Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 03-19-2019, 09:16 PM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,299
I'm liking Mayor Pete less with every interview I see of him. I've probably watched a handful by now. He spends more time saying how he has more executive experience than the Pres/VP and how he has more military service than both of them and how young he is than he spends on what his policies are.

When asked about automation of jobs, he says that he's willing to look into UBI, but he has no ideas or plans about it. When asked about healthcare, he says he wants a public option to let the people decide. When asked about climate change, he just reiterates that the problem is a big one.

Those aren't solutions. They're just acknowledgements that big problems exist. The more I hear him speak, the more I think his policies aren't very well-considered.

In the meantime, he says that he needs $500K by the end of March to hit an internal deadline.

In contrast to someone like Elizabeth Warren, whose policies are very specific, Buttigieg's policies are very vague.
  #102  
Old 03-19-2019, 09:38 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,749
I've already made it clear I'm not super high on Mayor Pete, but I'll defend him on this one. If there's anything we should want our candidates to emulate Trump on, it's not being too specific on policies. As long as you are vague, more voters are likely to think you are singing their tune--as long as you are charismatic. This is what I like about Beto. Demanding that candidates get super specific is demanding that they reduce their appeal for no particular reason I can see.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #103  
Old 03-21-2019, 11:13 AM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: 221B Baker St.
Posts: 86,725
I heard him speak in Parma, Ohio a few weeks ago. Seems smart, funny and self-deprecating. Quite a leap from small-town city hall to the Oval Office, but stranger things have happened in politics (especially recently), and he would be a far, far better President than the incumbent.

And he does seem to be having a moment: https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/21/polit...ign/index.html
  #104  
Old 03-21-2019, 12:08 PM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Where haggis roam free
Posts: 31,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
and he would be a far, far better President than the incumbent.
To be fair, that is not difficult.
  #105  
Old 03-21-2019, 01:44 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,930
His Twitter feed has a link to job positions with his campaign and I’m giving thought to applying. Going to think about it this weekend.

It’s been quite a while since I’ve worked in politics except for canvassing and phone banking.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #106  
Old 03-21-2019, 03:31 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: 221B Baker St.
Posts: 86,725
Cute story about his language skills: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2019/03/...ca-loves-even/
  #107  
Old 03-21-2019, 06:42 PM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Where haggis roam free
Posts: 31,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
His Twitter feed has a link to job positions with his campaign and I’m giving thought to applying.
If you do, point out that his website doesn't appear to have a 'Contact' option. Not being American, I'm not allowed to donate, but as is, I can't even offer moral support.
  #108  
Old 03-22-2019, 12:02 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
To be fair, that is not difficult.

Yeah, I am getting tired of hearing "_____ is better than Trump" any time a Democratic candidate is critiqued in one way or another. It's like...yeah, stipulated. All of them are. That's beside the point.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #109  
Old 03-22-2019, 02:54 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,749
On the 538 live podcast, Pete got such a big reaction from the crowd, the panelists wondered aloud if they were being punked.
  #110  
Old 03-22-2019, 03:02 PM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
Cute story about his language skills: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2019/03/...ca-loves-even/
I kept thinking that picture of him in the article looked awfully familiar and then I realized why.

Obviously his success in South Bend is due to him bringing much-needed jobs in thneed manufacturing.
  #111  
Old 03-22-2019, 04:45 PM
Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,984
He is impressive but the idea of a 37 year old mayor of a small city as President is pretty silly. With another decade of experience he could be a serious choice. Winning statewide in Indiana may be difficult but that would make it all the more impressive if he can pull it off; after all it is a state which Obama won in 2008 and Democrats have won in even redder states. Alternatively some time in a federal cabinet position would provide him that next level of experience.
  #112  
Old 03-22-2019, 05:26 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
Really? Could he not be the American Trudeau? He's older than Pitt the Younger when the latter became Prime Minister.
That should be about the last thing you hope for him. Trudeau has spent his first administration reminding people why they shouldn't elect substitute teachers/snowboarding instructors to the highest position in the country. And right now, it looks like he may be a one-term wonder.

