Any guesses where Pete and Chasten Buttigieg will live in the DMV?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even in DC, $4500 for one bedroom is not normal. Yes, I suppose the rent is too damn high if you need the height of luxury and security mere blocks from your office. The vast majority of us city dwellers manage to find housing for a fraction of that price.

This. Rent in DC is high but it’s ridiculous for a childless couple making upwards of 200k the complain about it — that’s like the one demographic that DC’s rental market serves very well. And while I understand the security needs, I’m guessing all they really need is a doorman building. Even among luxury buildings with a doorman, 4500 for a one bedroom is astronomically high for the city. That building is brand new, in a super pricy neighborhood, and loaded with amenities. I bet they could have found something cheaper in Navy Yard itself, but the building wouldn’t have been as nice and it probably would be in one of the high rises closer to the freeway. But that’s not a huge compromise.

Surely they also must have savings and the ability to buy if they wanted— you could definitely buy a condo with a lower mortgage than that on Capitol Hill.

Did you even read. He said he's not worried for THEM, but rent is too damn high in the city for everyone.

And yes, for security reasons, they chose that building.
I'm more concerned about the tweet and videoing of him on his bike when he is obviously concerned about safety and security.

He said they wanted a 1 bedroom + den but "couldn't afford" it. It comes off as tone deaf when plenty of people in this city live in 2-3 bedroom homes for less than they pay for a 1 bedroom in brand new luxury building in Eastern Market. They could have paid less but wanted to be in a certain kind of neighborhood (rich, white), have a certain kind of commute (close, by foot or bike), and live in a certain kind fo building (fancy, lots of amenities). Yes they had the security reasons as well, but there are other buildings that could accommodate security. Or they could have lived in a SFH (easily, for 4500/mo) which is what most people in that situation do because it simplifies security in many ways.

It sounds like he's saying "this city is so expensive, it must be so hard for people who don't have our resources." But actually they are making choices that contribute to the high cost of rent in the city while also acting like they had no other choice when they did.

But I forgot you aren't allowed to criticize Biden/Harris folks on this website because people like to fanboy about them. Anyway.

LOL. After they got roundly mocked, they had the WaPo revise the article to note that they got a “deal” on the apartment and are only paying $3,000 a month. Which makes their whining about not being able to afford it even more tone deaf.

Elitist democrats. What did you expect?

Well, at least they're not insurrectionist Republicans.

They're trying to adopt (which is $$$ to do properly), Chasten isn't working and they surely have a lot of expenses related to being high profile people (clothing, entertaining, grooming etc.) It's not that tone deaf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even in DC, $4500 for one bedroom is not normal. Yes, I suppose the rent is too damn high if you need the height of luxury and security mere blocks from your office. The vast majority of us city dwellers manage to find housing for a fraction of that price.

This. Rent in DC is high but it’s ridiculous for a childless couple making upwards of 200k the complain about it — that’s like the one demographic that DC’s rental market serves very well. And while I understand the security needs, I’m guessing all they really need is a doorman building. Even among luxury buildings with a doorman, 4500 for a one bedroom is astronomically high for the city. That building is brand new, in a super pricy neighborhood, and loaded with amenities. I bet they could have found something cheaper in Navy Yard itself, but the building wouldn’t have been as nice and it probably would be in one of the high rises closer to the freeway. But that’s not a huge compromise.

Surely they also must have savings and the ability to buy if they wanted— you could definitely buy a condo with a lower mortgage than that on Capitol Hill.

Did you even read. He said he's not worried for THEM, but rent is too damn high in the city for everyone.

And yes, for security reasons, they chose that building.
I'm more concerned about the tweet and videoing of him on his bike when he is obviously concerned about safety and security.

He said they wanted a 1 bedroom + den but "couldn't afford" it. It comes off as tone deaf when plenty of people in this city live in 2-3 bedroom homes for less than they pay for a 1 bedroom in brand new luxury building in Eastern Market. They could have paid less but wanted to be in a certain kind of neighborhood (rich, white), have a certain kind of commute (close, by foot or bike), and live in a certain kind fo building (fancy, lots of amenities). Yes they had the security reasons as well, but there are other buildings that could accommodate security. Or they could have lived in a SFH (easily, for 4500/mo) which is what most people in that situation do because it simplifies security in many ways.

