he says. Game on.

Facile, divisive, band-wagon rhetoric.

Thank you, next.

[betsuni]

156. Am waiting to hear "establishment" -- will not be long if "centrist incrementalism"

is on the table.

[thesquanderer]

271. He's potentially running against Biden. So...

...if Biden is going to sell himself as "most qualified," then isn't it reasonable for a competitor to point out that, as we've seen, most qualified doesn't always win in November? It's not enough.

[Celerity]

144. If your life was not great, if you were feeling disconnected and alienated (regardless of race,

ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, profession, etc) and if you felt insecure, then it could be seen as not speaking to your concerns.

It also was not good messaging as it was projected into the face of a 'change election'. It literally could be perceived as saying the status quo was already great, when for a very very diverse group of people it was not.For example, A-A voting levels cratered from not just 2012, but from even 2004 levels, see an extensive discussion of that here ( https://www.democraticunderground.com/128736610#post18 )

The dialectic was moved from what we could do to make peoples' lives better to a 'we are not them' and attempts to shame or outright bait (basket of deplorables) when then boiled down into a food fight and many people felt like it was no long about them, they were being talked past, not talked to. Buttigieg never ever went after Sec. Clinton on a personal level, it was a critique of the messaging of the campaign.

[lapucelle]

153. I live in NYS where "incrementalist" Democrat Andrew Cuomo delivered the $15/hr minimum wage,

tuition-free state university, and a codification of Roe v Wade into state law.

I like politicians who know how to get things done.

[betsuni]

162. Those aren't radical ideas nobody heard of before 2016 that needed a revolution to get done?

Hmmmm. How surprising.

[Celerity]

167. getting things done depends on what things are getting done,

especially at national levels.

If bi-partisanship is one's mantra, and the other side is a rabid, RW reactionary, corporatist, plutocratic party with a fair chunk harbouring neo-fascist views and a hatred for much of the bedrock of our party, then I have very little faith that the vast majority of things getting 'done' will be anything remotely acceptable or for the overall betterment of the country.

The insanely bloated defence budgets (larger than even the madman Trump asked for) that passed with overwhelming bi-partisan support are an example.

The same for the horrific recent partial gutting of Dodd-Frank, which was already a watered down regulatory apparatus for the giant banks.

[lapucelle]

168. The mayor slams incrementalist approaches in the WaPo Magazine article.

Our "incrementalist" Democratic governor delivered BIG important changes in NYS.

I like political leaders who get things done more so than those whose message is simply finding fault with the people who've gotten things done.

That's why BS is a non-starter for me. After reading the WaPo Magazine piece, I have some doubts about the mayor as well.

[Celerity]

171. If incrementalism is the main thrust, (and Buttigieg is no wild-eyed radical) then, seeing as

political centre of gravity in the national government (and many many states as well) has slid and is sliding so far to the radical right, it is only going going to be a 1 step-forward-two-stops-back proposition. AND, as I just stated before, much of that incrementalism is going to be even further right when it comes through the prism-of bi-partisanship with a psychotic, almost never bending an inch opposition party.

Buttigieg in that article, to be very specific, was talking about centrist incrementalism as well, which by its very nature (as the 'centre' of the federal government has now catastrophically slid to the right) will again, by its very nature, result in treading water at best, or, as is far more likely, simply slow down, yet maintain the rightward drift.

All you have to do to see his cogent thought on this is to look at his take on healthcare, where he says it is NOT possible to move directly to a Medicare For All paradigm, and that we should simply offer the option to buy-in and let the market place decide.

[lapucelle]

173. All one has to do is look at his record as mayor.

What side of the political spectrum does gentrification as the solution fall on?

[Celerity]

177. that's tosh cherry-picking out one very small part of of the outcomes of his policies

The vast majority of his initiatives have been aimed at the diverse (South Bend is 45% minority) lower and middle classes of the city. The VAST majority. Complete misrepresentation of his record.

[lapucelle]

172. Didn't the mayor rely on gentrification to try to accomplish the goal

of "turning the city around"?

Didn't it take eight years to actually effectuate the start of the turnaround?

Have the lives of POC in South Bend gotten any better?

If "incrementalism" is a problem, why weren't all his goals accomplished in his first term? What goals will he leave unaccomplished when he leaves the office next year?

The debates will be interesting.

https://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2019/03/21/pete-buttigieg-democratic-presidential-hopeful-south-bend-indiana-turnaround-city/3165477002/

[Celerity]

180. African American wages, housing ownership, wealth, employment rates all are up

under his mayorship. You are trying to use a dodgy either/or dialectic (that one is either a radical or a full incrementalist) to falsely posit an unrepresentative (of the actual options and methods) choice.

South Bend was in the top ten 'dead and decaying' cities list (I think it was Newsweek) before he took over. I think he has dome remarkable work for amount of time he has been in office. 80% plus of the voters there agree. Ludicrous to say he could have or should have completed that level of turnaround in one term, given the shape it was in.

[lapucelle]

193. Don't 'splain to me what I am "trying to do".

If the Indy Star is wrong about the realities of life for POV in South Bend, then explain why. If things are improving due to a long-term incrementalist approach, admit it. If centrist gentrification has been a part of his strategy, acknowledge it.

People of color face financial struggles in South Bend at a rate much higher than the national average.

Forty percent of African-American households in the city fall below the poverty line, nearly twice the national average for such households, according to a report by the Washington-based nonprofit advocacy group Prosperity Now. Thirty-three percent of Hispanics are below the poverty line, 10 percentage points above the national average.

https://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2019/03/21/pete-buttigieg-democratic-presidential-hopeful-south-bend-indiana-turnaround-city/3165477002/

[Celerity]

201. I am not 'splainin' anything. I gave clear examples.

Also those figures you quote were far worse before he took office.

As for that quote from that article, here are some others:

As a councilwoman, she said, she brought her community's perspective to the mayor and the city altered course. The city, she said, has begun working more closely and cooperatively with homeowners from her area in the past few years to help them repair, instead of lose, homes.
South Bend began providing more incentives for people in poorer areas to fix up their homes, she said, including a $2 million grant program for home repair and a $2 million program to provide affordable housing.

"I think it's really a mark of a true leader to hear that maybe 'I'm doing something wrong' because, quite frankly, there were a lot of mistakes made," said Williams-Preston, who is running to replace Buttigieg as mayor. "But what happened was he did slow down and he did listen and he did change course. And so many people would dig in their heels and just kind of keep going."

Buttigieg declined to comment specifically on Williams-Preston's situation. He said he did make changes in part after hearing concerns from neighborhoods.

Stacey Odom, a fourth-generation resident of west-side South Bend neighborhood LaSalle Park, poses for a picture on Wednesday, March 13, 2019. When Odom asked Mayor Pete Buttigieg for $300,000 for a grant program to help community members repair their homes, Buttigieg countered with $650,000, which became the Home Repair Pilot Program. "ThatÕs the kind of person you want in office," she said. "Someone who is looking at your best interests. And if theyÕre not, if you go to them and tell them what your interests are, then they will take your concerns and make them their concerns." (Photo: Jenna Watson/IndyStar)

Stacey Odom said she approached the mayor after learning of preliminary plans to redevelop her neighborhood, a historically black area called LaSalle Park, on the city's west side. She said she told Buttigieg the city should help the people currently living there keep their homes.

The redevelopment plans, which she characterized as not having progressed very far, were abandoned. She asked the mayor for $300,000 for a grant program to help homeowners with repairs. He countered, she said, with $650,000.

Odom, whose family has lived in the neighborhood for four generations, was spurred to found a community development corporation that connects area homeowners with resources to help keep them in place. She has an aggressive goal of her own: to repair 60 homes in two west-side neighborhoods and build another 28.

"That’s the kind of person you want in office," she said. "Someone who is looking at your best interests. And if they’re not (at first), if you go to them and tell them what your interests are, then they will take your concerns and make them their concerns."

Buttigieg said the city has decided to budget $1 million annually for such programs.

He said he didn't recall a specific plan to redevelop Odom's neighborhood and thinks the pressures of redevelopment likely are years away in that area.

"You don't see those kinds of pressures yet (on the west side)," he said, "but we’re sensitive to making sure we are ahead of them to make sure that doesn't happen."

snip

Unemployment has dropped from 11.8 percent when Buttigieg was elected to 4.1 percent this year. Many of those new jobs are downtown.

South Bend Regional Chamber of Commerce President Jeff Rea said the benefits have been undeniable as businesses have invested.

"Pete has played a critical role in getting deals done," he said. "He's raised our profile, too. He's well spoken. He's articulate. He's a person you don't mind having sit on the other side of a table from a CEO."

Mark McDonnell, owner of LaSalle Grill, said that people didn't want to live or hang out downtown as recently as a few years ago. They drove to work, he said. And then they drove home. He can't believe the change brought about by the city's investment.

He said traffic has slowed and calmed. Business is booming. The city holds festivals and events that draw in more customers. Nearly 1,000 people live there now, compared to effectively zero when Buttigieg took office.

"It's a heck of a lot better than it was five yeas ago," McDonnell said. "I think Pete started in the core and made a commitment, 'I'm going to improve downtown.' "

[lapucelle]

208. Don't gaslight me about the splainin'.

"You are trying to use a dodgy either/or dialectic..."

[Celerity]

210. Oki buzzword

And the gas isnt coming from me.

[lapucelle]

213. You're an interesting brand ambassador for your candidate.

You've certainly helped me to learn more about the mayor based on the the type of person who supports him.

Have a donut. You've earned one!

[Celerity]

217. donuts are junk food, I will pass, but thanks for the offer!

cheers

[thesquanderer]

272. re: "based on the the type of person who supports him."

I assure you, whoever you end up supporting, there will be jerks supporting that person, as there are every candidate.

[SWBTATTReg]

204. 8 years? Turning around any city would take lots longer, believe me. You can't turn around...

on a dime any major urban area due to embedded interests, vast amounts of overhead infrastructure that's dead/abandoned like a lot of old industrial cities have/funding issues/old laws that may impede unwillingly improvements, etc. But you can get started on a pretty good path...

[lapucelle]

218. Exactly my point. Big changes get made incrementally over time.

That's how "centrist incrementalist" Democrat Andrew Cuomo achieved the $15/hr minimum wage and free state university tuition here in NYS.

[marylandblue]

223. You've got it exactly right. This is another change election, for real this time.

We can't pretend that the only thing wrong is Trump and his supporters. The problem is that too many people supported someone like Trump because they didn't see a viable alternative from the Democrats. It's irrelevant that we on DU thought our Democratic standard-bearer was great. Too many people weren't buying it.

Going into 2020 as if all we have to do is tweak our 2016 message isn't going to work. Clintonism in a different package won't work either.

There is a rot in the soul of America, but not all of us see it. Buttigieg sees it and he's straight up talking about it. Some other candidates see it too, but I think Buttigieg says it best. Even if that means criticizing our 2016 selves or admitting that Trump knows something we don't.

[Qutzupalotl]

229. I think that is a fair asessment. Your point will probably get lost here

or perhaps buried in the outrage.

People want to exaggerate any cricism of HRC’s messaging into somehow being an attack on her candidacy. That’s not what it was for; Pete wants us to improve our messaging, and is saying that particular message sounds like glossing over of America’s problems. What we need more than everyone jumping on a bandwagon is people questioning how that bandwagon is steered.