Buttegieg doesn't appear to be a Trudeau. For one thing, he appears to actually have accomplishments. For another, he appears able to speak for more than a few minutes without putting his foot in his mouth.
  #113  
Old 03-23-2019, 12:34 AM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: 221B Baker St.
Posts: 86,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lantern View Post
...Alternatively some time in a federal cabinet position would provide him that next level of experience.
A very savvy Dem friend of mine who is by no means hostile to PB says he thinks the guy is actually running to become HUD Secretary in the next Democratic Cabinet.
  #114  
Old 03-24-2019, 10:23 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,930
3rd place in Iowa in a new poll. I wish it was a Selzer poll.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...gevBMjnWVRn28o
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #115  
Old 03-24-2019, 10:30 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: 221B Baker St.
Posts: 86,725
CNN Politics on how he's "having a moment": https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/24/polit...rip/index.html
  #116  
Old 03-24-2019, 11:15 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,276
I really like the guy, he's charismatic and smart. I just don't see people of color or blue collar white voters voting for a gay guy. If the Dem can't win the industrial midwest OR African Americans AND has no chance of turning out Latinos in any great numbers, just hand the election to Trump now. Despite being from Indiana, if he were the nominee, I suspect he'd only do well in Democratic strongholds. He'd lose MI, PA, WI, FL, OH, NV, IA, NC, VA, with no chance of picking up anything like GA or AZ.

I could get behind a "Buttegieg for HUD 2020" campaign, however.
  #117  
Old 03-25-2019, 03:36 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,749
Yeah, some Democrats seem to be treating this primary like they are perusing bespoke, personalized fashions at a trendy boutique. It is imperative to get Trump out of there--and we now know Mueller's not saving us--so I hope like hell most Democratic primary voters have a more realistic and pragmatic outlook.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 03-25-2019 at 03:36 AM.
  #118  
Old 03-25-2019, 04:23 AM
SOJA is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 174
He's definitely interesting. Intelligent, multi-lingual, war and counter-terrorism experience, well spoken, etc. I'm fairly blue even though I ride center 90% of the time, but he'll get my vote if it's down to him and Gabbard. Gabbard is the anti-thesis of modern Democrats. Old Democrats, sure. I see PBG advancing and O'Rourke floundering. If somehow Bernie gets the DNC nod, I suspect he'll pick Pete for his VP.

That said, about 35% of this country won't vote for Pete because he's gay and married to a man. And I caution labeling those people as Republicans because there's a lot of Democrats who don't actually like the whole gay thing even though they're liberal.
  #119  
Old 03-25-2019, 05:44 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Where haggis roam free
Posts: 31,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOJA View Post
That said, about 35% of this country won't vote for Pete because he's gay and married to a man.
If the UK is any guide, you're very wrong. Most people here don't give two hoots. My own local MP is gay and was married to a man - they've now separated - and is a Conservative.
  #120  
Old 03-25-2019, 06:08 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
If the UK is any guide, you're very wrong. Most people here don't give two hoots. My own local MP is gay and was married to a man - they've now separated - and is a Conservative.
The UK is not a guide on this particular point, trust me on this. The UK is far more socially liberal than America, even amongst its conservatives. The mere fact that a gay man had the temerity for run for public office is sufficient to cause frothing in a sizable percentage of the US population.

A friend of mine attended Buttegieg's appearance (it was intended to be more of a meet-and-greet than a rally but they had five times the anticipated turnout) in Rock Hill, SC and she livestreamed it for those of us further afield. I though Pete acquitted himself well in his speech and in his responses to audience questions. He's still avoiding too much details on policy positions, which is normal for this stage of the game, but I heard much that I liked and nothing that I didn't. He gives thoughtful responses, but also understands that sometimes you need a bumper sticker (his is "Freedom, Democracy and Security", according to him). It's still early but I'm not saying no yet.

