That was an extremely good article. I had to use a speed reading app to get through it all since it was 8000+ words but it was a very good picture of what Buttigieg actually stands for.
I’ll vote for whomever the democrats nominate, but if Buttigieg actually gets the nomination I’d say I’m more excited to vote for him than I was before reading that.
But, I must say, that Buttigieg is right that we’ve basically been put into a bind where the democrats are basically just neo-liberal republican lite and lots of democrats do not like that choice, and they don’t like the lack of a positive national vision from democrats. But that is why Sanders is so popular. Sanders is presenting this narrative as an alternative to the neoliberal republican-lite politics most of us have come to expect from the democratic party. I can understand why Pete did a major paper on Sanders because of this, but with Sanders already as the transformative candidate rejecting neoliberalism I guess Buttigieg had to present himself as the voice of a new generation instead as that lane was taken by Sanders and Warren.
I voted in the 2010 Indiana elections. I don’t remember voting for treasurer, but I tend to vote pretty much straight democratic so I’m sure I voted for Pete in 2010, despite not remembering him from that election. I hope he has a meaningful role in the future of the democratic party. However there is no future for him in Indiana, which is basically a southern state in the north (senators, governors and other statewide office all tend to go republican here). He may want to focus on behind the scenes work with narratives and how to portray the party on a national level, being involved in executive level cabinet positions, etc. if his plan to run for president doesn’t pan out.
It might be helpful to consider the entire context of this statement, rather than just spewing rage all over the internet.
His point is that we need to find money to provide social services, which will be more manageable if we control the debt. He also points out that Democrats have historically done a better job of controlling the debt than Republicans have, and blames the current debt entirely on Trump.
He’s right. We SHOULD be discussing this, and if a Democrat is going to be in the White House, they will have to address it.
I saw a clip of him being asked what if the president brings up “family values”? he said hes never cheated on his husband or paid someone to keep quiet about an affair. Good for him!
I saw Mayor Pete speak at a suburban Cleveland library about a year ago and liked what I saw - smart, funny, low-key, quick on his feet. His best line: asked about his electability, he said, “I think I have the ex-Navy small-town-mayor gay Episcopalian Maltese-American lane pretty much locked up.”
That said, moving from South Bend city hall to the White House is quite a leap, he has serious problems with black Democrats, and I think most Americans in the secrecy of the voting booth aren’t going to go for a gay President. I think he might be best as HUD Secretary in the next Democratic Cabinet.
Some of the candidates are discussing it. Warren’s got a wealth tax proposal which pays for an astounding amount of stuff, and IIRC Sanders has a similar proposal.
Maybe Buttigieg should discuss it, rather than just going around saying we ought to.