America both is and is not great. Fantastic in some ways, but mired with longstanding problems like cyclical economic depressions and a history of deep racial division to put it mildly.

The voter hears we’re supposed to say America is Already Great and thinks: but what about my shitty wages? Why can’t I afford healthcare? Why are cops shooting our kids?

To gloss over all that with a soundbite that is in the end a reaction to Trump’s rhetoric is a misstep and tone deaf. Pete is right to call it out.

And yes, it’s first name Pete and first name Hillary. Everyone knows who we’re talking about and it’s not a sign of disrespect, so people should chill about that. And listen to all the candidates explain themselves rather than write people off based on other DUers’ spin about who is worthy.

[Celerity]

231. +1

you said it more clearly than I did

[lunamagica]

211. Thank you Lapucell. Who could disagree with what she said?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

71. I doubt it's even accurate.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[TwilightZone]

5. Ouch.

From what I've seen, he's usually very measured and intelligent. That comment is pretty inexplicable.

His underlying assertion is valid - there are a lot of institutional problems in this country - but tossing Hillary under the bus is kind of bizarre.

[Cha]

6. Under President Obama America was

great compared to trump's fucking campaign.. and now we're living the nightmare.

Link to tweet

[TwilightZone]

11. Agreed.

But there's always room for improvement in a multitude of areas (most of which are constantly under attack by the GOP).

Pete could have said that without throwing Hillary under the bus.

I'd like to see more context, but at first glance, it's not a good look.

[Cha]

18. Yes, always room for improvment..

But, this soundbyte was not a good look for Buttigieg. Why would "trump go around saying America was great".. when he wanted to Destroy the America we had?

I have had nothing against him but when he starts going for the anti-Hillary crowd.. he's lost me.

And, what's up with his calling out "coastal elites"?

Link to tweet

[Merlot]

34. Does the "costal elite" thing mean he thinks all of Calfornia is Silicon Valley?

Pete must not have spent much time here. California is an agricultural state, we have plenty of rural areas and plenty of "red" parts of the state.

This is not a good thing, either that statement or the one about Hillary. Hillary was not my first choice, but I would never say or think what he just said was acceptable.

A lot will happen between now and the primaries, and it's good to find it all out now instead of at crunch time.

[Cha]

58. I have no idea.. but,

I'm past tired of seeing the broad brushing accusations of "elite" thrown out at our Democratic Party.

I agree that the statement about Hillary is unacceptable... saying that about Hillary and "..at least trump didn't go around saying this..".. is a great way to ingratiate yourself to a clueless trump voter but an insult to those who know who trump really is.

trump "went around" being a racist bigoted asshole.

[dsc]

134. No and if either of you had bothered to actually read the less than two page

article, you would know that he was referring to the Trump administration and the fact it is being run by coastal elites running the country into the ground.

[Merlot]

143. Coastal elites is a trope created by the republicans to describe democrats.

My reading comprehension skills are fine, thank you.

[dsc]

155. This is the one and only time in a two page article the word coastal was used

"I think it's the time for this generation to put forward new voices," Buttigieg told KQED Politics Editor Scott Shafer and Political correspondent Marisa Lagos. "And we just haven't had a lot of voices like mine: the voice of the midwestern millennial mayor at a time when our country is being run into the ground by a coastal billionaire who seems to think that the future is somebody else's problem."

https://www.kqed.org/news/11729874/pete-buttigieg-on-coastal-elitism-intergenerational-justice-and-his-game-of-thrones-character

So go ahead and tell me how wonderful your reading skills are again. Just whom is he referring to if not Trump. Go ahead I would love to read just whom you think this was about if not Trump.

[Merlot]

159. Buttigieg said "coastal elites" on Bill Mahar and he was talking about dems.

"coastal billionaire?" No one know how much money trumpft has, so billionaire is questionable. Using "coastal" in the description is a nod to "coastal elites."

And, why so rude?

[dsc]

164. Trump repeatedly called himself a billionaire so clearly Pete was referring to him

again, it was the only use of coastal in a short article. You claimed you had read it and heavily implied that I was out and out lying. Well, I wasn't. BTW I am listening to the interview and he didn't use elite, the journalist did. Yep the journalist lied in their headline. Plain and simple.

Now as to Mahar he did mess up there.

[thesquanderer]

274. Part of the premise of Pete's campaign is midwest appeal. To win back MI, WI, etc.

If you agree with that as a goal, then speaking to those residents "in their language" can be helpful. Face it, referring to a whole bunch of voters as "flyover country" is a real thing.

[lapucelle]

160. I read the article.

Hopefully the mayor will get an opportunity to walk back his simplistic, divisive assessments of HRC and Barack Obama.

[dsc]

166. Please point out where in the article in that twitter thread he mentions either Hillary or Obama

Here is the link. I am waiting.

https://www.kqed.org/news/11729874/pete-buttigieg-on-coastal-elitism-intergenerational-justice-and-his-game-of-thrones-character

[dsc]

100. Clearly neither you nor Ms. Murphy read that article

What the article said was that he stated there was a coastal elite running the country into the ground. And yes, the Trump Administration is a bunch of coastal elites running the country into the ground.

[dalton99a]

133. "Coastal elites" is how Rush Limbaugh talks every day

It's like the "Democrat Party"

[Me.]

149. Sick To Death Of The Voters In NY & Ca. Being Dismissed Out Of Hand

It's ignorant and insulting, not to mention how much of a RWTP it is.


Morning Hoa...

[Cha]

151. G'Day, Me!

I'm about to check out real soon!

Not because I'm "bored".. it's my sleepy icon.

[calimary]

297. Me too. Gotta say, the purported "coastal elites" running the country?

Um - California didn’t go for trump. As far as I can remember, the much unfairly-maligned “left coast” wanted nothing to do with trump/pence, and voted accordingly. Maybe the so-called “coastal elites” being referred to here mean the east coast. That’s where trump Tower is, after all - in New York City (even though New York went for Hillary), and Mar-a-Lago is in Florida - ALSO on the east coast.

Sorry. I was a Californian for 55 years. Now I’m an Oregonian. Still a “left-coaster” and still proud of it. And I can get my dander up pretty fast when it sounds as though California is being maligned. And it seems to me California is always the implicit target of those who diss the “left coast”. Seems to me few people bother to think of Oregon or Washington state in that equation.

[Me.]

301. Born A NYer

Last edited Mon Apr 1, 2019, 11:35 AM - Edit history (1)

Lived in Calif. Back home now.

First, let me say I resent the hell out of the arrogance of those who point at the coasts as the problem. The so-called heartland makes me laugh because there is very little heart there unless you're white and usually a man. They've been running roughshod over this country with their claim that they are the authentic center of the country for as long as anyone can remember. How's that working out for them especially now that they've voted in the man who's most likely to destroy that which they claim is dear to them?

The progress and steps forward in the US generally come from the coasts and I like to remind folks that the first Capitol of the country was New York. He is known to have prayed at Trinity Church, where centuries later firemen slept in pews in the moments when they weren't working on the pile at the destruction of the towers.

“On April 30, 1789, George Washington stood on the portico at Federal Hall, placed his hand on a bible borrowed from the local Masonic lodge, and took the presidential oath of office. The oath was administered by Chancellor of the State of New York, Robert Livingston, who then turned to the crowd and shouted, “Long live George Washington, President of the United States!” As the crowd cheered, Washington turned and walked into the senate chamber to deliver his inaugural address.

After addressing Congress, a weary looking Washington walked up Broadway between rows of saluting militiamen to St. Paul’s Chapel. Martha Washington, as well as both houses of Congress accompanied the new President to the chapel, where the service was presided over by the Episcopal Bishop of New York, Samuel Provoost.”

https://www.trinitywallstreet.org/blogs/archives/april-30-george-washington’s-1789-inauguration


“New York City was the first capital of the United States after the Constitution was ratified in 1788. On April 30, 1789, George Washington was inaugurated as the nation’s first president at Federal Hall, located on Wall Street.”

www.history.com/topics/us-states/new-york

[calimary]

315. And about that "America's heartland" thing...

Um - it WASN’T on the coasts (read West Coast and specifically the Northeast - NOT the entire Atlantic coast) that The Asset found his voter base. He’s in Hillary’s office right now because of, and thanks in a large part to, voters in that so-called “heartland.” Which by now I’ve come to regard as quite the misnomer.

[Me.]

318. Quite

and if the middle is the 'heartland', I'll consider the coasts the soul.

[thesquanderer]

273. Not thinking everything Hillary did was perfect is throwing her under the bus? (n/t)

Last edited Mon Apr 1, 2019, 10:59 AM - Edit history (1)

[calimary]

316. Yeah. We're noticing.

[Celerity]

8. Old tweet & 2 and a half month old article rehash, he has much more fully fleshed

out all these thoughts since then. There are so many posts here where this is talked about including many videos.

When that the article came out he was at 0 or 1% in the polls. Now he is third in Iowa and the Twitter troll chain has latched onto this.

[TwilightZone]

13. Didn't even notice it was two months old.

Thanks for the heads-up. Do you have any links where he specifically addressed that comment? I'm curious as to the context.

[Celerity]

24. sure, here are some links, and in the videos he goes into this subject as well

many articles and video in these links

this one shows a similar twitter troll attack

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128733687

the comments are good at explaining in that thread

he goes into much more depth about the issues where that pull quote in that old tweet cam from


https://www.democraticunderground.com/128739292

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128742575

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128741688

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128737852

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128741850 video from last night

?t=1

[TwilightZone]

90. Great, thank you.

I appreciate it. As we've learned, there's always more to a story.

[FM123]

121. "There's always more to a story"

Yes. These are words I always keep in mind whenever I read something that seems a little off...

[SWBTATTReg]

209. Thanks for the links. NT

[JI7]

10. this along with the i like chik fila ..............

[marylandblue]

14. I get it, but you may not like it.

He is talking to people who feel unheard and left behind in today's economy. Those people in the Midwest who we lost in 2016 and said we were out of touch and "elitist."

He is criticizing Hillary, and DU won't like that. But the people he is talking to will feel heard and approve. At least that's his plan.

[Merlot]

39. If that's his plan it's not a very good one.

I get what he was trying to say, but there are much better ways to say it.

[fleabiscuit]

53. You got wrong. It was white supremacy. The dude is toxic. nt

[marylandblue]

119. It wasn't just one thing. It was a lot of things.

He's identified one piece, and it was a piece that is not flattering to Hillary.

[whathehell]

105. Those remarks sound like Repuke Talking points, so no, we don't 'like' them

or agree with them

[marylandblue]

117. Well, they do have a resemblance, but he's making an important point

it is disruptive to the the party, so it will ruffle feathers, but he also says things more in line with standard Democratic thinking . There is, I think, a method to his madness.

[whathehell]

122. Yes, a rather strong resemblance..

and, no, I don't think his "important point" will be made by aping Republicans or comparing Trump to Hillary in favorable terms in ANY context. Sounds like he was pandering..

[marylandblue]

128. Trump knew something we did not, and he took advantage of it.

We won't win if we don't learn from our mistakes.

[whathehell]

136. He knew the ignorant and the resentful..

If the Democrats got closer to their economic roots like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are doing, they wouldn't feel they had to pander to narrow minded bigotry..

[marylandblue]

154. He is saying that social and economic dislocation causes more racism and extremism.

He is correct, this has been well document historically and in social science research. Calling out racism does not stop it, it only makes people defensive. But reducing the social and economic antecedents reduces the drivers of it.

