Why are Dems going all in on Mayor Pete?

[Anonymous]

What evidence is there that “Dems are going all in on Mayor Pete”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many minorities who have extreme homophobia. Won't work.

Especially when being gay is literally the only reason anyone is talking about him.

If he were a regular old straight white dude with the same resume nobody would even know his name.

I mean, except that he's smarter than anyone you ever met.

Not even close, seriously?

What exactly is his claim to genius status?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people on this site seem so out of touch. Most voters, minority or not, are not going to vote for a gay president. His ceiling is being a senator in a deep blue state.

Eh, the country swung pretty fast in favor of gay marriage even when dinosaurs like Obama and Hillary were against it. I think it’s entirely possible for a gay candidate to be elected. At least the kid has a brain and a pulse which is more than I can say for that cadaver of a president they wheel out on occasion. Go mayor pete!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What evidence is there that “Dems are going all in on Mayor Pete”?

+1

OP sounds like another GOP operative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many minorities who have extreme homophobia. Won't work.

Especially when being gay is literally the only reason anyone is talking about him.

If he were a regular old straight white dude with the same resume nobody would even know his name.

I mean, except that he's smarter than anyone you ever met.

Not even close, seriously?

What exactly is his claim to genius status?

Not particularly fond of the guy but Rhodes Scholars have been known to be smart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are many minorities who have extreme homophobia. Won't work.

Homophobia is secondary to their extreme dislike of white weenies.

[Anonymous]

Sad that you people are writing Americans off as a bunch of homophobes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dems need to realize that you need to connect to working class voters of all races to win a general election. Wonky urbanites with graduate degrees and UMC suburban moms only make up a small fraction of the population. That Bill Maher New Rules segment about it it not being about artisan but Art and Stan was very instructive, but Dems won’t listen and will obsess over courting Twitter likes over winning by focusing on meat and potatoes issues in a tone that builds a bigger tent and doesn’t exclude 70 percent of the country.

Case in point is how they treated Tulsi. A party that cared about winning national elections and not virtue signaling to a shrinking, increasingly bourgeoisie and elitist base would protect and build up a woman candidate with Tusli’s military background and working class appeal.

Wait...but you think Pete - the gay Rhodes scholar is going to somehow connect with the iron worker in Ohio or the evangelical in Utah? That's the funniest thing I've ever heard.

The man who just transplanted here refuses to leave the confines of D.C. and his bike commute to work! He's a enjoy Eastern Market and shop at Tysons urbanite gay dad. Not the go have a beer with the cop during a race summit type of person.

I agree on Tulsi though. We need candidates who can win and connect in these communities. Gabbard, Manchin, Cuomo, a younger Biden. Also people who have a voice and aren't afraid to use them.

conflicting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dems need to realize that you need to connect to working class voters of all races to win a general election. Wonky urbanites with graduate degrees and UMC suburban moms only make up a small fraction of the population. That Bill Maher New Rules segment about it it not being about artisan but Art and Stan was very instructive, but Dems won’t listen and will obsess over courting Twitter likes over winning by focusing on meat and potatoes issues in a tone that builds a bigger tent and doesn’t exclude 70 percent of the country.

Case in point is how they treated Tulsi. A party that cared about winning national elections and not virtue signaling to a shrinking, increasingly bourgeoisie and elitist base would protect and build up a woman candidate with Tusli’s military background and working class appeal.

Wait...but you think Pete - the gay Rhodes scholar is going to somehow connect with the iron worker in Ohio or the evangelical in Utah? That's the funniest thing I've ever heard.

The man who just transplanted here refuses to leave the confines of D.C. and his bike commute to work! He's a enjoy Eastern Market and shop at Tysons urbanite gay dad. Not the go have a beer with the cop during a race summit type of person.

I agree on Tulsi though. We need candidates who can win and connect in these communities. Gabbard, Manchin, Cuomo, a younger Biden. Also people who have a voice and aren't afraid to use them.

conflicting

Tulsi is a Russian asset
Manchin only cares about coal
No more Cuomos

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many minorities who have extreme homophobia. Won't work.

Especially when being gay is literally the only reason anyone is talking about him.

If he were a regular old straight white dude with the same resume nobody would even know his name.

I mean, except that he's smarter than anyone you ever met.

Not even close, seriously?

What exactly is his claim to genius status?

Not particularly fond of the guy but Rhodes Scholars have been known to be smart.

Marshalls are smarter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dems need to realize that you need to connect to working class voters of all races to win a general election. Wonky urbanites with graduate degrees and UMC suburban moms only make up a small fraction of the population. That Bill Maher New Rules segment about it it not being about artisan but Art and Stan was very instructive, but Dems won’t listen and will obsess over courting Twitter likes over winning by focusing on meat and potatoes issues in a tone that builds a bigger tent and doesn’t exclude 70 percent of the country.

Case in point is how they treated Tulsi. A party that cared about winning national elections and not virtue signaling to a shrinking, increasingly bourgeoisie and elitist base would protect and build up a woman candidate with Tusli’s military background and working class appeal.

Wait...but you think Pete - the gay Rhodes scholar is going to somehow connect with the iron worker in Ohio or the evangelical in Utah? That's the funniest thing I've ever heard.

The man who just transplanted here refuses to leave the confines of D.C. and his bike commute to work! He's a enjoy Eastern Market and shop at Tysons urbanite gay dad. Not the go have a beer with the cop during a race summit type of person.

I agree on Tulsi though. We need candidates who can win and connect in these communities. Gabbard, Manchin, Cuomo, a younger Biden. Also people who have a voice and aren't afraid to use them.

Pete connects with Fox News watchers pretty ok for a dem. Better than Warren for sure and for all of klobuchar’s so called strength, she could not beat Pete — just wound him.

I don’t think he would win in 2024 against a R in a general though.

Dems easiest and best choices are people like Andy beshear, Jon bel edwards, mitch landrieu, Roy cooper but won’t go down that route. Like hogan and baker, they can’t win a primary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many minorities who have extreme homophobia. Won't work.

Especially when being gay is literally the only reason anyone is talking about him.

If he were a regular old straight white dude with the same resume nobody would even know his name.

I mean, except that he's smarter than anyone you ever met.

Not even close, seriously?

What exactly is his claim to genius status?

Not particularly fond of the guy but Rhodes Scholars have been known to be smart.

Booker, Sullivan, and raimondo are all Rhodes scholars and have been painfully cringe and not in a wonky way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What evidence is there that “Dems are going all in on Mayor Pete”?

+1

OP sounds like another GOP operative.

Um, hello?

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/24/pete-buttigieg-presidential-buzz-white-house-523281

While Buttigieg says he’s not contemplating the race to be Biden’s successor, inside the West Wing, others are imagining it for him. His name is sometimes discussed by aides as a natural Democratic presidential nominee in 2028 — or 2024 if the president opts not to run.

“Nobody in the West Wing shuts that down,” said one person with direct knowledge of the conversations. “It’s very open.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are many minorities who have extreme homophobia. Won't work.

I don’t think it’s the homophobia that bother minorities. I think that it’s that he went from mayor to presidential candidate without putting in the work. How many POC mayors would be take seriously at the national level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many minorities who have extreme homophobia. Won't work.

I don’t think it’s the homophobia that bother minorities. I think that it’s that he went from mayor to presidential candidate without putting in the work. How many POC mayors would be take seriously at the national level.

There was a Black mayor of a Florida city of a similar size as South Bend who got zero traction, media etc. Wayne Messam.