ADVERTISEMENT

Buttigieg is plenty gay

KnighttimeJoe

Todd's Tiki Bar
May 29, 2001
21,774
11,108
113
From the Times.

How do Democrats properly vet their candidates for president without cannibalizing them? How do they rightly insist on sensitive and inclusive leaders while making allowances for past mistakes, present quirks, human messiness and the differences in the conversation and the culture now versus 10 or 20 or 40 years ago?

That’s emerging as a central challenge of the Democratic presidential primary. And it’s worrying me.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/opinion/pete-buttigieg-joe-biden.html
 
Identity politics is fuking idiotic.

That said this dude is smart, and 1000 times more badass than cadet bone spurs currently in office. Don't agree with all, or even most of his views but maybe focus on something other than literally the least important part of a person; the gender they prefer to have sex with.
 
From the Times.

How do Democrats properly vet their candidates for president without cannibalizing them? How do they rightly insist on sensitive and inclusive leaders while making allowances for past mistakes, present quirks, human messiness and the differences in the conversation and the culture now versus 10 or 20 or 40 years ago?

That’s emerging as a central challenge of the Democratic presidential primary. And it’s worrying me.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/opinion/pete-buttigieg-joe-biden.html

This opinion piece stemmed from a DUMBA$$ article (which was discussed in the other thread) about how Buttigieg being gay is negated by him being a white, upper-middle class male. The article was pretty widely panned.

This is THE problem with the far left though. It's not a competition to see who's more disadvantaged.

What I like about Buttigieg is he doesn't fan the fire when stuff like this pops up. He acknowledges that everyone is entitled to their opinions but we need to band together to work for ALL people who feel like they've been mistreated - no matter to what level.
 
It's too bad articles like this couldn't have been written about liberals who have been calling black conservatives "not real black people" for years.
 
The guy is an impressive speaker. He probably jumped the gun on a white house run though. Should've ran for a different higher office first.
 
Well, Buttigieg is a racist at a bare minimum.

Democratic presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg in 2015 addressed two local police controversies in South Bend, Indiana, by saying in an official speech that “all lives matter,” a comment that could land him in hot water with his party’s increasingly energized progressive base.



https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/03/pet...WayMDFGMBXT0FFJnZT67cMyqRazsYkouMKFE4lsRQ4-_o
 
  • Like
Reactions: btbones
Yeah, this issue is strictly a “liberal thing.” You’d never ever see conservatives play the “are you conservative enough?” game. :rolleyes:
 
Well, Buttigieg is a racist at a bare minimum.

Democratic presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg in 2015 addressed two local police controversies in South Bend, Indiana, by saying in an official speech that “all lives matter,” a comment that could land him in hot water with his party’s increasingly energized progressive base.



https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/03/pet...WayMDFGMBXT0FFJnZT67cMyqRazsYkouMKFE4lsRQ4-_o

Uh oh. Lefties lost their shit when people were daring to remark that all lives matter previously.

Surely they wouldn't let Mayor Petey off the hook for such offensive remarks?
 
Yeah, this issue is strictly a “liberal thing.” You’d never ever see conservatives play the “are you conservative enough?” game. :rolleyes:
You do realize the original editorial was written by a gay liberal columnist, right?

But to your point, you do realize the difference between evaluating someone based upon their political beliefs versus upon their race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation? You do understand which evaluation is appropriate and which isn't? You do realize which group is acting appropriately and which isn't?

Of course you do. But you won't ever admit that the group, your group, that constantly levels all the -ists at people who disagree with them politically are actually constantly judging based exactly upon that which they decry.
 
eating their own

this guy has no chance at 2020. however he has a decent shot at a senate spot afterwards. he could be a legit presidential candidate in the years to come, but not this cycle.
 
got damn I love me some identity politics.

He either has to tell the left wing of his party to piss off, or fall on his sword and issue a massive Mea Culpa, complete with some statement declaring that not all lives matter or something. My guess is that he'll cave to the left wing of the party and learn quickly what it means to be a national Democrat in 2019.
 
Pete said he wasn't for free college. #notmysocialist

“Americans who have a college degree earn more on average than Americans who don't,” he said. “I have a hard time getting my head around the idea that a majority who earn less because they didn't go to college would subsidize a minority who earn more because they did.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaShuckster
You do understand which evaluation is appropriate and which isn't? You do realize which group is acting appropriately and which isn't?

Which group is acting 'appropriately'??!?!

It's two sides of the same coin and you know it. In primary politics, it's all about who can survive an extremist cesspool designed to push candidates to show their "street cred", be it extreme left or right.
 
Petey is going to get a crash course into far left identity politics real soon. That Midwest bubble he's lived in is about to get popped hard.
 