Someone compared Buttegieg to Adlai Stevenson recently with this quote, which seems apt:

Female support: “Governor, every thinking person would be voting for you”.
Stevenson: “Madam, that is not enough. I need a majority.”

If he really wants the job, he's going to have to figure out a strategy to appeal to the frothers.
  #121  
Old 03-25-2019, 01:39 PM
RickG is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Boulder CO USA
Posts: 819
My elderly parents (Dad is 83, Mom is 75) watched him on The View last week. My mother, who has always voted D, thought he was fantastic. She donates to non-partisan political organizations like LWV, but not to candidates. She told me she's writing him a check. My father, who has mostly voted R in the past (though he voted Libertarian in 2016 for President, and straight D in the 2018 midterms--he *really* dislikes Trump), was impressed by his intelligence and liked him. I'd say Dad would probably fit as an old northeastern Republican--socially tolerant and fiscally conservative--so Buttigieg's sexual preference isn't material to him, although he'd probably be uncomfortable actually talking about it. I suspect people like Dad are already lost to the Republicans at this point, though, so it doesn't much matter who the Dems nominate.

Maybe the debates will raise his profile enough to keep him in until the caucusing/voting starts.
__________________
Rick
  #122  
Old 03-25-2019, 01:53 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
The UK is not a guide on this particular point, trust me on this. The UK is far more socially liberal than America, even amongst its conservatives. The mere fact that a gay man had the temerity for run for public office is sufficient to cause frothing in a sizable percentage of the US population.
Exactly this. It's a minority view now, but among that minority, it's still a strongly held view.

As of May, 2017, 23% of Americans still felt that same-sex relations between consenting adults should be illegal.

This Pew Research study shows that 31% of Americans believe that "homsexuality should be discouraged." The number is substantially higher among Americans who are more religious, particularly those who are members of conservative faiths / denominations.

Now, most of the "frothers" are probably people who wouldn't vote for *any* Democratic candidate in this election...but, as you note, probably not all of them.

Last edited by kenobi 65; 03-25-2019 at 01:54 PM.
  #123  
Old 03-25-2019, 03:13 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,350
Buttegieg, as one of the more moderate candidates with crossover appeal, just got a boost from the Mueller investigation.

If Trump had been seriously implicated and was very likely to lose in 2020, it would make sense for the Democrats to take the opportunity to put a real progressive in the White House. But with a stronger Trump, the Democrats need to abandon the far left candidates and find someone who has a lot more crossover appeal and can pull away the Trump voters who are more likely now to stick with Trump.

I thought Hickenlooper or Klobuchar might be the ones to take that role, but Hickenlooper keeps making a fool of himself and Klobuchar's reputation for being a nightmare boss and poor in-person campaigner is turning out to be a problem. Beto O'Rourke might be able to do it, but stunts like livestreaming his dental cleaning makes him look like a flake.

As someone who would like to see Trump gone, I'm worried that the Democrats are going to run someone like Warren or Sanders against him. If so, say hello to four more years of Trump.
  #124  
Old 03-25-2019, 03:23 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,815
You say that as if we know what was in Mueller's report.

And regardless of his actual policies, the electorate is going to treat Buttigieg as "far left" just because he's gay.
  #125  
Old 03-25-2019, 03:30 PM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,870
I always thought I would view with suspicion the first real candidate to be younger than me. But, goddamn, do I like this guy.
  #126  
Old 03-25-2019, 03:52 PM
Ulf the Unwashed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
Exactly this. It's a minority view now, but among that minority, it's still a strongly held view.

As of May, 2017, 23% of Americans still felt that same-sex relations between consenting adults should be illegal.

This Pew Research study shows that 31% of Americans believe that "homsexuality should be discouraged." The number is substantially higher among Americans who are more religious, particularly those who are members of conservative faiths / denominations.

