What is the Matter with Buttigieg and His Spokeswoman?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a good attack line on Warren, maybe not so much Bernie. Why is a politician attacking an opponent so shocking to you?

Why is it a good attack on Warren but not Sanders?

Because she comes off as more "elitist" than Bernie does. It's reflected in their core voting bases; Sanders more working class, Warren DCUM college-educated wives lol.

Wut

Yeah Warren’s background is anything but elitist.

Let’s give the PP the benefit of the doubt. Maybe she or he genuinely doesn’t know?

I'm that PP. Nope she can come across as elitist and it can be effective to cast her as such. Harvard, professor/academia, "I have a plan", "I know better than you", schoolmarmy/didactic speaking tone, government bureaucrat is always the answer. It could be politically effective to cast her as such. It just needs to stick; doesn't need to tell the full story. Biden has trotted out the same attack.

Bernie just comes across as angry old man and I don't see charges of elitism sticking to him as much.

You are right.

It is super duper elitist to grow up basically working class in Oklahoma with a janitor dad and three brothers who served in the military, to marry and drop out of college at 19, to have a baby at 22 and return to a commuter college and almost drop out again due to a lack of affordable childcare, to go to a public law school, to divorce because your spouse doesn’t support your working, to work your way up through academia to teach at Harvard, to be the foremost advocate for bankruptcy reform, and to found the CFPB. You’re right. Very elitist. No ordinary person can relate to any of that.

Did you not read? It's about the efficacy of the attack line, not the reality. In politics, perception is reality. Don't be so sensitive.

I’m not sensitive, friend. I just like facts.

Politics may not be your game then, my friend.

It’s not my game. It’s my job.

Then you should know about how "facts" work in politics. Look at what happened to Kerry vs. Bush. Perception is reality, my dear friend.

Tell us which Democrat you support, then. And tell us why you don’t want us to talk about the subject of the thread.

The subject is what is the matter with Pete. What is the matter with him is that he is trying to differentiate himself from the Warren/Sanders wing of the party and using this free college issue curry favor with the more midwest/working class elements of the party and test out the elitism attack line. As others in this thread have pointed out, it could backfire given his own background, but he's trying it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a good attack line on Warren, maybe not so much Bernie. Why is a politician attacking an opponent so shocking to you?

Why is it a good attack on Warren but not Sanders?

Because she comes off as more "elitist" than Bernie does. It's reflected in their core voting bases; Sanders more working class, Warren DCUM college-educated wives lol.

Wut

Yeah Warren’s background is anything but elitist.

Let’s give the PP the benefit of the doubt. Maybe she or he genuinely doesn’t know?

I'm that PP. Nope she can come across as elitist and it can be effective to cast her as such. Harvard, professor/academia, "I have a plan", "I know better than you", schoolmarmy/didactic speaking tone, government bureaucrat is always the answer. It could be politically effective to cast her as such. It just needs to stick; doesn't need to tell the full story. Biden has trotted out the same attack.

Bernie just comes across as angry old man and I don't see charges of elitism sticking to him as much.

Careful. Words like didactic and bureaucratic make you sound elitist.

Who cares what I sound like? I'm not running for President.

Right, you're just telling everyone else who they should vote for.

We are responding to a troll who is interested in derailing the thread for some reason.

It's always a "troll" with you people

Pete attacked Warren on the grounds that she is elitist. Keep up.

He can attack on those grounds all he wants. His biography is much, much more elitist. Let’s be really honest: the only difference between him and many other ambitious white male politicians is that he’s gay - something he only revealed in his second mayoral campaign. Otherwise he’s a standard-issue white male politician from an elected background.

I don't disagree with anything you have said.

But look at GWB's background. Elite as it gets! Yet he was the relatable "guy you want to have a beer with". If you can swing it in politics, go for it! I don't think Pete can, but shoot your shot, bro.

Bro would have been wise to show he can win votes outside of South Bend, Indiana before deciding he should run for president. If a woman or person of color did this, the press would be merciless. But because the political press is still dominated by white men, Pete is a phenomenon! Their gay bro! Press coverage drives polling, and Iowa loves the flavor of the month.

It’s a self-perpetuating cycle.

Don't think I really disagree much with this. In terms of being "wise" for him, not sure. He will have a much larger national political profile after this race, regardless of what happens. He's running and this is the reality, so here we are. He is shooting his shot.

[Anonymous]

Super disappointed in Mayor Pete and regret giving him $ when he launched. Another white elite man coming to save us? No thanks. I’d take Klobachar and her comb/fork over this ambitious bro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a good attack line on Warren, maybe not so much Bernie. Why is a politician attacking an opponent so shocking to you?

Why is it a good attack on Warren but not Sanders?

Because she comes off as more "elitist" than Bernie does. It's reflected in their core voting bases; Sanders more working class, Warren DCUM college-educated wives lol.

Wut

Yeah Warren’s background is anything but elitist.

Let’s give the PP the benefit of the doubt. Maybe she or he genuinely doesn’t know?