[whathehell]

250. If that's what he's saying, I agree with him

I just don't think he needs to use Right Wing tropes to do it.

[marylandblue]

257. Maybe you are right. I imagine he will adjust his message.

But I also imagine this won't be the only thing he or any other candidate will say that DUers won't like. In this election, I'm not concerned about anything any of our candidates do wrong. I am only looking at what they do right.

[emulatorloo]

251. Republicans destroyed our economy, and Trump enboldened racists to come out in full force.

Sorry, I’m just not buying what he is saying. It seems like a huge misinterpretation of 2016 to me.

And as other poster says, it echoes rightwing tropes. Not interested in a Dem primary candidate who does that.

As I have said elsewhere if he wins nomination, i’ll Knock doors and praise him to the heavens.

[True Dough]

15. Rather than fixating on that one very brief excerpt

go to the end of the article and arrange the comments by "most liked." You know what this world is full of today? Internet rage, insults and cruelty. But look at the top-rated comments on this profile of Mayor Pete. So many people are thoroughly impressed. He's winning over more and more of the populace every day.

I'm not certain if Pete's true intent was to slam Hillary or his remark was taken out of context. Either way, I'm not going to throw out the incredible wealth of qualities he brings to the table over a single comment that appears derogatory.

[OilemFirchen]

20. Know what else the internet is "full of"?

Puffery.

[True Dough]

30. Don't forget about cynicism

and disparagement.

[OilemFirchen]

48. Denial is hot as well. (n/t)

[True Dough]

95. Where do you see denial?

If it's supposedly from me, give me some specifics. Otherwise, flake off.

[betsuni]

16. He thinks Trump voters did so because of economic anxiety.

Republicans made the huge troubles in our economy and our democracy. People voted for Trump because they thought here was someone who would finally do something about the minorities and immigrants they blame for everything.

Al Franken:

"And after eight years of refusing to help the president govern -- in fact, eight years of actively trying to make the country ungovernable -- Republicans hadn't just created a monster within their own ranks. All that inaction and gridlock helped to create a country of politiphobes, people who (correctly) felt like they were being left behind in the economy and (correctly) felt that the political system was broken and rigged against people like them and (extremely incorrectly) felt that everyone who had anything to do with politics was more or less equally to blame. Rauch writes that these voters are inclined toward 'leaders who will step forward, cast aside cowardly politicians and venal special interests, and implement long-overdue solutions.' These leaders 'can be politicians, technocrats, or autocrats -- whatever works,' Rauch ads. 'Whether the process is democratic is not particularly important.'"

[dalton99a]

118. It is puzzling that he is ignoring research data from multiple sources

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/24/us/politics/trump-economic-anxiety.html
Trump Voters Driven by Fear of Losing Status, Not Economic Anxiety, Study Finds
By Niraj Chokshi
April 24, 2018

A study published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences questions that explanation, the latest to suggest that Trump voters weren’t driven by anger over the past, but rather fear of what may come. White, Christian and male voters, the study suggests, turned to Mr. Trump because they felt their status was at risk.

“It’s much more of a symbolic threat that people feel,’’ said Diana C. Mutz, the author of the study and a political science and communications professor at the University of Pennsylvania, where she directs the Institute for the Study of Citizens and Politics. “It’s not a threat to their own economic well-being; it’s a threat to their group’s dominance in our country over all.”

The study is not the first to cast doubt on the prevailing economic anxiety theory. Last year, a Public Religion Research Institute survey of more than 3,000 people also found that Mr. Trump’s appeal could better be explained by a fear of cultural displacement.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/10/opinion/trump-coalition-2016-midterms.html
Economic Anxiety Didn’t Elect Trump and It May Hurt His Party in the Midterms
By Robert Griffin and John Sides
Oct. 10, 2018

What about Trump voters overall? They actually reported less economic distress than those who voted for Hillary Clinton — and again this was true at every income level. Moreover, Mr. Trump’s earliest supporters, those who voted for him in the primary, reported less distress than did the primary supporters of either Mrs. Clinton or Bernie Sanders. Similarly, the much-discussed “Obama-Trump voter” did not report distinctively high levels of economic distress.

All of this squares with research using surveys conducted during the presidential campaign: economic distress was not a distinguishing feature of Mr. Trump’s support, especially compared to attitudes about race and immigration.

etc., etc.

[sheshe2]

140. +1000

[dlk]

188. Buttigeig Likes to promote Himself as a Former McKinsey, Data-Driven Guy

He’s not making sense.

[dalton99a]

199. +1. Trump has little to zero support among working-class or economically stressed nonwhites

I guess the mayor never noticed

[dlk]

207. That Demographic is Not Distracted by White Nationalism for Obvious Reasons

[calimary]

298. Good points here.

[dalton99a]

17. Showing a political genius not often appreciated by mortals

Earth to Pete: The economic anxiety theory has been thoroughly debunked.

[DavidDvorkin]

19. Yawn.

[lunamagica]

22. Right, praising trump is a big yawn. Also trump based his campaign on xenophobia

MAGA was nothing but a racist call.

Shame, shame on him

[Celerity]

26. complete misrepresentation, & in his multiplicity of articles and videos on here he has RIPPED Trump

and the racism and hate, NOT praised him.

see my post above for a tonne of examples

[lunamagica]

35. You know, there are better strategies than bashing Hillary. This is not the first time he does that

Attacking Democrats is just WRONG

[Celerity]

38. HE didnt bash Hillary, false meme, that has been tried before and exposed as false

Not playing these fake games.

[IndianaDave]

63. Yes - This is Definitely Not the Pete Buttigieg I Have Come to Know

First, for eight years, Pete has been the mayor of a city with a large African-American and Latino/Latina population (over 40 percent, I believe) who re-elected him by over 80 percent. The population has a median income of about $20,000. His policies have consistently been oriented toward helping those people. To call him a racist is a complete mischaracterization of him, personally, and the policies he has promoted.

Second, in regard to his troubling comments in the Washington Post article, my best theory is that -- in those very early days of the presidential campaign -- he was probably amazed that he -- the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and often referred to as "fly over territory" by folks from large, coastal cities -- that he was actually being interviewed by people from the Washington Post. They probably asked him some questions he hadn't prepared for, like "Why do you think Trump was elected?" And he just pulled a couple undeveloped ideas out of his sleeve, and here we are today, baffled by his comments.

Third, although he may have used poorly-considered language, it sounds to me like he was reflecting on his own city's situation, and expressed it badly -- but can we agree that there is economic inequality in our country for women, for people of color, and so forth? Can we agree that many of our citizens experience voter suppression; that the electoral college has made a mockery of one person - one vote, and majority rule, and that Gerrymandering negatively affects our democracy? Can we agree that there is too much corporate influence in our political system, and money plays far too great a role?

And I don't accept that Pete was "bashing" Hillary. Like practically everyone I respect, Pete voted for her -- as I did. What I'm convinced Pete was trying to say is a version of what President Obama often said, that we need to work toward a more perfect union. That our country is wonderful, but is also flawed and in need of reform. In that brief moment, Pete latched on to a phrase Hillary used, "America is already great." And, if you ask him today if he regrets the 35 or so words that make up that awful paragraph, I would bet that he does.

I refuse to write off Pete Buttigieg for a couple poorly worded remarks, just as I refuse to write off Joe Biden for some bad decisions at the Anita Hill hearings, or Kamala Harris for some criticism of her prosecutorial positions, or Kirsten Gillibrand for her stance on Al Franken, etc., etc. I respect all of these candidates, and you who support them.

We don't have any perfect candidates, but we have a hell of a lot of good to great ones, and I still firmly believe that Pete Buttigieg is one of them. He continues to have my confidence and my vote. Please continue to listen to him and learn about him. He's really a good guy, even though he has made a couple mistakes.

[Celerity]

83. +10000

It is a crazy tightrope one has to walk to run for POTUS. That WaPo piece was strangely disjointedly written, with such short quotes and then abrupt changes. It is easy to see how a pull quote was drawn out of it.

It also was 2 and half months old and in the dustbin of internet obscurity until a series of Twitter bots and trolls latched onto it a few hours ago. Out of over 800 comments (now is down to 683, so some of the bot replies must have been pulled) almost NONE came from before just a few hours ago.

He has an extraordinarily low level of scandalous behaviour, and is also so eloquent and holistic in his answers and philosophical underpinnings, that the avenues of attack open to his opponents are fairly limited. I have no doubt that oppo research teams are truly working overtime to try and brew up some.

Obviously certain forces are getting concerned as he has shot up to 3rd place and 11% (from zero just a month or so ago) in Iowa and and is also now tied for third place nationally on PredictIt. ALL candidates go through this process of orchestrated attacks, I am sure, if he as skilful as he certainly seems, he will no doubt be able to handle it.

[True Dough]

97. Very well stated, IndianaDave

Are you David Letterman, by chance?

[IndianaDave]

246. No -- That's hilarious! I'm just a guy who lives in Indiana!

But I'm deeply concerned that people are making some very harsh judgments about Pete, based on a couple off the cuff remarks he made long before his campaign got off the ground. His message for our country is positive, intelligent, and realistic. And he is authentic, caring and deeply Democratic. He needs to be heard. It appears that there's a concerted effort to undermine him. He must be a big threat to somebody. These attacks look well coordinated.

Thank you for your kind words, True Dough. Is your first name Justin?

[True Dough]

247. Dave, I just went through a bit of a political disillusionment crisis

I selected my DU handle based on Justin Trudeau. I was inspired by him. He got elected and seemed to do many great things but with another federal election looming in Canada, Trudeau has faltered. He's facing a couple of scandals -- not Trumpian-level shenanigans but things that are damaging to his integrity.

I pondered requesting a DU name change but someone suggested that if anyone asks whether my DU screen name is in reference to Justin Trudeau, I reply that it's actually a tribute to Garry Trudeau of Doonesbury fame. So that's now my official answer (and you know the backstory).

I firmly believe what you wrote about Pete Buttigieg is accurate. I have no doubts that he's sincere, a bona fide political luminary in the making. One who WILL become president, hopefully in 2020 but maybe in 2024. His day is coming.

[IndianaDave]

264. Thanks for your thoughtful and informative reply.

I was just funning you. Your DU name is cool. And I'll go with Garry Trudeau if it makes you happy. Nice communicating with you. And I agree with your characterization of Pete, and his chances for the future. I'm hopeful about 2020, and I think the debates will bring him there, but if not, I'm all in for 2024 as well.

[Cha]

321. Exactly, Luna!

[lunamagica]

21. Well, that does it for me. Off my list

[msongs]

23. glad to hear nobody had economic anxieties in 2018. everything on twitter is true eh? nt

[True Blue American]

220. :)

[Stare Decisis]

27. This is Stupid.

Capital S. Pete is right. America is by no means universally great. Been to East St. Louis fucking ever? Been to Gary fucking ever?

These are nice people, good-hearted caring loving peoples who are trapped in a paradigm of racism and poverty, so no, that part of America is not great.

So save it. PETE WAS RIGHT. And if you really think there is not an element of economic anxiety playing into Trump's rise, you read too many fucking polls.

[shanny]

28. he spoke the truth

as he has said before, the fact that trump was able to get "within stealing distance" of the WH is indicative of enormous problems in our society. it's too bad that saying that is worse--for some--than the reality of it.