Now, most of the "frothers" are probably people who wouldn't vote for *any* Democratic candidate in this election...but, as you note, probably not all of them.
Not to argue with what you say here, because it's sadly accurate, and because running for the presidency is a much more complex thing than running for House or even senate or the governorship...but it's interesting to note the geographical distribution of the few LGBTQ folks who hold these positions at present. While they don't generally come from West Virginia and Idaho and Alabama and other deeply Republican states, neither do they generally come from Massachusetts and Washington and Illinois and other heavily Democratic states.

There are two US senators who identify as gay or bi: Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin and Kyrsten Sinema of AZ. The first has a long history of support for progressive candidates and causes. It also produced Scott Walker and Ron johnson, and going back further Joe McCarthy, and it voted narrowly for Trump in 2016. Arizona hadn't elected a Democratic senator since 1988 and hadn't voted for a Dem for president since the nineties. These are not deep blue states, and yet openly non-straight candidates won them.

Governors--there are currently two, Polis in CO (trending Democratic) and Brown in Oregon (pretty safely Democratic).

House members--two from CA, one from NY, one from RI, one from MN, one from WI, one from NH, one from KS. I don't know much about the individual districts, but this certainly isn't a list of the most liberal districts in the country. My own congressman (NY) is a married gay man and father of three kids who represents a long-time swing district that voted for Trump in 2016.

Yes, their numbers are few. But they demonstrate that strong gay candidates CAN win not just in Democratic strongholds, but also in much more marginal areas--including New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Colorado, Arizona, and Minnesota, states that the Democrats certainly could stand to win but aren't exactly in the bag. We can hope!
  #127  
Old 03-25-2019, 04:06 PM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Buttegieg, as one of the more moderate candidates with crossover appeal,
How can you tell he's a moderate? He hasn't given much policy. Which of his positions makes him a moderate?
  #128  
Old 03-25-2019, 04:41 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 17,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
How can you tell he's a moderate? He hasn't given much policy. Which of his positions makes him a moderate?
He pretty much couches everything he says in his religious beliefs.
  #129  
Old 03-25-2019, 05:24 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,985
New data point:

- South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg surges to third place in Iowa poll

Polls don't mean much at this point but it does indicate he is getting some name recognition.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill
  #130  
Old 03-25-2019, 06:09 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,749
Sam Stone, I cosign the general thrust of your argument that we need to be very pragmatic about ousting Trump. But your leap to "therefore, let's nominate Buttigieg" makes me think of the Far Side cartoon with the step "A Miracle Occurs". Having a virtually unpronouncable name; being in a gay marriage (something African Americans, whom we need to turn out en masse unlike 2016, are not super keen on); being super young and looking even younger, like he's Topher Grace's nephew; being the mayor of a small city that's unable to match the population of such metropolises as Greeley, Colorado or League City, Texas...what am I missing here? (I would add that "learned Norwegian to read an obscure foreign author" is NOT a selling point with low-information, middle-of-the-road voters, sad as that may be.)

FTR, that "livestreaming his dental cleaning" trope about Beto is basically fake news. He showed his mouth for context for maybe a second or two, and then the whole point was interviewing his hygienist, a Latina immigrant, about border issues.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 03-25-2019 at 06:11 PM.
  #131  
Old 03-25-2019, 09:42 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulf the Unwashed View Post
Yes, their numbers are few. But they demonstrate that strong gay candidates CAN win not just in Democratic strongholds, but also in much more marginal areas--including New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Colorado, Arizona, and Minnesota, states that the Democrats certainly could stand to win but aren't exactly in the bag. We can hope!
I can only really comment on Wisconsin (my home state), but Mark Pocan (to whom you're referring) represents the 2nd Congressional District, which is dominated by highly-liberal Madison.

Yes, I think it's progress, but if a gay candidate was going to win in a Wisconsin congressional district, that's the one.

Last edited by kenobi 65; 03-25-2019 at 09:44 PM.
  #132  
Old 03-26-2019, 12:14 AM
Ulf the Unwashed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
I can only really comment on Wisconsin (my home state), but Mark Pocan (to whom you're referring) represents the 2nd Congressional District, which is dominated by highly-liberal Madison.