I'm that PP. Nope she can come across as elitist and it can be effective to cast her as such. Harvard, professor/academia, "I have a plan", "I know better than you", schoolmarmy/didactic speaking tone, government bureaucrat is always the answer. It could be politically effective to cast her as such. It just needs to stick; doesn't need to tell the full story. Biden has trotted out the same attack.

Bernie just comes across as angry old man and I don't see charges of elitism sticking to him as much.

You are right.

It is super duper elitist to grow up basically working class in Oklahoma with a janitor dad and three brothers who served in the military, to marry and drop out of college at 19, to have a baby at 22 and return to a commuter college and almost drop out again due to a lack of affordable childcare, to go to a public law school, to divorce because your spouse doesn’t support your working, to work your way up through academia to teach at Harvard, to be the foremost advocate for bankruptcy reform, and to found the CFPB. You’re right. Very elitist. No ordinary person can relate to any of that.

Did you not read? It's about the efficacy of the attack line, not the reality. In politics, perception is reality. Don't be so sensitive.

I’m not sensitive, friend. I just like facts.

Politics may not be your game then, my friend.

It’s not my game. It’s my job.

Then you should know about how "facts" work in politics. Look at what happened to Kerry vs. Bush. Perception is reality, my dear friend.

Warren is perceived as a warm and smart person who can make arguments crystal clear. People agree with her when they hear her speak. You are just parroting right wing talking point.

By whom? It's a big tent, my friend. Recent polling suggests some people aren't liking what they're seeing.

Actually, recent polling - before Harris dropped out - shows that Democratic primary voters are very happy with their choices. This is why there was no genuine rationale for Bloomberg.

You’d know this if you were a Democrat.

Um, what? Warren has dropped in the polls of late.

You do you, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can have an elite background and not be an elitist.

But it is seriously hilarious to call St. Joseph's in South Bend an elite school.

+100

This made me lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Super disappointed in Mayor Pete and regret giving him $ when he launched. Another white elite man coming to save us? No thanks. I’d take Klobachar and her comb/fork over this ambitious bro.

Klobachar...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can have an elite background and not be an elitist.

But it is seriously hilarious to call St. Joseph's in South Bend an elite school.

+100

This made me lol.

-100

Not me. Tuition for St. Joseph is almost $8,000 if you're a parishioner, and almost $10,000 if you are not. If that's pocket change for you, then it's safe to say you are an elitist.

[Anonymous]

“Elitist” isn’t just someone with an elite education and/or association with elite institutions (arguably both Pete and Warren fall in this category.)

“Elitist” is someone who lords that over the rest of us, explicitly or usually less so, explaining how they know better than the people they are preaching to what those same people need/want, and how to get it for them. In Warren’s case, for free.

Elitist is largely a label of perception. Someone upthread mentioned GWB - the ultimate elitist - but no one would describe him as such based on what or how he spoke.

This is Warren’s problem, as well as the reason Pete is popular in the Midwest, as well as why Cory Booker is not doing better - Cory comes across as “I know better than you.” Perceptions are reality, in politics and often in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Elitist” isn’t just someone with an elite education and/or association with elite institutions (arguably both Pete and Warren fall in this category.)

“Elitist” is someone who lords that over the rest of us, explicitly or usually less so, explaining how they know better than the people they are preaching to what those same people need/want, and how to get it for them. In Warren’s case, for free.

Elitist is largely a label of perception. Someone upthread mentioned GWB - the ultimate elitist - but no one would describe him as such based on what or how he spoke.

This is Warren’s problem, as well as the reason Pete is popular in the Midwest, as well as why Cory Booker is not doing better - Cory comes across as “I know better than you.” Perceptions are reality, in politics and often in life.

Interesting that the woman and the black man have these problems but the white man does not. Maybe Americans only like being told “I know better than you” by one rather than the others?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Elitist” isn’t just someone with an elite education and/or association with elite institutions (arguably both Pete and Warren fall in this category.)

“Elitist” is someone who lords that over the rest of us, explicitly or usually less so, explaining how they know better than the people they are preaching to what those same people need/want, and how to get it for them. In Warren’s case, for free.

Elitist is largely a label of perception. Someone upthread mentioned GWB - the ultimate elitist - but no one would describe him as such based on what or how he spoke.

This is Warren’s problem, as well as the reason Pete is popular in the Midwest, as well as why Cory Booker is not doing better - Cory comes across as “I know better than you.” Perceptions are reality, in politics and often in life.

Well said, PP. Agree completely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Elitist” isn’t just someone with an elite education and/or association with elite institutions (arguably both Pete and Warren fall in this category.)

“Elitist” is someone who lords that over the rest of us, explicitly or usually less so, explaining how they know better than the people they are preaching to what those same people need/want, and how to get it for them. In Warren’s case, for free.

Elitist is largely a label of perception. Someone upthread mentioned GWB - the ultimate elitist - but no one would describe him as such based on what or how he spoke.

This is Warren’s problem, as well as the reason Pete is popular in the Midwest, as well as why Cory Booker is not doing better - Cory comes across as “I know better than you.” Perceptions are reality, in politics and often in life.

You may perceive it that way, but I do not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Elitist” isn’t just someone with an elite education and/or association with elite institutions (arguably both Pete and Warren fall in this category.)