[Cha]

44. There was a Whole Hellava Lot of Cheating going

on that he conveniently doesn't mention.

The M$M droning on Hillary's emails while giving trump carte blanche for normalcy and billions of $$$$$ in free publicity while they were at it.

"Hillary Clinton Just Delivered the Strongest Speech of Her Campaign ... And, The Media Barely Noticed."

March 31, 2016 ... Hillary Clinton speaks at a campaign event in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on March 28 ...

https://www.thenation.com/.../hillary-clinton-just-delivered-the-strongest-speech-of-he...

jill stein's & BS' surrogates' LIES about Hillary and trump, suckering in voters in swing states, threw it to trump.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Second, a lot of Bernie Sanders supporters weren’t big fans of Clinton. So Stein campaigning on the idea that Clinton and Trump were similar made it harder for Clinton to win over those voters — even if Sanders voters didn’t vote for Stein, they may have stayed home out of disgust.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/jill-stein-democratic-spoiler-or-scapegoat/

Hillary talked relentlessly about Democratic issues and her plans to implement them.

The Damn US Media only Gaslighted on her emails 24/7 and trying to normalize trump.

Buttigeig is wrong.

[lunamagica]

57. Those enormous problems in our society are Misogyny, xenophobia and racism

[shanny]

101. they certainly include those, but are not limited to them

but thank you for the information

[whathehell]

111. Those problems are not exclusive to 'our society'

unfortunately.

[RandySF]

31. With all due respect, Mayor Pete is wrong.

The existence of those voters has served as evidence that the most plausible explanation for what happened in 2016 — that Trump’s campaign tapped into the racism of white Americans to win pivotal states — is wrong. “How could white Americans who voted for a black president in the past be racist,” or so the thinking goes.

“Clinton suffered her biggest losses in the places where Obama was strongest among white voters. It’s not a simple racism story,” the New York Times’s Nate Cohn wrote on the night of the election. This typically segues into an argument that Trump won by tapping into economic, rather than racial, anxiety — anger about trade and the decline of manufacturing, or the fallout from the 2008 Great Recession.

A new study shows that this response isn’t as powerful as it may seem. The study, from three political scientists from around the country, takes a statistical look at a large sample of Obama-Trump switchers. It finds that these voters tended to score highly on measures of racial hostility and xenophobia — and were not especially likely to be suffering economically.

“White voters with racially conservative or anti-immigrant attitudes switched votes to Trump at a higher rate than those with more liberal views on these issues,” the paper’s authors write. “We find little evidence that economic dislocation and marginality were significantly related to vote switching in 2016.”

This new paper fits with a sizeable slate of studies conducted over the past 18 months or so, most of which have come to the same conclusions: There is tremendous evidence that Trump voters were motivated by racial resentment (as well as hostile sexism), and very little evidence that economic stress had anything to do with it.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm

[mr_lebowski]

36. Even on this point, I'm not terribly bothered by the 'Trump tapped into rural $ anxiety' angle ...

Along with the 'politics is broken' angle ...

In fact, it's de rigeur at this point ... this article and similarly scholarly learnings that disprove that assertion ... notwithstanding.

What is NOT OKAY ... is throwing Hillary under the bus ... at least as it's written here, should it prove accurate/verbatim.

Not to me, anyway ...

[Celerity]

37. he never just blamed it on economic anxiety, that is a false meme

He goes into great depth on thsi subject in great detail in so many articles and videos. And he rips Trump ( I see ludicrous comments that he is praising him, lolol) and definitely puts racism at the fore.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128742587#post24

[crazytown]

50. Except Pete wasn't talking about the general economic anxiety

He was taking about the huge economic problems in the dying cities and town, the decimated rust belt that Trump had targeted. And he is just as clear Trump was lying: The OLD coal mining and manufacturing jobs could not be brought back by trade wars or anything else.

[dalton99a]

152. +1

[Celerity]

33. I just ran through all the Twitter comments from this 2 month old tweet of a even older article

Out of 284, almost ALL (might be a couple from when it came out in January) have come from a chain of bots and trolls in just the past few hours. Almost all also completely misrepresent what has said, go into zero depth, and/or are flat out lies.

Strange what shooting up in the polls (3rd in Iowa, from zero percent to 11% in a month or so) does.

[JI7]

42. is that why they want to lock her up ? because of economic anxiety ?

[Cha]

46. That must have been it.

[Socal31]

43. He's thinking about continuing to ride this media wave.

It will subside, of course. But he will Ace the debates.

[Devil Child]

45. The more I learn of Buttigieg...

The more I like him.

I read the linked tweet, walked away, then read again. Still can't find any outrage to summon over this. If he has an opinion regarding Clinton that is unpalatable to some then so be it. All I care about is removing trump in 2020 and Buttigieg is showing himself quite capable of doing so.

President Buttigieg sounds damn good to me.

[crazytown]

47. WaPo Article: Pete was talking about South Bend

It’s quite clear if you read the article:-

Buttigieg announced his 2011 campaign two weeks after Newsweek featured South Bend as one of “America’s Dying Cities.” People had been promised a return of manufacturing jobs for almost half a century, Buttigieg says — “a little like Trump in coal country.” From 1902 to 1963, the city was the home of carmaker Studebaker, which employed nearly 25,000 local workers at its peak, before going belly-up. The city never recovered. When he was growing up, “a lot of people would still talk about the closure like it happened yesterday,” he says. “When I ran, we had to paint a picture of the future that did not translate into nostalgia.”

For the residents of dying town and cities, the decimated rust belt, “America is already great” rang hollow. Pete is quite clear Trump was lying: The old coal mining and manufacturing jobs were never coming back.

[True Dough]

108. How dare you

bring context into this debate???

[stopbush]

49. He lost me tonight on Bill Maher when he played the "I'm a Christian" card, and said that

the left needs to be more open about being religious (ie; Christian).

I'm sorry, but we should be going in the opposite direction. The trend in this country is that non-believers are the fastest growing segment of the population. We need to get beyond religion as a species. There are better fantasies out there to replace the mythology of the Judeo/Christian systems. Certainly the tenets of these religions are the personification of immorality when viewed from an Enlightened perspective.

Let the Rs have the religious BS. I think Bill was right to ask him how he could be so progressive and intellectual on the one hand and cling to religious bullshit at the same time. Pete's response was to cite a bunch of human attributes that do not at all stem from religious belief, saying these were things religion inspired. Hogwash.

[Celerity]

51. I am an athiest to the bone, and I have no problem with his stance, which I think you

are somewhat characterising. He is very similar to Obama, wherein he says that he looks at his own religion (and make no mistake, the VAST majority of American voters are, for better or worse, religious believers) as being very, very inclusive and focusing on the the least powerful in society. He says (correctly so IMHO) that it is crazy to cede the area of religion to the hateful, non-inclusive RW fundie assholes, that there needs to be a strong religious left to address the hundreds of millions of Americans who do believe in it.

[Cha]

54. Thanks for that report, stopbush..

good to know.

It's fine if people want to have their "religion" but don't try to push it for those who are principled, and exponentially have more honor and integrity than those using "Christianity" to lie and support trump.

My sister is a liberal Christian but she doesn't try to convert anyone. Or set herself up as a better example of humanity.

[betsuni]

59. I did not care for the "wealthy coastal liberal professional" remark.

In the last election the people with the least amount of money voted for the Democrat, as everyone knows. In this scenario, a wealthy coastal liberal professional gets in the face of a guy pumping gas and accuses him of voting against his own interests and the guy replies, "you are too." What?

[Cha]

61. Exactly. "What?"!

Too many are trying to rewrite history on what actually happened in 2016.

They should start from a reality base if they really don't want to repeat the same mistakes. Instead of just reaching for what fits their agenda.

[Cha]

62. Oh? Buttigieg said

"wealthy coastal liberal professional" tonight?

What was the context used for that, betsuni?


Mahalo!

[betsuni]

64. He was asked why Republicans hate us.

Buttigieg's answer was that we are too often condescending. It's our fault! He goes on to talk of Republicans "loss in the sense of belonging."

Right. I had to listen to rants about how feminists and liberals and atheists and the gays destroyed and hate America and immigrants took all our jobs from my right-wing brainwashed relatives for decades and I say BULLSHIT.

[Cha]

65. Wow.. and, I think repubs hate

liberals because they're trained, gaslit, and brainwashed by faux "news" propaganda station.

Tell me, Pete.. is there one repub who doesn't watch fox day and night?

Too Divisive.

I like this person's attitude..

Link to tweet

Mahalo, betsuni

[betsuni]

66. Right-wing media convinced white working class people they were victims of liberals.

Traditionally, the lower and upper classes didn't care what anybody thought about them, as discussed in Paul Fussell's book "Class." It was the middle class that obsessed over that.

[Cha]

68. Yes, they have convinced them with lies,

Last edited Sat Mar 30, 2019, 06:03 AM - Edit history (1)

gas lighting, and 24/7 indoctrination. I might hate us, too.. if I let faux do my thinking for me.

Thank you for the Class info, betsuni

[betsuni]

74. For someone who thinks Democrats ran on being only against Trump, he sure talks a lot about Trump.

And Trump voters. But, like, not in a bad way. Be nice to Trump voters! Trump was right!

[Cha]

75. Excellent observation. ".. "At least he didn't go around saying that America was already great, like

Hillary did.” Thank Goodness!

Like I said.. I don't care this is 2 1/2 months old.. I missed it before and appreciate being informed.

Oh, and Btw..

Link to tweet

And, divisive..

[betsuni]

76. And, I have to add, as if LA, SF, Seattle, NYC, Miami and all other big cities aren't full of

people from small towns and cities all over the damn county.

[Cha]

84. Yes, they are.. lots of peeps popping up

on twitter saying that very same thing.

And small towns are all over in coastal states..

Link to tweet

[JI7]

69. the largest Christian Groups in the US are African AMericans and Hispanics . but people always want

to go to the white evangelicals when they want to talk about christians in the US.

how about blacks and hispanics ? as a whole those groups are more likely to be christian and religious.

white evangelicals have been exposed to actually be white supremacists with their support for Trump.

[JI7]

72. in his defense i think as a gay man he feels he has to go a bit futher to prove something and not

scare off the other side too much.

Obama was kind of the same way when it came to race issues . it was mostly towards the end of his time in office that he really started talking about the problems.

but for a long time we kind of pretended the post racial bs.

also there was the professor gates incident but it was treated like he did wrong. also Obama lost support among white people after he said blacks and hispanics were treated unfairly. he never gained back the support from white people that he lost with this.

[Ruby the Liberal]

98. Did you say the same about Obama?

Really not getting this line of thought I'm seeing in this thread. You may not believe as he does when it comes his personal theistic beliefs, but I don't recall anyone attacking Obama for the same.

[True Dough]

113. Exactly

I'm an atheist and I respect Obama and Buttigieg's religious beliefs. Same with Keith Ellison. Same with Mazie Hirono.

They're not in your face about it. Live and let live.

[stopbush]

256. Obama did not propose that Ds be overt about their religion, using it as a ploy

to appeal to Christians to get votes. That is what Mayor Pete is proposing.

In fact, I seem to remember Obama being raked over the coals for stating that people clung to their guns and religion.

