After trump, it’s hard to shame an opponent with past improprieties. I’m so old that I remember yelling “yee-haw!” was enough to disqualify you.
Kind of like this scream?
In fairness, he’s a democrat. It still would be disqualifying.
Were I able to vote in the local Democratic primary, I would certainly consider Mayor Pete. He brings a lot to the table.
Most historians believe we have already had a gay president, James Buchanan, but yeah, times were a lot different for many reasons.
My dad was a big Howard Dean supporter, and was at that rally. Context was everything, according to him.
Ummm… you must be thinking of a DIFFERENT Democratic Party…
Bumped.
I’m a big Mayor Pete fan but confess I have my doubts that he will ever become President. Still, I thought you’d all appreciate his remarks, as both a dad and a Navy vet, on the American flag - just in time for Independence Day: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ptbTZB4yidE
Yeah, same here. But if he becomes senator or Governor and does a good job, maybe in 2032.
He could run in 2060 and still be younger than Joe Biden was last year.
Or Trump now.
The only way ‘Mayor Pete’ is getting elected in the foreseeable future is if he invents the flux capacitor and installs it in a DeLorean that can somehow make it all the way up to 88 miles an hour. Better do it quickly; federal funding for highway maintenance is going to dry up faster than a puddle on a summer day in Phoenix.
Stranger
An out gay president? Not for a long while, unless the GOP radically implodes. It’s just too large of an “obstacle “ in too many minds.
I’ve never really understood this line of thought.
In 2020 — which is to say, when Biden won out over Trump — there were folks who voted for Trump rather than Biden, and who would’ve still voted for Trump if the other candidate had been Buttigieg; I get that. And some folks who voted for Biden rather than Trump would’ve likewise voted for Buttigieg rather than Trump, and I get that too.
But who looks back at that race and says, oh, no, I wouldn’t have voted for Buttigieg, due to my position on, uh, gay matters. But I didn’t vote for Trump; I voted for Joe Biden, who of course agreed with Buttigieg when it comes to gay matters! And who chose Pete Buttigieg for Cabinet Secretary! So, y’know, boo, down with Buttigieg; but, hey, yay for Biden, because why the heck wouldn’t I approve of the guy who appointed gay federal judges to deal with stateside stuff and a gay White House press secretary to explain things, sure as his gay ambassadors and gay Secretary of the Army were representing him and dealing with stuff abroad?
I’m entirely serious; who is that voter? Who approves of Biden, who approves of Buttigieg, but doesn’t approve of Buttigieg?
I sort thought along these lines when folk discussed Kamala, Stacey Abrams, or other women of color. I thought that too big of a grasp, and thought it more strategic to go with - say - a latino man. (Of course, I woulda bet the house that I’d never live to see a black president.)
Many folk around here decried such thinking, saying they were tired of such a slow, incremental approach, and that such an approach treated women candidates unfairly. Those folk pretty much convinced me. I don’t know how to reach the ignorant/evil fuckers who voted for Trump. Not sure how many such assholes would have voted for Hillary or Kamala had they been white men with identical positions/resumes. But I’m sorta tired of trying half measures in the hope of appealling to such persons.
If Pete is the best candidate, he’s my guy. If things aren’t hurtling downhill fast enough by 28 for the idiots to see, well, I’m likely to have given my last fuck.
Who can tell, the same country that elected Obama twice also elected trump twice. National schizophrenia is nothing to take lightly.
Socially conservative-but-not-Republican voters who can accept a president who might accede to ‘the homosexual agenda’ in order to get votes but would rather stay home rather than vote for an actual homosexual candidate. There are even a contingent of self-described ‘progressives’ who oppose expansion of LGBTQ+ protections, either because they think it undermines other aspects of their advocacy, or because it just makes them uncomfortable.
Politics is not a unipolar color bar; it is a multi-dimensional spectral array that covers a wide degree of beliefs, principles, and ideals. The GOP has managed to condense the horizon of their region by insisting on dogmatic adherence to a cult of personality but on the ‘liberal’ or 'progressive end that distribution is fanned out. Which, in theory, is what democracy is all about, assuming you have a system that actually represents a diversity of opinions and encourages the formation of coalitions around core issues without quashing political independences. Sadly, our ‘two party system’ is explicitly intended to facilitate top down control by large political organizations which reject ‘too much’ free thought or independent rhetoric.
Stranger
There is a larger gap than you might think between bigots VS and people who just dont know much about gays and are a little uncomfortable and suspicious due to that lack of knowledge. People who wont condemn gay marriage, but would feel uncomfortable going to one. Like the famous people who arent bigoted against blacks but wouldnt want their sister to marry one.
And sure even Biden supporters as Pete was “only” secretary of transportation.
Not a lot of those sure, but remember, in battle ground states the margin is often razor thin.
Many posters think the fact Clinton and Harris were women worked against them.
This. Stirring up the base and the average “I’m not a bigot but-“ voter up against Pete would be remarkably easy.