Yes, I think it's progress, but if a gay candidate was going to win in a Wisconsin congressional district, that's the one.
I hadn't noticed where Pocan was from, and in any case I was thinking more about Baldwin. I believe she also represented Madison when she was in the House (right?), but even so, winning the Senate seat required her to hold her own in the Fox Cities, some of the more conservative sections of the Milwaukee suburbs, and other heavily Republican parts of the state. Either that, or REALLY pile up the votes in not just Madison but also Milwaukee and the southwestern counties...

At any rate, it's interesting that Baldwin (a lesbian) was able to win and keep a senate seat in "modern times," while Russ Feingold (a straight man) lost two elections.

But my larger point remains. I agree that Madison is a likely place to support a gay congressional candidate, but it's about the only truly "liberal bastion" to do so. Boston and Cambridge haven't elected a gay congressperson. Neither have San Francisco or Berkeley. Brooklyn hasn't. The Upper West Side of Manhattan hasn't. Not Seattle, not Ann Arbor. The lesbian representative from Minnesota isn;t from central Minneapolis, but from a suburban district that had most previously elected a right-wing talk show host. The only gay representative from NY represents a mostly exurban district well north of Manhattan. The gay man representing NH actually has the less Democratic of the state's two districts. And so on--

Because I'm curious, here are the figures for the eight openly LGBTQ reps currently in Congress:

Pocan, WI (Madison)--a D+16 district; as you say, the WI district most likely to elect a gay person, and one that's probably done so twice.
David Cicciline, RI (Providence)--D+14.
Mark Takano, CA (Riverside)--D+12.

But those are the only current Democratic-leaning districts that elected people known to be LGBTQ. The others:

Katie Hill, CA (Agua Dulce) -- even
Sean Patrick Maloney, NY (Carmel/Cold Spring)--R+1
Angie Craig, MN (south suburbs of Mpls)--R+2
Chris Pappas, NH (eastern half of the state, including Manchester)--R+2
Sharice Davids, KS (Kansas City area)--R+4

None of these are exactly noted for being hotbeds of liberalism. And yet...

[Yes, I believe jared Polis got his start in Boulder, and Kate Brown in OR came out of Portland, I think, but as governors they've had to appeal to people in other parts of their states as well...]

Anyway. I knew from my own congressman (Maloney) as well as from Synema and Baldwin (at the senatorial level) that politically moderate places could indeed elect gay political leaders, but even so I'm surprised to see how true it is. Again, none of this is meant to say "Oh, Baldwin won two Senate elections, so Wisconsin is in the bag for Mayor Pete should he decide to run"--just that the connection between "bastion of liberalism" and "has elected gay representatives" isn't actually very strong.
  #133  
Old 03-26-2019, 12:24 AM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulf the Unwashed View Post
I hadn't noticed where Pocan was from, and in any case I was thinking more about Baldwin. I believe she also represented Madison when she was in the House (right?), but even so, winning the Senate seat required her to hold her own in the Fox Cities, some of the more conservative sections of the Milwaukee suburbs, and other heavily Republican parts of the state. Either that, or REALLY pile up the votes in not just Madison but also Milwaukee and the southwestern counties...

At any rate, it's interesting that Baldwin (a lesbian) was able to win and keep a senate seat in "modern times," while Russ Feingold (a straight man) lost two elections.
Yes, Pocan's House seat was Baldwin's. In the 2018 election, Baldwin actually won the Fox Valley, including Brown County (Green Bay, my old hometown), which was never particularly liberal, has gotten increasingly conservative over the past few decades. She did have the advantage of incumbency, as well as running in '18, when some voters were likely making anti-Trump votes (and her opponent, Leah Vukmir, was an unabashed Trumpist), but even so, she won re-election by 11 percentage points, in a state that, as you note, isn't particularly "blue" overall.