It sounds like he's saying "this city is so expensive, it must be so hard for people who don't have our resources." But actually they are making choices that contribute to the high cost of rent in the city while also acting like they had no other choice when they did.

But I forgot you aren't allowed to criticize Biden/Harris folks on this website because people like to fanboy about them. Anyway.

LOL. After they got roundly mocked, they had the WaPo revise the article to note that they got a “deal” on the apartment and are only paying $3,000 a month. Which makes their whining about not being able to afford it even more tone deaf.

Elitist democrats. What did you expect?

Well, at least they're not insurrectionist Republicans.

They're trying to adopt (which is $$$ to do properly), Chasten isn't working and they surely have a lot of expenses related to being high profile people (clothing, entertaining, grooming etc.) It's not that tone deaf.

He needs to get a job. He also needs to put on his big boy pants. He changed gyms because a lobbyist approached him to try to get an intro to Pete. Give me a break. It will happen everywhere. Washington is about power and access. He needs to grow up and learn to play the game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even in DC, $4500 for one bedroom is not normal. Yes, I suppose the rent is too damn high if you need the height of luxury and security mere blocks from your office. The vast majority of us city dwellers manage to find housing for a fraction of that price.

This. Rent in DC is high but it’s ridiculous for a childless couple making upwards of 200k the complain about it — that’s like the one demographic that DC’s rental market serves very well. And while I understand the security needs, I’m guessing all they really need is a doorman building. Even among luxury buildings with a doorman, 4500 for a one bedroom is astronomically high for the city. That building is brand new, in a super pricy neighborhood, and loaded with amenities. I bet they could have found something cheaper in Navy Yard itself, but the building wouldn’t have been as nice and it probably would be in one of the high rises closer to the freeway. But that’s not a huge compromise.

Surely they also must have savings and the ability to buy if they wanted— you could definitely buy a condo with a lower mortgage than that on Capitol Hill.

Did you even read. He said he's not worried for THEM, but rent is too damn high in the city for everyone.

And yes, for security reasons, they chose that building.
I'm more concerned about the tweet and videoing of him on his bike when he is obviously concerned about safety and security.

He said they wanted a 1 bedroom + den but "couldn't afford" it. It comes off as tone deaf when plenty of people in this city live in 2-3 bedroom homes for less than they pay for a 1 bedroom in brand new luxury building in Eastern Market. They could have paid less but wanted to be in a certain kind of neighborhood (rich, white), have a certain kind of commute (close, by foot or bike), and live in a certain kind fo building (fancy, lots of amenities). Yes they had the security reasons as well, but there are other buildings that could accommodate security. Or they could have lived in a SFH (easily, for 4500/mo) which is what most people in that situation do because it simplifies security in many ways.

It sounds like he's saying "this city is so expensive, it must be so hard for people who don't have our resources." But actually they are making choices that contribute to the high cost of rent in the city while also acting like they had no other choice when they did.

But I forgot you aren't allowed to criticize Biden/Harris folks on this website because people like to fanboy about them. Anyway.

LOL. After they got roundly mocked, they had the WaPo revise the article to note that they got a “deal” on the apartment and are only paying $3,000 a month. Which makes their whining about not being able to afford it even more tone deaf.

Elitist democrats. What did you expect?

Well, at least they're not insurrectionist Republicans.

They're trying to adopt (which is $$$ to do properly), Chasten isn't working and they surely have a lot of expenses related to being high profile people (clothing, entertaining, grooming etc.) It's not that tone deaf.

He needs to get a job. He also needs to put on his big boy pants. He changed gyms because a lobbyist approached him to try to get an intro to Pete. Give me a break. It will happen everywhere. Washington is about power and access. He needs to grow up and learn to play the game.

