You mean he doesn’t speak in soundbites? BLASPHEMY! 
BTW remember that the last president who was a Rhodes Scholar was Bill Clinton. Those are big boots to fill.
It’s possibly because Google or Facebook or both are noting that you’re visiting this page.
I really like Pete, not the least of which because he is one of the few candidates that will actually viscerally care what the world looks like in 2050 because he will still have to be living in that world. It’s not an intellectual exercise for him. He’s honest and straightforward and has more experience in every category than our current president.
I’m donating to his campaign. I think it’s unlikely he gets the nod but I hope he makes some noise.
The Guardian has just published a gushing article here.
Over every other candidate, Democrat or Republican? Hmm.
Any specific issue he is centering on?
True - “black man” is the bigger swing vote bloc, and having every black person automatically vote for you wins more elections than having every gay person vote for you. As has been mentioned, Hilary lost because black people stayed home and did not vote for her like they did Obama. Would blacks be more likely to turn out for a gay white person as a straight white one? That remains to be seen.
Regards,
Shodan
Yes really. Pete Buttigieg has no chance this time around because he’s a nobody from nowhere and he has to overcome that first.
Justin Trudeau never had to deal with that. His birth was national front page news. When he was three months old President Richard Nixon visited Canada and toasted, “The future prime minister.”
I think I mentioned this before, but to piggyback on this line: when I heard him speak last summer, the thing he said that I found most compelling was a comment to the effect that he CAN’T go back to the 1950s; it’s not just a matter of don’t-want-to, it’s a matter of can’t. Going back to what the fifties stood for, he said, would invalidate his marriage, force him into metaphorical hiding. --To some extent the same can be said by the women and the people of color in the presidential field as well, but the sense of “erasure” in what he was talking about was especially powerful.
Look forward AND don’t look back; more than any other candidate, as you say, it’s “not an intellectual exercise.” It’s very real.
I like a lot of the candidates this time around, probably lean toward Klobuchar more than anyone at this point, but from where I sit Buttigieg seems right up there with the best of 'em.
Trudeau took the Liberla leadership following 2 disastrous previous leaders and two failed elections. There no real equivalent to that in the US system.
As for becoming PM that was, as usual in Canada, through exhaustion with the existing government, and failure by the NDP. It’s much clearer in the Canadian system who is to blame for policy than the US, so again…not quite the same.
Obama was a nobody from nowhere.
The hell you say.
He was a known name with buzz from that convention speech and his entry was a big will he or won’t he for quite a while. Pretty much soon as he announced he polled in second place in a crowded field.
And before that?
Just as Obama made a splash, so Buttegieg appears to have made a splash. Only time - and American voters - will tell if anything comes of it
In addition to “the nomination speech,” Obama was elected to the US Senate four years before he was elected President. true, he was in his first term as a senator, but there’s really nowhere to go from the US Senate other than to the Presidency. Mayor of the 300th largest US city is…not exactly the US Senate.
Also, if Chicago (and more generally IL) is “from nowhere,” what’s “from somewhere”? Chicago is the third largest city in the US, as influential in business and politics as essentially anywhere else in the country; Illinois is either the fifth or sixth most populous state. The US hasn’t tended to be terribly concerned in the past about “coming from somewhere” where its presidential candidates are concerned (see Bill Clinton, Bob Dole, Bernie Sanders…), but if it’s a consideration, hard to see how we do much better than Obama in that department.
You didn’t ask if he could be the American Obama. You asked if he could be the American Trudeau.
He also can’t be the American Obama because, among other things, Obama is the American Obama.
Here’s a post of mine comparing Tulsi Gabbard to Obama, but the same argument applies to Pete Buttegieg.
For this foreigner, a place like New York, Washington, LA, SF…
Really? Wow. There was me thinking that apart from being the home of the Straight Dope it was part of the decrepit, derelict, corrupt Rust Belt like Detroit. Ignorance fought.
He has not made a splash.
March, 17 2007 Obama was the choice of 25.1% of democratic primary voters according to his RCP (2008 Dem Primary) average.
Right now RCP (2020 Dem Primary) isn’t even tracking Pete Buttegieg’s average. The most recent Morning Consult pollhas him at 1%.
He has no chance to win because at this point in the cycle he’s a nobody from nowhere. Neither Obama nor Trudeau had that problem at this point in the cycle.
I would actually say that being a mayor rather than a senator is a huge mark in Buttegig’s favor. I would prefer Governor or mayor or a larger city, but I think Senators generally make poor executives unless they have executive experience elsewhere (like Booker has, for example) . Being mayor is much better prep.
It’s not necessarily about being mayor, it’s about being elected mayor as an openly gay man in the city with a conservative Roman Catholic university that dominates the city.
The last president from New York City was Teddy Roosevelt? Never had one from DC, though Al Gore came the closest. Nixon was from near LA (“Son of Orange County” “I just can’t believe you are such a fool!”), so much for that one.
Our next president is from near San Francisco. Oakland, to be precise.
Here is a link to the incumbent for Indiana’s 2nd district:
https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&hs=twg&ei=a8SOXMHNIsPMjgSW3yk&q=jackie+walorski+district&oq=Jackie+Walorski+&gs_l=psy-ab.1.8.0l10.27955.27955..32461...0.0..0.59.59.1......0....2j1..gws-wiz.......0i71.T7Mqp6INt-g
Here’s a link to a map of Indiana’s 2nd Congressional district:
https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&hs=7HM&ei=jMSOXO2ZM4SSjwT-opjIDw&q=map+of+Indiana’s+2nd+congressional+district&oq=map+of+Indiana’s+2nd+congressional+district&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i22i30.195548.220788..224146...0.0..0.144.3460.41j2......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i67j0i131j0j38j33i22i29i30j33i299j33i160.rWePQwaLKbQ
I live in the City of Elkhart, considering the entire district, those of us who would favor a Democratic candidate are mighty thin on the ground.
Now a Senate race, Indiana has elected Democrats to the US Senate, so I wouldn’t rule that out, however, as has been noted Indiana is strongly Republican.
Well, this is very interesting. For myself, I’m all in for Mayor Pete, and for all the reasons mentioned. As for experience, there are past presidents who have had as little experience. Some did well, some didn’t, I leave it to the reader to decide which is which, and who goes where. I live not far from South Bend, I’ve gotten positive vibes for Mayor Pete from S.B. folk I know. Back to the experience issue, in more than one of Mayor Pete’s interviews, he has noted that he’s had more government experience then Mr. Trump and Mr.Pence combined.
Respectfully Zuer-coli