“Elitist” is someone who lords that over the rest of us, explicitly or usually less so, explaining how they know better than the people they are preaching to what those same people need/want, and how to get it for them. In Warren’s case, for free.

Elitist is largely a label of perception. Someone upthread mentioned GWB - the ultimate elitist - but no one would describe him as such based on what or how he spoke.

This is Warren’s problem, as well as the reason Pete is popular in the Midwest, as well as why Cory Booker is not doing better - Cory comes across as “I know better than you.” Perceptions are reality, in politics and often in life.

Interesting that the woman and the black man have these problems but the white man does not. Maybe Americans only like being told “I know better than you” by one rather than the others?

GWB ran against John Kerry. Two super elite background white dudes. Yet who got stuck with the tag? The Boston Brahmin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Elitist” isn’t just someone with an elite education and/or association with elite institutions (arguably both Pete and Warren fall in this category.)

“Elitist” is someone who lords that over the rest of us, explicitly or usually less so, explaining how they know better than the people they are preaching to what those same people need/want, and how to get it for them. In Warren’s case, for free.

Elitist is largely a label of perception. Someone upthread mentioned GWB - the ultimate elitist - but no one would describe him as such based on what or how he spoke.

This is Warren’s problem, as well as the reason Pete is popular in the Midwest, as well as why Cory Booker is not doing better - Cory comes across as “I know better than you.” Perceptions are reality, in politics and often in life.

Well said, PP. Agree completely.

Every day of the week and on the eighth day too, Senator Amy Klobuchar speaks at listeners' level than the know it all Mayor Buttigieg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Elitist” isn’t just someone with an elite education and/or association with elite institutions (arguably both Pete and Warren fall in this category.)

“Elitist” is someone who lords that over the rest of us, explicitly or usually less so, explaining how they know better than the people they are preaching to what those same people need/want, and how to get it for them. In Warren’s case, for free.

Elitist is largely a label of perception. Someone upthread mentioned GWB - the ultimate elitist - but no one would describe him as such based on what or how he spoke.

This is Warren’s problem, as well as the reason Pete is popular in the Midwest, as well as why Cory Booker is not doing better - Cory comes across as “I know better than you.” Perceptions are reality, in politics and often in life.

Interesting that the woman and the black man have these problems but the white man does not. Maybe Americans only like being told “I know better than you” by one rather than the others?

GWB ran against John Kerry. Two super elite background white dudes. Yet who got stuck with the tag? The Boston Brahmin.

Kerry is not as Brahmin as you think he is. https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/16/us/kerry-s-grandfather-left-judaism-behind-in-europe.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a good attack line on Warren, maybe not so much Bernie. Why is a politician attacking an opponent so shocking to you?

Why is it a good attack on Warren but not Sanders?

Because she comes off as more "elitist" than Bernie does. It's reflected in their core voting bases; Sanders more working class, Warren DCUM college-educated wives lol.

Wut

Yeah Warren’s background is anything but elitist.

Let’s give the PP the benefit of the doubt. Maybe she or he genuinely doesn’t know?

I'm that PP. Nope she can come across as elitist and it can be effective to cast her as such. Harvard, professor/academia, "I have a plan", "I know better than you", schoolmarmy/didactic speaking tone, government bureaucrat is always the answer. It could be politically effective to cast her as such. It just needs to stick; doesn't need to tell the full story. Biden has trotted out the same attack.

Bernie just comes across as angry old man and I don't see charges of elitism sticking to him as much.

You are right.

It is super duper elitist to grow up basically working class in Oklahoma with a janitor dad and three brothers who served in the military, to marry and drop out of college at 19, to have a baby at 22 and return to a commuter college and almost drop out again due to a lack of affordable childcare, to go to a public law school, to divorce because your spouse doesn’t support your working, to work your way up through academia to teach at Harvard, to be the foremost advocate for bankruptcy reform, and to found the CFPB. You’re right. Very elitist. No ordinary person can relate to any of that.

Did you not read? It's about the efficacy of the attack line, not the reality. In politics, perception is reality. Don't be so sensitive.

I’m not sensitive, friend. I just like facts.

Politics may not be your game then, my friend.

It’s not my game. It’s my job.

Then you should know about how "facts" work in politics. Look at what happened to Kerry vs. Bush. Perception is reality, my dear friend.

Warren is perceived as a warm and smart person who can make arguments crystal clear. People agree with her when they hear her speak. You are just parroting right wing talking point.

By whom? It's a big tent, my friend. Recent polling suggests some people aren't liking what they're seeing.

Actually, recent polling - before Harris dropped out - shows that Democratic primary voters are very happy with their choices. This is why there was no genuine rationale for Bloomberg.

You’d know this if you were a Democrat.

Um, what? Warren has dropped in the polls of late.

You do you, though.

Yes, Warren has dropped in the polls. But the polls also show that Democratic primary voters are happy with their choices. I guess I misunderstood your “aren’t liking what they’re seeing” comment. But it is that they don’t like what they actually see from Warren, or they don’t like what the political press says about Warren?