A) - Leave that man alone - not every political spouse wants to be a political operative

B) - Since when are they adopting? The D.C. know-it-alls insisted they'd be hiring surrogates before Christmas was out and they'd be moving to VA with the new administration

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even in DC, $4500 for one bedroom is not normal. Yes, I suppose the rent is too damn high if you need the height of luxury and security mere blocks from your office. The vast majority of us city dwellers manage to find housing for a fraction of that price.

This. Rent in DC is high but it’s ridiculous for a childless couple making upwards of 200k the complain about it — that’s like the one demographic that DC’s rental market serves very well. And while I understand the security needs, I’m guessing all they really need is a doorman building. Even among luxury buildings with a doorman, 4500 for a one bedroom is astronomically high for the city. That building is brand new, in a super pricy neighborhood, and loaded with amenities. I bet they could have found something cheaper in Navy Yard itself, but the building wouldn’t have been as nice and it probably would be in one of the high rises closer to the freeway. But that’s not a huge compromise.

Surely they also must have savings and the ability to buy if they wanted— you could definitely buy a condo with a lower mortgage than that on Capitol Hill.

Did you even read. He said he's not worried for THEM, but rent is too damn high in the city for everyone.

And yes, for security reasons, they chose that building.
I'm more concerned about the tweet and videoing of him on his bike when he is obviously concerned about safety and security.

He said they wanted a 1 bedroom + den but "couldn't afford" it. It comes off as tone deaf when plenty of people in this city live in 2-3 bedroom homes for less than they pay for a 1 bedroom in brand new luxury building in Eastern Market. They could have paid less but wanted to be in a certain kind of neighborhood (rich, white), have a certain kind of commute (close, by foot or bike), and live in a certain kind fo building (fancy, lots of amenities). Yes they had the security reasons as well, but there are other buildings that could accommodate security. Or they could have lived in a SFH (easily, for 4500/mo) which is what most people in that situation do because it simplifies security in many ways.

It sounds like he's saying "this city is so expensive, it must be so hard for people who don't have our resources." But actually they are making choices that contribute to the high cost of rent in the city while also acting like they had no other choice when they did.

But I forgot you aren't allowed to criticize Biden/Harris folks on this website because people like to fanboy about them. Anyway.

LOL. After they got roundly mocked, they had the WaPo revise the article to note that they got a “deal” on the apartment and are only paying $3,000 a month. Which makes their whining about not being able to afford it even more tone deaf.

Elitist democrats. What did you expect?

Well, at least they're not insurrectionist Republicans.

They're trying to adopt (which is $$$ to do properly), Chasten isn't working and they surely have a lot of expenses related to being high profile people (clothing, entertaining, grooming etc.) It's not that tone deaf.

He needs to get a job. He also needs to put on his big boy pants. He changed gyms because a lobbyist approached him to try to get an intro to Pete. Give me a break. It will happen everywhere. Washington is about power and access. He needs to grow up and learn to play the game.

A) - Leave that man alone - not every political spouse wants to be a political operative

B) - Since when are they adopting? The D.C. know-it-alls insisted they'd be hiring surrogates before Christmas was out and they'd be moving to VA with the new administration

Half the Washington post article that people were linking to was about how they were hoping to adopt. They had a false alarm where they were promised a baby and ran out and got all the baby gear and then the birth mother changed her mind.

[Anonymous]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/chasten-buttigieg-pete-buttigieg-washington/2021/07/23/e10fd616-e388-11eb-b722-89ea0dde7771_story.html

Here it is.^^

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/chasten-buttigieg-pete-buttigieg-washington/2021/07/23/e10fd616-e388-11eb-b722-89ea0dde7771_story.html

Here it is.^^

Thank you for the link - after reading it I'm on Chastein's side. The man who tried to lobby him was working as a personal trainer at the gym and yet he approached an administration spouse for a different/unrelated job? The gym should have fired him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/chasten-buttigieg-pete-buttigieg-washington/2021/07/23/e10fd616-e388-11eb-b722-89ea0dde7771_story.html

Here it is.^^

Thank you for the link - after reading it I'm on Chastein's side. The man who tried to lobby him was working as a personal trainer at the gym and yet he approached an administration spouse for a different/unrelated job? The gym should have fired him.