[Ruby the Liberal]

261. I didn't get that at all

What I am hearing is that belief in a deity doesn't mean RWNJ by default, any more than they hijacked terms like "freedom" and "patriot" while demonstrating the polar opposite.

It seems to me he is trying to take back concepts from the people who misappropriated them.

[Honeycombe8]

300. Most people in the country are religious, though. So he was saying, if you want to win....

it's not good rhetoric to seem to look down on or not be accepting of a citizen's faith. There are religious people in the Democratic Party, as well as agnostics, and atheists. All viewpoints on faith are legitimate and should be respected.

For some people, even if they are not religious, when they are in a very dark place, for whatever reason, a faith in something is the only thing that gets them through. That's nothing to denigrate, IMO.

I think most Democrats share a revulsion to the evangelicals, though. The Pat Robertsons and Falwells who say that a natural disaster occurs somewhere because it's a liberal area, and support a disgusting, immoral, unethical predator because he promises to send money their way and put the U S Embassy in Jerusalem. They sold their support to "evil" for some gold coins.

[seaglass]

77. He has been putting his foot in his mouth all week. He is out of my top 5 for sure. n/t

[BlueFlorida]

78. K&R

Some people either have a very distorted view of the last election or they are purposely trying to score points by denigrating the last Democratic nominee.

I don't know which of those two Pete belongs to. Who did he endorse in the last primary?

[solara]

80. Just curious - what do you think of this article about Mayor Pete?

One of the biggest, gaping horrors of the trump administration is his absolute lack of empathy and the subsequent near normalization of what I see as a growing national deficiency of compassion in response.

I was beginning to really like what I was finding out about Mayor Pete and so was somewhat surprised that this article resonated with me at all.



It's a long but worthy read.

"Only accept politicians who have proved they actually care about people other than themselves…" by NATHAN J. ROBINSON


https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/03/all-about-pete

[dalton99a]

99. +1

[MrsCoffee]

124. Robinson is a Sanders supporter.

He calls for putting socialists in every state at every level.

He also bashes Obama and Beto.

While there may be some truth in there, he ridiculously insinuates the worse possible intentions and characteristics of everything Buttigieg has ever done.

I have a few problems with things he has said, but this is just over the top.

[BlueFlorida]

222. +1 nt

[Freethinker65]

138. Read that earlier.

While I didn't necessarily agree with the author's arguments and conclusions (it seemed too eager to look for any proof that Buttigieg was a priveliged elitist non-progressive opportunist), there were some interesting questions raised that I think Mayor Pete needs to answer.

FYI. I really liked what he said while running for DNC chair and was happy to see him enter the race.

[solara]

148. I agree and I just don't know enough yet

I am leaning towards Jay Inslee, Kamala Harris and/or Elizabeth Warren. Also wondering how successful an all female ticket would be - Harris/Warren or Warren/Harris.

This election is too incredibly important on every level.

Lordy

[babylonsister]

320. You do know Robinson is a huge Bernie fan and has this

platform to bash anyone who gets in his way.


February 19, 2019
There Is Still Only One Clear Way To Get Rid Of Trump
Let’s be honest: running Bernie in 2020 is the best shot the Democrats have at beating Trump…
by Nathan J. Robinson

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/02/there-is-still-only-one-clear-way-to-get-rid-of-trump

***************************

April 19, 2019
We’re Gonna Win
Oh yes we are…
by Nathan J. Robinson
Don’t take it from me. Take it from Karl Rove, who writes in the Wall Street Journal:

[W]hen only 37% of Americans in the RealClearPolitics average think the country is going in the right direction while 56.4% think it’s on the wrong track, Mr. Sanders could be perceived as an agent of change. If he is the Democratic nominee, Mr. Trump’s task will be to convince Americans that a socialist turn would be a ruinous change. Based on Monday’s town hall, that won’t be as easy as Republicans may think. Mr. Sanders is a real contender.

Rove was referring to Bernie Sanders’ FOX News town hall, in which the consensus opinion is that Bernie kicked all kinds of ass, getting the FOX studio audience to cheer for getting rid of their private health insurance. Even the National Review carried the headline “Bernie Sanders Shines on Fox News” with an article that sounded almost admiring:

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/04/were-gonna-win

[KayF]

85. that's an unacceptable opinion!

UNACCEPTABLE!!!!

[Celerity]

91. yes it is, save for the fact it is misrepresentational, utterly devoid of context and a Twitter bot

and/or troll-driven rehash of pull quote from a 2 and half month old article that had almost zero comments up until a few hours ago (it now has close to 700, it was well over 800, but some of the bots have been removed)




context and a previous attempt at the same type of attack from a week ago:


Buttigieg: “I don’t want this to slide into the idea that some of these racist behaviors can be excused because they can be connected to economic issues.

How Democrats can defeat Trump and his ugly ideas, according to Pete Buttigieg

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128742675



Pete Buttigieg must be surging, Wonkette exposes dirty twitter troll tricks against him

That's Not What He Said! Mayor Pete / Hillary Clinton Edition

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128733687



and some more evidence that he is NOT at all going Trump a pass, has consistently attacked him, has also repeatedly attacked white nationalism and racism of every stripe, and about how social and racial justice being key




Pete Buttigieg On Political Honesty, His Black Agenda, Open Homosexuality + More

and here are some articles that also specifically talk about white racism


Buttigieg: 'Americans are being radicalized' by Trump administration

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/436340-buttigieg-americans-are-being-radicalized-by-trump-administration

"And I think a lot of Americans are being radicalized by this administration. The experience of disruption that’s gone on, especially in the interior, has obviously made it more fertile to being taken advantage of by people like this president," he said.

Buttigieg added, however, that he thinks "improving our economic condition" and achieving racial and social justice "go hand in hand."

Pete Buttigieg Says Mike Pence Is ‘At Best Complicit’ In White Nationalism Revival

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/pete-buttigieg-mike-pence-white-nationalism_n_5c9c9722e4b07c886631526b

“But I think the moment you come on board with a project like the Trump campaign or the Trump-Pence administration, you are at best complicit in the process that has given cover for flourishing and the resurgence of white nationalism in our midst,” Buttigieg added.

Pete Buttigieg tells SC voters 2020 presidential race is about justice

https://www.postandcourier.com/politics/pete-buttigieg-tells-sc-voters-presidential-race-is-about-justice/article_2e4d015a-4d82-11e9-854e-071b072ed647.html

snip

“Democracy is on the ballot in 2020,” he said.

Buttigieg said Democrats need more younger leaders who understand racial and social justice as well as more leaders from Republican-dominated states.

“We cannot continue to be regarded as a party that is only for the deepest blue communities,” he said. “There is written nowhere that a state like South Carolina or Indiana or anywhere else has to be conservative forever.”

Buttigieg, who took military training in Columbia before deploying to Afghanistan with the Navy Reserve, said Republicans are not willing to tackle the security issues caused by climate change, computer hackers and white nationalists.

“White nationalism is a deadly threat that has claimed lives as far away as New Zealand and as close to home as Charleston,” he said. “So let’s do something about that.”

Also, Biden (and Obama more recently is echoing this to a point as well, at least thematically) has been doing the same thing for over 2 years now



Joe Biden wants to make sure Democrats don't give up on Trump voters

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bidens-last-stand-convincing-democrats-not-to-give-up-on-the-white-working-class-voters-fueling-trump/2016/10/21/d4230d4a-7a94-11e6-ac8e-cf8e0dd91dc7_story.html


Obama and Biden are on mission to win back swing state voters

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/obama-biden-are-mission-win-back-swing-state-voters-n925966

"There’s a lot of people who are going to vote for Donald Trump," Biden warned an audience of excited Democrats as he shared the stage in Virginia with Sen. Tim Kaine, the man he hoped would succeed him after 2016. "We've got to figure out why. What is eating at them? Some of it will be unacceptable. But some of it will be about hard truths about our country and about our economy. A lot of people do feel left out."

Two years later, Biden seems to be on a mission to again help his party answer that question head-on. And to do so, both he and former President Obama have been targeting those very voters who helped put them in the White House for eight years, then voted to elect President Trump.

But Obama has also been mindful of the advice he gave to Democrats at one of his final presidential news conferences, where he asked, “How do we make sure that we are showing up in places where I think Democratic policies are needed, where they are helping, where they are making a difference, but where people feel as if they're not being heard?”

snip

“Neither party has had a monopoly on wisdom, neither party has been exclusively responsible for us going backwards instead of forwards,” Obama said there. “But over the past few decades, the politics of division, of resentment and paranoia, has unfortunately found a home in the Republican Party.”

Biden’s standard pitch to voters, like Obama's, also speaks to a concern that he says is bigger than politics — America’s values and standing in the world. It’s a message that seems designed to offer a permission slip to Independents and Republicans who reluctantly turned to Trump to return to the Democratic fold.

[KayF]

94. I'll add a sarcasm tag

but I don't think it's necessary to dispute whether he said it or whether it's out of context. I don't think that forevermore no one can ever criticize Hillary, or the way she ran the election. Maybe when she was running for president against a republican we might want to hold our fire. But forevermore for the rest of time? No way.

And yes, this seems to be a Hillary staffer digging this up and stirring it up.

[patricia92243]

86. I have to pay to read the WP. Is there a link that shows the ENTIRE interview? I have

read it somewhere else and he does not say this. The way it is presented here does not give an accurate picture of what was said.

Twitter taking things our of contest is a joke and should not be taken seriously.

Welcome to politics, Mayor Pete.

[Cha]

87. It's a WaPo Mag Tweet.. so if it's

inaccurate it's on them tweeting it inaccurately.

[Amimnoch]

88. Cheetolini did win. That was his tactic.

Sorry, but I’m not biting on this one. I’m not supporting Mayor Pete because I don’t see him as our best chance of ousting Cheetolini... at this time.

From total logic: Cheetolini, despite losing the popular vote by such a huge margin is the one that is in the Whitehouse. What Pete states as his position during the campaign season is spot on. It’s undeniable that is what somehow got that monster through the primaries, and ultimately edged him in all those rustbelt states to the presidency.

Here’s the map:


Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan.. Rustbelt states. States that have had a very hard go at it economically with industries pulling out, and employment challenges for a long time now. It’s not that much of a stretch to believe that a “positive” message was less believed by a percentage of the electoriate than the “negative” one.

It may be an ugly truth. It may be one we don’t want to hear. But, what he’s asserted is true.

[Kahuna7]

89. Just wow. Sounds like he has Indiana-itis. Also sounds like he's

pandering to trump voters.

[Celerity]

92. nope, that is a completely false take away, absolutely zero pandering

here you go for a full analysis, and also (at the bottom of that post in the link below) Biden and Obama saying and doing the same thing that Buttigieg is falsely getting smashed for

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128742587#post91

[MrsCoffee]

106. You can keep spamming that,

but he really seems to stick his foot in his mouth when he talks about Hillary.

I’ve been pushing friends and family to check him out because I like him a lot. So quit insinuating that we can’t read, see or hear. We can make up our own minds without all this ‘splainin.

Between his comments on Hillary and his comments on religion, I’m starting to cool off on the guy. I get that it doesn’t bother you, but he is going to piss off millions of Americans going down that road in hopes of winning over a few hundred Trump supporters.

[Cha]

123. I like the way Nick Merrill puts it..

Link to tweet

He's got Hillary's back

[MrsCoffee]

126. Nick got it right.

[stopbush]

258. Well spoken. I've seen only a bit of Pete, but I'm noy buying.

[Hortensis]

93. Pete shouldn't assume Hillary's very long to-do list

wasn't actually meant to be major change and updating just because she presented the parts individually instead of trumpeting a remaking of America.