Last edited by kenobi 65; 03-26-2019 at 12:25 AM.
  #134  
Old 03-26-2019, 03:44 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,749
Ulf, those are definitely interesting--and surprising--numbers. (I'll take your word for it that they are accurate.)
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #135  
Old 03-26-2019, 11:14 AM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,546
Clay Aiken ran for Congress in my district which at the time was pretty red and he got 40% which I assume means he got all the Dem votes or maybe he lost a few and picked up a few GOP votes.
  #136  
Old 03-26-2019, 11:20 AM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: 221B Baker St.
Posts: 86,725
I share the concern that PB's being a married gay dude with an odd name is going to hurt him with a substantial chunk of the electorate. I also wonder, more and more, if he has the gumption to stand up to Trump & Co. once they start seriously dumping on him, as they will if he comes anywhere close to the Dem nomination. Just not sure how he'll fare once the GOP attack machine cranks up.
  #137  
Old 03-26-2019, 12:17 PM
YamatoTwinkie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
I'm liking Mayor Pete less with every interview I see of him. I've probably watched a handful by now. He spends more time saying how he has more executive experience than the Pres/VP and how he has more military service than both of them and how young he is than he spends on what his policies are.
I don't think the job of president is to dream up and come in with a huge list of fully fleshed out detailed policy proposals - that's a job much bigger than one person. At this stage it's unfair to compare smaller, less funded candidates against someone like Senator Warren who has the advantage of multiple staffers (who's job is to dream up these proposals), lots of money to hire outside consultants, and prior experience in Congress to piggyback off of.

The President's role is to be informed about the issues, knowledgeable, willing to defer to experts (and to know how to select those experts), willing to be flexible when facts on the ground suggest a change of direction, be able to sell both the voters and congress on whatever policy changes are the best course of action, and ultimately make the tough decisions that are placed before the unitary executive.
  #138  
Old 03-26-2019, 12:25 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,815
What I'm really hoping for from him, this cycle at least, is that he acts as a lightning rod for all of the Republican attacks, to leave the eventual actual candidate more protected.
  #139  
Old 03-26-2019, 06:58 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
I share the concern that PB's being a married gay dude with an odd name is going to hurt him with a substantial chunk of the electorate.

And if a married gay dude with an odd name is going to make a run, it should be someone with political experience beyond mayor of such a small city (that people outside Indiana have only heard of because a famous university is there). For that matter, even if his name were Peter Bradley, and he was in a straight marriage and looked like Ashton Kutcher instead of Topher Grace, it would still be an absurdity to run for president from that position. If he's really running for Cabinet, that's cool, I guess--except that he might distort the field and change who gets nominated.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #140  
Old 03-26-2019, 07:58 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,965
I finally, after many months of seeing his name and watching interest in him grow, heard his speaking voice in an interview on "The Breakfast Club" on Youtube. I was NOT prepared for that voice at all. I was not REMOTELY expecting it to sound like that - not to judge someone on his appearance too much but I assumed it would be higher. No, not at all because he is gay, but because he's so youthful looking. But his voice sounds more like a professional voice-over actor....or Don Draper. I'm sold on the guy by his speaking voice alone. He speaks with incredible confidence, authority, and is very articulate. I'm impressed, honestly. Now in spite of his name, and his being gay, I am CONVINCED he could be very competitive in the election.

Just my 2 cents.
  #141  
Old 03-26-2019, 08:03 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,965
Just heard him say "we need to treat teachers more like soldiers. We need to pay them more like doctors." While the latter might be a stretch, and the risk to life and limb not the same as the former, I think it's an admirable thing to say, and that message - that teachers need to be better compensated and that the education they provide is a crucial part of economic progress, and it's a great thing to hear. Again, very impressed. Not so much by the message, although I agree with it, than by the way he presented it. And with SUCH authority and confidence in his voice.
  #142  
Old 03-26-2019, 09:26 PM
SOJA is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
Exactly this. It's a minority view now, but among that minority, it's still a strongly held view.

As of May, 2017, 23% of Americans still felt that same-sex relations between consenting adults should be illegal.