Yes I agree. I thought the Post piece presented Chasten the in a very sympathetic light. He’s a friendly open guy coming to DC not knowing many people and manipulative people are trying to use him for access.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/chasten-buttigieg-pete-buttigieg-washington/2021/07/23/e10fd616-e388-11eb-b722-89ea0dde7771_story.html

Here it is.^^

Thank you for the link - after reading it I'm on Chastein's side. The man who tried to lobby him was working as a personal trainer at the gym and yet he approached an administration spouse for a different/unrelated job? The gym should have fired him.

Yes I agree. I thought the Post piece presented Chasten the in a very sympathetic light. He’s a friendly open guy coming to DC not knowing many people and manipulative people are trying to use him for access.

Oh for goodness sake. That's typical Washington. I am about as blue as blue can be but he really does need to 'grow a pair' as my kids would say.

I agree the WaPo article cast him very sympathetically. Too much so in my opinion. When I read the article I was disappointed and upset - he came across as an entitled whiner. Just what we don't need. I lost a lot of respect for him after reading it. The same with most of the people I know. It is eyeroll city whenever the subject comes up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even in DC, $4500 for one bedroom is not normal. Yes, I suppose the rent is too damn high if you need the height of luxury and security mere blocks from your office. The vast majority of us city dwellers manage to find housing for a fraction of that price.

This. Rent in DC is high but it’s ridiculous for a childless couple making upwards of 200k the complain about it — that’s like the one demographic that DC’s rental market serves very well. And while I understand the security needs, I’m guessing all they really need is a doorman building. Even among luxury buildings with a doorman, 4500 for a one bedroom is astronomically high for the city. That building is brand new, in a super pricy neighborhood, and loaded with amenities. I bet they could have found something cheaper in Navy Yard itself, but the building wouldn’t have been as nice and it probably would be in one of the high rises closer to the freeway. But that’s not a huge compromise.

Surely they also must have savings and the ability to buy if they wanted— you could definitely buy a condo with a lower mortgage than that on Capitol Hill.

Did you even read. He said he's not worried for THEM, but rent is too damn high in the city for everyone.

And yes, for security reasons, they chose that building.
I'm more concerned about the tweet and videoing of him on his bike when he is obviously concerned about safety and security.

He said they wanted a 1 bedroom + den but "couldn't afford" it. It comes off as tone deaf when plenty of people in this city live in 2-3 bedroom homes for less than they pay for a 1 bedroom in brand new luxury building in Eastern Market. They could have paid less but wanted to be in a certain kind of neighborhood (rich, white), have a certain kind of commute (close, by foot or bike), and live in a certain kind fo building (fancy, lots of amenities). Yes they had the security reasons as well, but there are other buildings that could accommodate security. Or they could have lived in a SFH (easily, for 4500/mo) which is what most people in that situation do because it simplifies security in many ways.

It sounds like he's saying "this city is so expensive, it must be so hard for people who don't have our resources." But actually they are making choices that contribute to the high cost of rent in the city while also acting like they had no other choice when they did.

But I forgot you aren't allowed to criticize Biden/Harris folks on this website because people like to fanboy about them. Anyway.

LOL. After they got roundly mocked, they had the WaPo revise the article to note that they got a “deal” on the apartment and are only paying $3,000 a month. Which makes their whining about not being able to afford it even more tone deaf.

Elitist democrats. What did you expect?

Well, at least they're not insurrectionist Republicans.

They're trying to adopt (which is $$$ to do properly), Chasten isn't working and they surely have a lot of expenses related to being high profile people (clothing, entertaining, grooming etc.) It's not that tone deaf.

He needs to get a job. He also needs to put on his big boy pants. He changed gyms because a lobbyist approached him to try to get an intro to Pete. Give me a break. It will happen everywhere. Washington is about power and access. He needs to grow up and learn to play the game.