What was her/our very comprehensive plan for making the Appalachia coal country as as healthy and prosperous as it is beautiful except a new Tennessee Valley Authority type project?

I like Mayor B's kind of big, forward thinking a lot, but everyone should remember that FDR didn't run on half the things his administration accomplished. FDR was very much a member of the establishment who ran on recovering the economy and creating what he called a new deal for the American people, given credibility by his creation of jobs and other efforts as a governor to combat the depression, but not on THE New Deal by a long shot.

He had to keep a safe distance from the socialist candidate so Hoover's camp couldn't successfully tar him as one of them, though they certainly tried. (And at that the 1932 Democratic convention saddled him with a conservative Southerner for VP to make him palatable to that faction.)



This could have been a poster for Hillary. Thank goodness he was such a rousing speaker.

[Ruby the Liberal]

96. Confused. Why is it OK for us to call her Hillary

but he needs to refer to her with an honorarium title?

Not looking for a fight, just trying to understand the angst.

[True Blue American]

102. Pete has a point

That is the way many unhappy voters felt. They feel left behind, voted for Trump because he mouthed all the words they thought.

After the billionaire tax cut, trying to kill the ACA and watching his lavish use of tax payers money, along with his misguided tarrifs the question is, do they still feel the same.

The 2018 election shows many do not. We shall see if he makes it to 2020.

[mcar]

200. ...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211971490

[lunamagica]

214. No, he does not. Maga was a dog whistle for misogyny, racism, and xenophobia. That;s why

they voted for him

[True Blue American]

219. Say what you want

I have heard this for at least 40 years. Trump played off that anger of feeling left behind.

I have heard it that neither party cares about us. Trump said exactly what those who felt left behind wanted to hear.

Of course it was all lies but this anger goes back to Clinton signing NAFTA and Hillary took the blame. They did not want another Clinton in the WhiteHouse so they took the chance, voted for Trump because he was saying what they have long felt.

That is why I want totally new blood in the WhiteHouse and the Senate. The House needs more, too.

[lunamagica]

224. There is proof. White voters who worried about the economy and jobs voted for Hillary

voters whose priority were terrorism and immigration voted for trump

[True Blue American]

228. Link?

[lunamagica]

235. here

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/existential-anxiety-not-poverty-motivates-trump-support/558674/

https://www.pnas.org/content/115/19/E4330

https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2016

[True Blue American]

243. Read your second link. It verifies what I posted.

My opinion comes from knowing how those people who felt left behind by both parties.

Telling people they are doing great does not work when they know better. The slide has happened during the last 40 years with both parties, has now carried over into the third generation.

The younger candidates are projecting what they intend to do, the reason we won the House. To ignore how these people feel is not wise. They voted for real people this time, not slick long time Politicians. And that is all you have among the old.

Both Bernie and Biden are life time Politicians.

[JI7]

248. yet they voted for pro free trade republicans for senate instead of people like Feingold

who actually has a record of opposing trade unlike trump.

[IndianaDave]

286. I think it's important to share this with you

Most of my family voted for Hillary, as I did. But one of my nephews decided to vote for Trump. We desperately tried to change his mind, pointing out a lot of what you just expressed. My nephew -- a high school educated, blue-collar worker, who spent very little time paying attention to political analysis -- told us that he didn't like a lot of what Trump said, but he believed that he was going to improve things for the ordinary working people. And some of his co-workers supported his naive belief. We were all disappointed, of course. Personally, I felt deep anger with him on election night.

I agree that a large percentage of Trump voters are the very deplorables that Hillary described. But I'm convinced from my own experience, that a certain percentage of them, who weren't paying close attention, and may have heard from a co-worker that Trump was going to make their lives better, just decided to give Trump a shot. My nephew would never attend a Trump rally. He, and people like him can be won back in 2020. I think we should be open to letting them know they're welcome back.

[dlk]

103. This is Not Buttigeig's First Public Dig at Hillary - Is He a Misogynist?

Buttigeig is a highly educated, articulate, successful Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, with countless excellent ideas to solve America's problems, and gave an excellent interview on Real Time with Bill Maher last night. However, if he is a misogynist (which his continued public digs at Hillary would seem to suggest) he is not fit to be president. Women have had to endure the hideous Trump administration. Our next president cannot and will not be a misogynist. For most women, that is the deal breaker of all deal breakers.

[True Dough]

139. "Misogynist" gets thrown around so flippantly

Show me a couple of other examples of where Pete Buttigieg has unfairly castigated women.

He dares to take issue with the way Hillary ran in campaign, at least in part, and it's fair to start tossing around the label of "misogynist"?

Give me a break!

[dlk]

179. After Watching an Hour-Long Video of One of Buttigeig's Talks on his Book Tour

I saw two red flags. First was his dig at Hillary’s financial policy. The second was a story about one of his South Bend constituents, an elderly woman who had called the city for assistance removing a dead animal from her property. In Buttigieg’s telling, she was too stupid to understand how they were trying to help her. Although Buttigieg did not use those words exactly, the inference was clear. The fact that Buttigieg chose to share those particular thoughts was telling to me. Then, there is the tweet in this post where Buttigeig promotes a false equivalency between Hillary and Trump, That only further confirmed my suspicions.

I was married to someone very much like Buttigieg- Ivy League educated, well-traveled, brilliant, erudite and witty. He also had a well-hidden, deep vein of misogyny. I see similar signs with Buttigeig. You don’t have to agree with me. The good news about the very long vetting process for those running for President is that much of a candidate’s character is revealed.

[True Dough]

203. I read your post

and there are two points that I'll make:

1) You are inferring a whole lot, you actually use the word inference yourself.

2) You acknowledge that you once spent part of your life with a spouse who, like Pete Buttigieg, was "Ivy League educated, well-traveled, brilliant, erudite and witty." I'm sorry to hear your ex-husband happened to be a misogynist. I can understand how that would make you be guarded against others who you suspect might be like-minded. However, just because there are parallels between your former partner and Mayor Pete, it does not make them the same people.

Time will certainly bear this out. If you're right and there's a trend, it will be impossible for it not to come to the surface. In the meantime, it's premature, and unfounded, to accuse Mayor Pete of misogyny.

[dlk]

206. That's Why I Posted Misogyny as a Question

I’m not imagining Buttigeig’s digs at Hillary Clinton. As the campaign progresses, more will be revealed.

[True Dough]

212. Again

Just because someone takes "digs" at a female politician, does that automatically make the individual a misogynist???


Here's an op-ed by Alyssa Rosenberg in the WaPo titled "Hillary Clinton and I are done." She provides a litany of reasons why she no longer supported Clinton. Is Rosenberg a misogynist?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2018/01/30/breaking-up-with-hillary-clinton/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.719debe54f18


Here's another op-ed by Ruth Marcus that ends with "Clinton consistently disappoints." Does that make Ruth Marcus a misogynist?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-hillary-clintons-comments-were-even-more-painful-than-trumps/2018/10/18/7197bf98-d318-11e8-8c22-fa2ef74bd6d6_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.48d317bcd8e2


In the words of Hillary Clinton herself, female voters in 2016 caved to ”ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should.” Hillary attacking women! She even later apologized for that remark. Does that make Hillary a misogynist? She took a "dig" at women!

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/379521-hillary-clintons-sorry-apology-is-why-shes-no-champion-for-women 


Here's an article from The Week by a female author titled "Every critique of Hillary Clinton is not sexist." I'd encourage you to read it.

https://theweek.com/articles/725123/every-critique-hillary-clinton-not-sexist

[dlk]

239. True, Not Every Critique of a Female is Misogynistic-However Some Critiques Are Exactly Misogynistic

Also, when it comes to critiques, context matters. When I watched the video of Buttigeig's book tour, I sensed a definite undercurrent, not just when he criticized Hillary Clinton, but especially in his telling of the story of his elderly, female constituent. I may be completely wrong about Buttigieg and, hopefully, the long, arduous campaign will give us better answers. In the meantime, I have learned to trust my instincts and I see potential red flags. There's no reason in the world you have to agree with me.

[betsuni]

104. "That was my problem with many voters: I skipped the venting and went straight to the solving."

Hillary Clinton.

[sunnybrook]

107. Will he attack Michelle Obama next?

As I recall she said something to the effect of "America is already great. " That was a running theme from our side. His MAGA slogan seemed code for wanting to return to the overt racism of the past. What the hell was wrong with HRC saying this? I am deeply disappointed in Mayor Pete, and I've really liked him thus far.

[sunnybrook]

110. President Obama also said this

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/28/obama-hillary-clinton-convention-speech-trump

[betsuni]

114. I saw this Twitter comment somewhere today:

White America 2008: How dare you say you're not proud of America, Michelle Obama.
White America 2016: How dare you say America is great, Hillary Clinton.

[mcar]

198. Can you even imagine the s&itstorm

if HRC campaigned saying America wasn't great? The RW and media would have had a meltdown screaming about how unAmerican she was.

Yet Dotard gets away with it and even here on DU, and apparently on the campaign trail, she is being criticized for saying America is already great.

This is so far beyond a double standard, I don't have a word for it.

[mcar]

112. What was wrong with HRC saying America is already great?

This is ridiculous.

[brooklynite]

115. Answer: it doesn't resonate with voters who don't think it is...

....and that's NOT limited to Trump base voters who remember the good old days of White supremacy.

When Democrats lost the House in 2010, I recall a point that Steve Israel made: talking about the strength of the economy by pointing to the growth of the stock market doesn't work if economically struggling voters don't HAVE money in the stock market.

Trump didn't win Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan (which voted for Obama twice) by appealing to racism; he appealed to economic uncertainty, such as loss of mining and auto jobs.

[mcar]

120. If she had gone around saying MAGA,

the RW and media would have crucified her for her unAmerican outlook. Also disagree with your last: Trump appealed to racism and promised the moon to those voters. HRC had plans to address the economic uncertainty, Trump didn't.

[dsc]

132. He appealed to both

and yes the racism helped him immensely. I am from north east Ohio literally bordering Pennsylvania. I have many, many friends who are still in the area. Some supported Trump, others didn't. Many of the ones who supported Trump have deep racial resentment towards blacks, immigrants, and Muslims. They just do. I have read their posts, I have seen their reaction to Trump's overt racism. Racism helped him win, it is a fact.

[True Blue American]

230. They did not vote Democratic

Because they felt Democrats failed them, too!

Now people can deny this all they want but for those of us who live in the areas where plants moved over seas because of NAFTA are not listening. This has been a long,festering sore for the so called rust belt states.

Until we deal with facts instead of pretending that is not true need to wake up and listen. Those who won the last election got out there,told the truth and won their elections.

[sfwriter]

116. Wow. So out of context.

That twitter post is almost Trumpian in its level of deception.

He was talking about voters in South Bend. He knows them pretty well.

Hillary lost and lots of Indiana voters he has met switched sides. You have to analyze that loss on a county by county basis. Hillary’s campaign appeared self centered with its “I’m with her” and glass ceiling talk and it doesn’t matter how many policy talks she gave because most voters never heard them. They heard what Trump said and sometimes her response to Trump. That’s all that got airtime. And they sure heard Make America Great. That made Trump more appealing than he actually is. That’s it, that’s the whole ballgame.