This Pew Research study shows that 31% of Americans believe that "homsexuality should be discouraged." The number is substantially higher among Americans who are more religious, particularly those who are members of conservative faiths / denominations.

Now, most of the "frothers" are probably people who wouldn't vote for *any* Democratic candidate in this election...but, as you note, probably not all of them.

23% is an interesting figure. Presuming that 35% of the country still backs the current POTUS 100% regardless of whatever or whomever he hurts, I sincerely wonder whether the difference between those two numbers are okay with homosexuality.

I'd love to see the ethnic, religious background and social status breakdown of both your 23% figure and the much thrown around 35% figure.


It's safe to say he won't get 99.9% of the Evangelical vote, but then again most of those people are delusional and think Trump is the third coming of Christ, assuming he was real.


If Pete B. makes it to the debates, I'm curious what kind of dog whistling we'll see from the GOP. Compared to being a woman or black/minority, or even both, there's very little to point towards him being gay as a con without coming off as an asshole. The only real baggage I can think of is him being gay, which I pointed out earlier in my first post in this thread. However, like I said and you said, a very small portion, albeit very vocal, opposes homosexuality. Then again, they're fine with Lindsey Graham.

Last edited by SOJA; 03-26-2019 at 09:29 PM.
  #143  
Old 03-26-2019, 09:33 PM
SOJA is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
I finally, after many months of seeing his name and watching interest in him grow, heard his speaking voice in an interview on "The Breakfast Club" on Youtube. I was NOT prepared for that voice at all. I was not REMOTELY expecting it to sound like that - not to judge someone on his appearance too much but I assumed it would be higher. No, not at all because he is gay, but because he's so youthful looking. But his voice sounds more like a professional voice-over actor....or Don Draper. I'm sold on the guy by his speaking voice alone. He speaks with incredible confidence, authority, and is very articulate. I'm impressed, honestly. Now in spite of his name, and his being gay, I am CONVINCED he could be very competitive in the election.

Just my 2 cents.
Nah, you're not being homophobic. He does look young, but it's down to genetics. Similar to you, I didn't expect the voice that came out of Jared Kushner, either. Jared's voice isn't as deep as Pete's, but his voice doesn't match his body/face either. Actually, what's more surprising is how old Kushner is. I had thought he was in his early 30s.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
And if a married gay dude with an odd name is going to make a run, it should be someone with political experience beyond mayor of such a small city (that people outside Indiana have only heard of because a famous university is there). For that matter, even if his name were Peter Bradley, and he was in a straight marriage and looked like Ashton Kutcher instead of Topher Grace, it would still be an absurdity to run for president from that position. If he's really running for Cabinet, that's cool, I guess--except that he might distort the field and change who gets nominated.
The old rules need not apply after 2016. One could argue even Obama wouldn't have made it. The dynamic of politics is changing.

Last edited by SOJA; 03-26-2019 at 09:34 PM.
  #144  
Old 03-26-2019, 10:19 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOJA View Post
I'd love to see the ethnic, religious background and social status breakdown of both your 23% figure and the much thrown around 35% figure.
The Post article with the 23% has a link to the supporting Gallup poll, but there aren't any demographic breakdowns in that data.

However, the Pew study, in which 31% said that homosexuality "should be discouraged" does, at least, have breakdowns by religion: faiths / denominations in which the "discouraged" number is 50% or higher include evangelical Protestants, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Mormons. A bit lower are Muslims (at 47%), and "historically black Protestant" denominations (at 40%).

Similarly, among those who are absolutely certain in the existence of God, who attend church regularly, and who pray regularly, they, too, are more likely to feel that homosexuality should be discouraged. Unfortunately, the web site doens't have any breakdowns by age, region, income, etc.
  #145  
Old 03-26-2019, 11:21 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,749
People in this thread are really treating black voters as invisible. White conservatives are not the only ones who are less accepting of homosexuality. African Americans are about twice as likely as other Democrats to disapprove.