+1

[Anonymous]

One of the NBC4 news anchor run an adoption program every Wednesday to introduce kids in foster care who are waiting for a permanent home. Pete and his family could give one or two of the kids a family and be great parents. No need to start from a baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even in DC, $4500 for one bedroom is not normal. Yes, I suppose the rent is too damn high if you need the height of luxury and security mere blocks from your office. The vast majority of us city dwellers manage to find housing for a fraction of that price.

This. Rent in DC is high but it’s ridiculous for a childless couple making upwards of 200k the complain about it — that’s like the one demographic that DC’s rental market serves very well. And while I understand the security needs, I’m guessing all they really need is a doorman building. Even among luxury buildings with a doorman, 4500 for a one bedroom is astronomically high for the city. That building is brand new, in a super pricy neighborhood, and loaded with amenities. I bet they could have found something cheaper in Navy Yard itself, but the building wouldn’t have been as nice and it probably would be in one of the high rises closer to the freeway. But that’s not a huge compromise.

Surely they also must have savings and the ability to buy if they wanted— you could definitely buy a condo with a lower mortgage than that on Capitol Hill.

Did you even read. He said he's not worried for THEM, but rent is too damn high in the city for everyone.

And yes, for security reasons, they chose that building.
I'm more concerned about the tweet and videoing of him on his bike when he is obviously concerned about safety and security.

He said they wanted a 1 bedroom + den but "couldn't afford" it. It comes off as tone deaf when plenty of people in this city live in 2-3 bedroom homes for less than they pay for a 1 bedroom in brand new luxury building in Eastern Market. They could have paid less but wanted to be in a certain kind of neighborhood (rich, white), have a certain kind of commute (close, by foot or bike), and live in a certain kind fo building (fancy, lots of amenities). Yes they had the security reasons as well, but there are other buildings that could accommodate security. Or they could have lived in a SFH (easily, for 4500/mo) which is what most people in that situation do because it simplifies security in many ways.

It sounds like he's saying "this city is so expensive, it must be so hard for people who don't have our resources." But actually they are making choices that contribute to the high cost of rent in the city while also acting like they had no other choice when they did.

But I forgot you aren't allowed to criticize Biden/Harris folks on this website because people like to fanboy about them. Anyway.

LOL. After they got roundly mocked, they had the WaPo revise the article to note that they got a “deal” on the apartment and are only paying $3,000 a month. Which makes their whining about not being able to afford it even more tone deaf.

Elitist democrats. What did you expect?

Well, at least they're not insurrectionist Republicans.

They're trying to adopt (which is $$$ to do properly), Chasten isn't working and they surely have a lot of expenses related to being high profile people (clothing, entertaining, grooming etc.) It's not that tone deaf.

He needs to get a job. He also needs to put on his big boy pants. He changed gyms because a lobbyist approached him to try to get an intro to Pete. Give me a break. It will happen everywhere. Washington is about power and access. He needs to grow up and learn to play the game.

+1

Well, then you anonymous DCUM poster are meaner than the average Washington post reader as the reader comments were overwhelmingly positive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/chasten-buttigieg-pete-buttigieg-washington/2021/07/23/e10fd616-e388-11eb-b722-89ea0dde7771_story.html

Here it is.^^

Thank you for the link - after reading it I'm on Chastein's side. The man who tried to lobby him was working as a personal trainer at the gym and yet he approached an administration spouse for a different/unrelated job? The gym should have fired him.

Yes I agree. I thought the Post piece presented Chasten the in a very sympathetic light. He’s a friendly open guy coming to DC not knowing many people and manipulative people are trying to use him for access.

Oh for goodness sake. That's typical Washington. I am about as blue as blue can be but he really does need to 'grow a pair' as my kids would say.

I agree the WaPo article cast him very sympathetically. Too much so in my opinion. When I read the article I was disappointed and upset - he came across as an entitled whiner. Just what we don't need. I lost a lot of respect for him after reading it. The same with most of the people I know. It is eyeroll city whenever the subject comes up.

Same.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Good for them. That's exciting and wonderful in anyone's life. I personally do not understand how a cabinet secretary could manage having an infant, but I suppose if Chasten is not working he will be the primary caretaker.

[Anonymous]

I’m guessing it was an adoption.