Pete is very good at not painting those voters into a corner and labeling them racists or sexists or morons. That’s something you have to do if you want their votes.

[DesertRat]

125. Howard Dean "I hope this is a misquote"

Link to tweet

[dalton99a]

135. Not the first time he used Hillary to explain Trump's victory

[DesertRat]

141. One of the reasons he won't get my primary vote. nt

[True Blue American]

232. Howard Dean

Is right. This country has not been great for the average worker for a long time.

[NurseJackie]

127. Tone deaf and not-ready for Prime Time. He has peaked.

Unless he decides that one of the houses of Congress is more to his liking, I think this is his high-water-mark. This is as good as he's ever going to be... as high as he'll ever reach.

He will NOT be our party's nominee.

Goodbye, Pete. Done with you.

[dalton99a]

165. There is no upward path for him in Indiana

The House seat in his district is held by a four-term wingnut. Statewide, Donnelly went "moderate" and still lost his U.S. Senate seat by 8 points to a wingnut.

Going national is a smart move for Pete in terms of future career prospects

[IronLionZion]

129. The person who posted that tweet was thinking Dems are easy to divide

and won't read the whole article. So they cherry pick a statement out of context that would cause some Dems to get upset and defensive.

They know that Pete is an ideas guy, but they would like to discredit his ideas and prevent our party from adopting any of it into the platform.

[True Dough]

142. I believe you're right

It's an effective tactic, unfortunately.

But I'm confident Pete will overcome this perceived gaffe in the coming weeks and months.

[IronLionZion]

150. Pete makes a lot of good points

and they're hoping people will ignore that if they can provoke an emotional response from some folks

[True Dough]

161. And we're in a reactionary age

Quick soundbites, social media. Doesn't take much to mislead. Get people riled up. Zero to 100 in a second.

There's another post in this thread implying that Pete may be a misogynist because he's had the audacity to critique aspects of Hillary's campaign. That's the environment we're in. A person elucidating brilliant ideas and showing tremendous leadership qualities is smeared as being prejudiced against women because he takes a different view than Clinton and says so (if he wasn't taken out of context).

[SWBTATTReg]

215. Sure sounds this way...people are still sensitive about any ref to HRC it seems and that's okay. ...

HRC was by far best candidate in 2016. For Mayor P, Personally, I think his tweet was taken out of context and I'm disappointed at the name dropping (misogynist) / 'ohhh, he's no longer my candidate in consideration, etc.' / etc. based upon a single comment/tweet (and the comment/tweet wasn't verified either, need to be clarified for intent and meaning, in giving the benefit of the doubt to the candidate).

I'd like to extend the benefit of the doubt for a candidate for we all know what a campaign is like and the 'he said, she said, they said' etc. type of back and forth is like. We all know the political give and take environment ... it's relentless and dog eat dog unfortunately.

[dlk]

131. False Equivalencies are the Republicans' Stock in Trade

It is disappointing to see Buttigieg stoop to that level.

[Kurt V.]

146. lol. 1st ppl praised him for his honesty until he said something they disagree with.

[mobeau69]

158. LOL

Getting very ridiculous around here very quickly. Next thing you know we'll be seeing OP's with "Willie Brown" in the title.

Sad for us if we really want to defeat tRump.

[David__77]

157. I think the statement is fine.

...

[hlthe2b]

163. This isn't a "misspeak". He believes this. FAIL!

I don't know if this is enough to halt his momentum, but I sure as hell am dismayed at that statement. I will not quickly forget it, either.

[defacto7]

169. My first reaction is a strong one.

After reading this op my first reaction is a strong one. I'm disappointed and my knee-jerk reaction is to sink the ship. On the other hand there are some good rebuttals. My conclusion is that the bots and deceivers were powerful in the last couple of elections, this we all know; a lot of people were duped. It would be irresponsible on my part to dump Buttigeig on this or even a couple of down tweets or bites just as much as it would be irresponsible for me to disregard them because their messages don't meet my standards for a candidate.

If you think the descievers were rampant and somewhat successful last time around I have no doubt they have improved since then.

I'm holding all info and judgements until I see and hear the real thing in action at the debates and in person. I'm not letting any tweets or hearsay dictate my position but I will compare notes and make my conclusions based on experience, not strictly on what I'm fed by the media or anonymous promotion.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

174. My first reaction was "So what?" but I have reached the same conclusion as you.

All this knee-jerking over a comment or a sound bite or a tweet that can be easily taken out of context, inflated, misinterpreted, trollified and generally blown up into something it isn't, doesn't make sense. All of the candidates are going to produce gaffes or things that can be made to look like gaffes, and all of them will say something that some of us disagree with. But if you're all OMG, he's off my list now!!! because of one remark, pretty soon you won't have a list at all.

The trolls will be out there, throwing these little sound bites out for people to fight over. I'm not deciding anything on the basis of that kind of bullshit I'm waiting until everyone is in and have had their chances to debate, get interviewed, get vetted and release their tax returns. I want to see the big picture. I want to know that they will fight for the Democratic agenda as a whole and I don't care about minutiae. Most of all I want to feel confident that they can beat Trump.

[defacto7]

176. Hear hear. I think my moments of shock are over.

I'm with the "so whats" wait and see, document and verify voters. Thanks.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

170. So now he sucks because he had the temerity to mildly criticize Clinton?

I'm not declaring for anybody at this point, but it would have to be a lot worse than that to make me reject him out of hand.

[emulatorloo]

184. Nah he sucks for lying about Hillary's campaign. She talked jobs, income inequality

etc. She won the votes of lots of working class people.

Trump “pointed out the huge troubles in our economy and our democracy”

Um no. trump catered to racists and flirted with white supremacists.

Pete sounds like one of those guys who said “right on, man!” to trust-fund baby Walter Bragman’s “The Liberal Case for Donald Trump”

Poor judgement. I am not a litmus test person, but I think I’ve found mine.

If you find yourself wanting to shit on Democrats while you praise Trump, maybe your should think about it a couple seconds and keep your mouth shut instead.

I wish him the best, many great qualities. And of course i’ll Vote for whoever is our nominee

[femmedem]

266. Messaging is not the same thing as a platform.

A person can have a detailed, brilliant platform but not have a concise message that resonates.

[emulatorloo]

268. She won voters who were most concerned about Jobs and the Economy though.

Her message and platform resonated w those voters. The Economy and Jobs.

Trumps message was evil brown people, which resonate w his voters. Their top concerns were terrorism and immigration.

It’s fine if Mayor Pete wants to ignore facts and go with “liberal” versions of Republican talking points about Trump Good and HRC Bad.

It is also fine for me to not support him in the primary.

What would’nt be fine is for me to not enthusiastically support him if he wins the nomination.

But that’s what I always do. Whoever gets the nom gets me out door knocking and singing their praises

[customerserviceguy]

175. While it seems to not have been artfully done

it does emphasize that Pete gets it that we need to at least make a show of having some understanding why so many Americans voted for Trump. If our eventual nominee dismisses them all as irredeemable racists, then we're going to end up with the same result as last time.

[emulatorloo]

181. Praising Trump, lying about Hillary? Well Pete, I guess I can check you off the list.

[randr]

182. The majority of Democrats who do not live

in the "fly over zone" need to shut their mouths and listen up for a change.
The Mayor is telling it like it is for most of these people. Many of which were Democrats.

[OilemFirchen]

195. And those of us who do?

Those of us who spent tortuous hours canvassing registered Democrats in urban hellholes?

I'll be happy to relate their concerns, but you go first.

[randr]

236. Those of us who do?? Do what?

Just trying to understand your post.
If you mean to say that registered Democrats in urban hellholes share the same concerns I would not be surprised.
I was responding to my perceived understamdomg that Mayor Pete should not be calling out Democratic candidates for discretions he perceives as unwarranted or dismissive.
I live in an ultra right wing county of Colorado and most of the Trump folk I deal with, on a daily basis, mirror what Mayor Pete was talking about.

[OilemFirchen]

262. Live in the "fly over zone". (n/t)

[True Blue American]

234. Right on!

[Politicub]

186. "In his twisted way" is not Mayor Pete being supportive of Trump

On the contrary. He's acknowledging that Trump tapped into something that got him elected. And Trump did that in a twisted way. It's stating his opinion. Maybe Mayor Pete is wrong and Trump tapped into animus toward immigrants more. Maybe it's both.

Bernie's schtick was also pointing out "huge troubles in our economy and our democracy". Bernie didn't make it through the primary, though, and it is to be seen if he does this time around.

Democrats were feeling good about our country in the wake of Obama's two terms. We wanted to continue it. The trouble is, voters in a handful of states preferred Trump, and our broken Electoral College system was manipulated into him getting elected. Clinton's campaign (and the democrats) were caught off guard.

But, back to the post at hand: I hate when Democrats eat their own with a single quote.

But if we're relying on quotations of sentences, I prefer this one:

But “normal” and “regular” are not adjectives that apply to the son of a Maltese immigrant father and an Army brat mom who grew up in decaying South Bend, got himself into Harvard, summer-interned for Ted Kennedy, worked for John Kerry’s presidential campaign, won a Rhodes Scholarship, learned Arabic in Tunisia, landed a jet-setting consultant’s job, left it to return to his beat-up hometown and become the youngest mayor of a midsize U.S. city, transformed that city into a national model of renewal, and then — deep breath — volunteered for active duty in Afghanistan while serving as mayor, came out as gay in the local newspaper, married a schoolteacher live on YouTube, turned heads in a dark-horse bid to lead the Democratic National Committee, and had the New York Times’s Frank Bruni gushing about him as potentially the “First Gay President”— all by age 36.

[mobeau69]

191. + x K

[emulatorloo]

194. Trump tapped into fear of the other, racistm, and white supremacy

Hillary talked jobs, retraining displaced worker from dying industries, income inequality, making the wealthy pay their fair share, lifting everybody up.

Trump talked wall to keep the rapists Mexicans out. He talked Muslim ban to keep brown people out. Fear fear fear fear. His entire campaign was predicated on White Identity Politics.

Trump pointed out “Huge Trouble in our Democracy and Economy” and Hillary ran around “America was already Great”?

Probably one of the worst hot takes i’ve ever read.

If a DU poster wrote that, or somebody on Reddit—sure fine. The Internet is built for hot takes

Expect more from someone who wants to lead the party and the country. Imho these speaks to his judgement. If he gets 2016 so wrong, what else will he get wrong in the Oval Office?

Hope he does well. Will certainly enthusiastically support him if he’s the nominee

[Politicub]

225. You are not incorrect

I think it's a travesty that Trump was able to sway enough voters to win through the electoral college. I would also add, I think the media was against Hillary and didn't cover Trump accurately. I started the primary season a Hillary supporter and I ended it as a Hillary supporter. In the 2008 election, I was also pro-Hillary during the primaries. I think she is fantastic and would have made a presidency that would rival some of the best. It hurts to think about what might have been versus what the reality is today.

But you and I differ on the hot take, I guess. I didn't see it as something as damning as some of the folks here. Onward and upward.

[ismnotwasm]

196. Going for that white "economically distressed" vote.

I wasn’t sure how I felt about the guy, I’m always very very excited to have diversity on the ticket, and he is, by all accounts very bright. He brings a lot to the table.