ETA: Sorry, kenobi's data does point to that a bit, and also reminds me there are Arab-Americans to consider, who are disproportionately important in Michigan, obviously one of the key spaces on the electoral map chessboard.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 03-26-2019 at 11:24 PM.
  #146  
Old 03-27-2019, 12:29 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,749
Mayor Pete received all of 8,500 votes in his last seriously contested election in 2015. Compare that to Cory Booker's 1 million in 2014, Kamala Harris's 7.5 million in 2016, or Beto O'Rourke's 4 million in 2018.

This article says he is weak with black voters: https://www.southbendtribune.com/new...dce6f9452.html

I tried to find some politicians who had received as few votes as Pete for an apples-to-apples comparison, but the closest I could come up with is Toni Carter. Here in Minnesota, she won the District 4 race to get a seat on the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners, with 25,500 votes, "only" three times as many as Pete.

I mean, what are we doing here? 1-2-3 in Iowa is an elderly man who was born before WWII, an elderly man born during WWII, and then for a curveball, a guy who didn't turn eighteen until after Y2K and looks like he was too young to vote for Obama? None of whom excite black voters? Hello?
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #147  
Old 03-27-2019, 07:03 AM
not what you'd expect is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,905
I like Pete a lot. You can tell he's really smart. He's served in the military in addition to being Mayor.

I'm very happy to see him rising in the polls.
  #148  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:50 PM
SOJA is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
The Post article with the 23% has a link to the supporting Gallup poll, but there aren't any demographic breakdowns in that data.

However, the Pew study, in which 31% said that homosexuality "should be discouraged" does, at least, have breakdowns by religion: faiths / denominations in which the "discouraged" number is 50% or higher include evangelical Protestants, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Mormons. A bit lower are Muslims (at 47%), and "historically black Protestant" denominations (at 40%).

Similarly, among those who are absolutely certain in the existence of God, who attend church regularly, and who pray regularly, they, too, are more likely to feel that homosexuality should be discouraged. Unfortunately, the web site doens't have any breakdowns by age, region, income, etc.
Does the third part of your post correlate to the Pew data? I'm not entirely surprised by the faith breakdown. Also not surprised at Islam being more accepting by a small margin compared to non-Muslims. That said, the Mormon part surprises me, not because of the advanced the Mormon Church has made to become more inclusive (though they have tons of work to do) is that, and anecdotally speaking, I've never met a Mormon who wasn't gay.
  #149  
Old 03-28-2019, 02:18 AM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOJA View Post
Does the third part of your post correlate to the Pew data? I'm not entirely surprised by the faith breakdown. Also not surprised at Islam being more accepting by a small margin compared to non-Muslims. That said, the Mormon part surprises me, not because of the advanced the Mormon Church has made to become more inclusive (though they have tons of work to do) is that, and anecdotally speaking, I've never met a Mormon who wasn't gay.
Yes, that's from the Pew data. Their site breaks out the answers to the question about "should homosexuality be accepted or discouraged" by several other measures related to faith and religion.

The LDS Church is still pretty anti-homosexual, as far as I can tell. Church policy still prohibits any same-sex sexual behavior, the church has actively fought against legalization of same-sex marriage in recent years, and Mormons who enter into a SSM are classified as apostates.

OTOH, it also looks like the church at least no longer holds that homosexuality is a "curable condition," and they apparently actually supported a law in Salt Lake City to ban discrimination against LGBT people in employment and housing.

In short, it sounds like the LDS position currently is, "being gay is all right, but gay sex is still really bad."

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homose...ter-day_Saints

Last edited by kenobi 65; 03-28-2019 at 02:19 AM.
  #150  
Old 03-28-2019, 08:47 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOJA View Post
Also not surprised at Islam being more accepting by a small margin compared to non-Muslims.

You should be surprised, because it’s not actually the case. Of the 12 religions listed, only three were slightly more intolerant of homosexuality than Muslims, while the others were significantly less intolerant. For example, only about one-fourth of Catholics and mainline Protestants said homosexuality should be discouraged, compared to half of Muslims.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017