But this? This is simple pandering. Not even good pandering. Positively comparing Trump to Hillary skeeves me right the fuck out.

[emulatorloo]

197. And completely forgetting that Jobs and Economy voters went For Hillary

While terrorism (evil brown people) and illegal immigration (more evil brown people) voters went for Trump.

Undecided still, I can now check another on off the list.

[crazytown]

227. Trump targeted economic dislocation as well as racism

Inaugural:-

But for too many of our citizens, a different reality exists: Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities; rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation; an education system, flush with cash, but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of knowledge; and the crime and gangs and drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential.

It’s a twist on Mario Cuomo - A Tale of Two Cities:-
And that is what Buttigieg is talking about:-

It’s quite clear in article:-

Buttigieg announced his 2011 campaign two weeks after Newsweek featured South Bend as one of “America’s Dying Cities.” People had been promised a return of manufacturing jobs for almost half a century, Buttigieg says — “a little like Trump in coal country.”

And what is quite clear is like the coal mining - Trump is lying, the manufacturing jobs are not coming back:

From 1902 to 1963, the city was the home of carmaker Studebaker, which employed nearly 25,000 local workers at its peak, before going belly-up. The city never recovered. When he was growing up, “a lot of people would still talk about the closure like it happened yesterday,” he says. “When I ran, we had to paint a picture of the future that did not translate into nostalgia.”

Buttigieg is quite correct:- For the dying cities and towns in the rust belt ‘America Is already great’ is a poor slogan.

And ... as he has said many times in interviews, the good old days were not so great for African Americans and other disenfranchised minorities.

This quote from early January was reposted by bots. It’s a hit job.

[ismnotwasm]

241. Are you saying he didn't say it, or it needs more context?

He is a politician, politicians take positions. Using “Hillary was wrong and Trump was right” is not a great argument

[crazytown]

244. It's taken right out of context

From my reading he is saying ‘America is already great’ is an appallingly bad slogan for a (dying) town like South Bend with widespread poverty which longs for illusory good old days.

It’s purely a political calculation about local voters, not a statement about morals or substance. It’s the sort of insider calculation politicians learn not to say in public.

[emulatorloo]

249. Point to where HRC ever said "America is already great"

It is very cool you support him. He was on my list, now he’s off. I wish him luck. If he wins the nomination I’ll knock doors for him until my knuckles bleed.

In the meantime, I like my primary candidates to avoid dumb hot takes.

it is gonna be a good Primary

[crazytown]

252. AFAIK - 'America is already great' was President Obama's take.

HRC said ‘America never stopped being great’

As far as Buttigieg is concerned - I usually play defence attorney to hit jobs on Democrats. In a group I play the role of Defense attorney of last resort.

When there is no room for doubt, that’s another matter.

[emulatorloo]

255. The dystopia Trump painted was false. And as you know Obama and Clinton were describing

the spirit of the American people. Hopes dreams generosity of spirit ability to solve problems together.

We have problems we can solve them together. Versus “I alone can fix it”

To be charitable seems like Buttigieg’s analysis of 2016 is shallow, glib and too literal minded.

JMHO of course. Would be proud to knock doors for him should he win the nomination. Probably not going to vote for him in the primary though.


I loved the stuff you wrote about playing defense attorney

[BlueFlorida]

221. This makes me not vote for Mayor Pete.

This was political suicide.

[crazytown]

233. It's a hit job

Highly mislead. The full article makes it clear he is talking about voters in South Bend, nominated by Newsweek as a dying city. To say that ‘America is already great’ is s poor slogan for the distressed and dying cities and towns in the rust should not be controversial.

Do you know your Tale of Two Cities, where Mario Cuomo took aim at Reagan’s ‘Shining City on the Hill’

But there's another city; there's another part to the shining the city; the part where some people can't pay their mortgages, and most young people can't afford one; where students can't afford the education they need, and middle-class parents watch the dreams they hold for their children evaporate ... There are ghettos where thousands of young people, without a job or an education, give their lives away to drug dealers every day. There is despair, Mr. President, in the faces that you don't see, in the places that you don't visit in your shining city.

Telling the underclass America is already great is a sick joke.

[calimary]

282. Yep.

[doompatrol39]

226. So this is what we're doing going into 2020?

Making the belief that Hillary did an amazing job, did nothing wrong in her campaign, and that everyone who voted for her did so (since her winning the popular vote seems to be held up as the only evidence anyone needs) because they thought she was an amazing candidate and not at all because Trump was such a vile wretch, the litmus test for our 2020 candidates?

Because I want to win in 2020 which unfortunately for the "Hillary did nothing wrong at all, ever so stop saying that!!!!" crowd, involves someone who is willing to look back at the many things that we as a party and Hillary as a candidate did not do 100% correctly in 2016, and not make those same mistakes. I want someone who is willing to have that conversation.

If all any candidate is allowed to say happened in 2016 was racism and Russia we can plan on losing again.

[Mike Nelson]

237. That was bad...

… but nobody's perfect.

[aikoaiko]

238. This comment is not s big deal.

It’s a slight criticism of the HRC campaign rhetoric.

[Gothmog]

240. From Jeffifer Palmaire

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

263. Hillary Clinton spokesman slams Pete Buttigieg for criticism of 2016 campaign

Link to tweet

[mtnsnake]

275. If Pete had replaced 3 of the words in his tweet with these 3 words, it would have made more sense

Instead of saying "Donald Trump got elected because, in his twisted way, he pointed out the huge troubles in our economy and our democracy,”

...I think his tweet would have been more relevant if he said “Donald Trump got elected because, in his twisted way, he pointed out the huge troubles in our economy in the Midwest,”

It was the Midwest that made the difference for Trump in 2016.

As for the Hillary part, I'm not sure if that was relevant, wise, or not. Politically speaking, Hillary wasn't as popular in the Midwest as we would have liked, so I doubt his tweet will offend too many of Pete's own constituents. It didn't offend me, and I'm not even from the Midwest.

I like Mayor Pete. I think he's smart and knows how to run a government, but I would have to wonder how he'd fare campaigning in a general election.

[betsuni]

276. Trump opens his mouth and out comes hours of demented nonsense and he's a master

at "messaging." Democrats are nitpicked to death for everything word.

How many times do we have to have this conversation:

A: (Repeats lie about Democrats.)
B: That's not true, don't lie about Democrats (provides link debunking lie).
A: Why do you think Democrats can't be criticized and are perfect?

[BlueWI]

277. Hillary Clinton is a primary candidate?

Sure sounds like it based on the tempest in a teapot your OP initiated.

There's nothing wrong with constructive criticism in context. Disagree and move on to the real issues? It's always an option .

[bitterross]

278. He fucking said the truth. Too bad if reality is a problem for you.

Too bad if reality is offensive.

[DURHAM D]

279. What is with your personal attack on me?

I like Pete but he made an unforced error. Hope he learned from it.

Please take note that this is my first response in this long thread but your attitude and insult is unwarranted.

[bitterross]

290. I didn't make a personal attack on you

I told the truth. Like Pete did.

[DURHAM D]

291. Yes you did

and Pete would agree.

[bitterross]

292. I think posts like yours are part of the problem with us not winning.

Pete didn't say anything wrong or untrue. He said something a lot of people do not want to acknowledge and then they pile onto him and call it an error. Admitting there is a problem is the first step to solving it.

It wasn't an error. He is correct. It's about time we start admitting those things. America isn't great anymore. Trump knows that. You know that. I know that. It's about time a Democrat stands up and says it and begins to point out how the GOP policies and politicians are WHY America isn't great anymore.


ON EDIT: I wish they would say it and channel the anger about that reality in a positive manner. Not in the negative manner Trump has. Posts like yours contribute the death by a thousand cuts we do to our candidates. STOP helping the GOP by calling something true and honest an unforced error when it isn't.

Let me refer you to some reality I wish more politicians like Pete would say.

BTW, how you know what Pete thinks?

[DURHAM D]

293. You are not responding to what I actually posted.

Instead you are having a conversation in your head that has you all upset.

I am not interested in it so I am done.

[bitterross]

294. Yes, I am. You disparaged Pete. Disparaging the candidates is bad for us.

You may feel free to be done, but I'm not.

Your OP was "Pete, what were you thinking." A clear note of disapproval.

Apparently, you didn't like what he said. Your OP then started the onslaught of people saying it was an error, they hope he can recover and all the other Lindsey Graham having vapors comments. I feel pretty sure that is exactly what you wanted to happen. I am sure you wanted to have a lot of people agree with you.

The whole thing then leads to everyone saying things that become talking points and links to this site from conservative sites. Where they say "See! Even Democrats don't think he's ready for the national stage"

What would have been the right, supportive thing to say is something like "Pete is right. The GOP, long before Trump, HAS taken this country out of its place as great. The GOP blocked infrastructure bills that would provide jobs.The GOP gave the wealthy a tax break. The GOP wants to take your health care. Pete is right. That's not what a great national does."

We don't need to make the talking points for the GOP, we need to counter them. Every time people react with things like "What were you thinking?" We give them power.

We must stop ceding power to them. Trump says batshit crazy every day. No on cares about it anymore. We can't call out our candidates for saying things that are true just because it's not a popular truth. We need to use those unpopular truths to rally people the way Trump used racism and xenophobia. We can do that I. A positive way rather than his negative manner.

[Cha]

283. Yeah, Buttigieg's plan to insult and be

divisive is working perfectly.

[calimary]

281. And WHAT WAS WRONG with Hillary saying America is already great???

WTF, Mayor Pete? You want me to rule you out or something?

Better damn well NOT dump on HRC if you expect to woo a vote from calimary.

[Celerity]

317. he was not dumping on anyone, he was mildly critiquing one small aspect of the campaign messaging

If your life was not great, if you were feeling disconnected and alienated (regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, profession, etc) and if you felt insecure, then it could be seen as not speaking to your concerns. If you are told it is already great and you are not doing great at all, that does create a disconnect.

It also was not good messaging as it was projected into the face of a 'change election'. It literally could be perceived as saying the status quo was already great, when for a very very diverse group of people it was not.For example, A-A voting levels cratered from not just 2012, but from even 2004 levels, see an extensive discussion of that here ( https://www.democraticunderground.com/128736610#post18 )

The entire dialectic was moved from what we could do to make peoples' lives better to a 'we are not them' and attempts to shame or outright bait (ie. basket of deplorables) people, which then boiled down into a food fight, further distracting from our substantive messaging. Many people felt like it was no long about them, they were being talked past, not talked to. Buttigieg never ever went after Sec. Clinton on a personal level, it was a critique of the messaging of the campaign. There is nothing divisive at all in his framing of his campaign. That is pure spin from people with agendas of attack themselves. They see Buttigieg surging in the polls (up to 3rd in Iowa, and has shot from 0% to 11%, probably higher now, as that was a week ago or so) and start up the attack train.

This story referenced in the tweet was 2 and half months old (the original tweet itself was 2 months old), and was lying there dormant until a Twitter bot/troll train latched onto it and dumped 1000 plus comments (many bots were removed as we watched it) in a few hours. It literally had almost no comments before the Twitter troll army found it a couple days ago.

Perfect example of of a previous attempt at the exact same thing by a notorious troll (slapped down by Wonkette) can be seen right here https://www.democraticunderground.com/128733687

[treestar]

289. What was wrong with saying it is already great?

You can't say it sucks and expect to win.

[Alabo]

319. Test