Which group is acting 'appropriately'??!?!

It's two sides of the same coin and you know it. In primary politics, it's all about who can survive an extremist cesspool designed to push candidates to show their "street cred", be it extreme left or right.
That's a false equivalence and you know it. Evaluating someone's stance on policy issues is not "street cred," it is our duty as a responsible electorate. Evaluating someone's leadership ability on how they look or who they love is despicable.
 
Uh oh. Lefties lost their shit when people were daring to remark that all lives matter previously.

Surely they wouldn't let Mayor Petey off the hook for such offensive remarks?

There's context around that quote.

You know Mayor Pete is getting noticed when these things start coming out of the woodwork.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaShuckster
There's context around that quote.

You know Mayor Pete is getting noticed when these things start coming out of the woodwork.
I like some of the things Mayor Pete is saying and I think he'd be a very good candidate for the Democrats. I agree with those who say that he's the right candidate for you at the wrong time.
 
I agree with those who say that he's the right candidate for you at the wrong time.

The wrong time???!?

Goodness, when would be a better time? It's not like the Democrat's Presidential field is chock full of dynamite candidates.

Who's got the best chance? Old-as-Trump Bernie? Handsie Joe? "Charisma a mile wide and depth an inch deep" Beto? Warren? Really people?

The only one in the field that has stood out besides Mayor Pete is Kamila Harris. But in the optics of Presidential general election races and the geopolitics at play in 2016 and again in 2020, she strikes me as the wrong person at the wrong moment in history to run against Trump.

I see Pete Buttigieg is the anti-Trump who would actually sway many of the blue collar, rust belt working stiffs AND many of the suburban, moderate Republicans who voted for Trump last time out.
 
The wrong time???!?

Goodness, when would be a better time? It's not like the Democrat's Presidential field is chock full of dynamite candidates.

Who's got the best chance? Old-as-Trump Bernie? Handsie Joe? "Charisma a mile wide and depth an inch deep" Beto? Warren? Really people?

The only one in the field that has stood out besides Mayor Pete is Kamila Harris. But in the optics of Presidential general election races and the geopolitics at play in 2016 and again in 2020, she strikes me as the wrong person at the wrong moment in history to run against Trump.

I see Pete Buttigieg is the anti-Trump who would actually sway many of the blue collar, rust belt working stiffs AND many of the suburban, moderate Republicans who voted for Trump last time out.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying. But we're also in an era where being a white male, non-socialist-icon is an instant disqualification for a healthy segment of the Democrat voting block. Identity politics is the sword the Democrats forged and it'll be the sword they use. We'll see what happens, I just feel like he'll be swallowed up by the rest.
 
The wrong time???!?

Goodness, when would be a better time? It's not like the Democrat's Presidential field is chock full of dynamite candidates.

Who's got the best chance? Old-as-Trump Bernie? Handsie Joe? "Charisma a mile wide and depth an inch deep" Beto? Warren? Really people?

The only one in the field that has stood out besides Mayor Pete is Kamila Harris. But in the optics of Presidential general election races and the geopolitics at play in 2016 and again in 2020, she strikes me as the wrong person at the wrong moment in history to run against Trump.

I see Pete Buttigieg is the anti-Trump who would actually sway many of the blue collar, rust belt working stiffs AND many of the suburban, moderate Republicans who voted for Trump last time out.

If you think that you're getting a white guy from the Midwest who support racists cops, opposes free college, and is reluctant to wage a left wing culture war through this primary then you're delusional.

And again, you're making a lot of claims about this guy who he hasn't really been forced to take a position on some of the hot button national issues. When that time comes, my money is that he adopts the going left wing talking point instead of trying to be some centrist maverick.
 
The wrong time???!?

Goodness, when would be a better time? It's not like the Democrat's Presidential field is chock full of dynamite candidates.

Who's got the best chance? Old-as-Trump Bernie? Handsie Joe? "Charisma a mile wide and depth an inch deep" Beto? Warren? Really people?

The only one in the field that has stood out besides Mayor Pete is Kamila Harris. But in the optics of Presidential general election races and the geopolitics at play in 2016 and again in 2020, she strikes me as the wrong person at the wrong moment in history to run against Trump.

I see Pete Buttigieg is the anti-Trump who would actually sway many of the blue collar, rust belt working stiffs AND many of the suburban, moderate Republicans who voted for Trump last time out.
Harris is the right candidate this time around. She is more of a substance candidate than the others but also checks the boxes. Buttigeig, although the left doesnt seem it yet, is a cult of personality candidate. He's impressive but the lack of experience in politics hurts him against trump. Not because trump is himself experienced, but because the pendulum hasn't swung back yet. If this was trumps 2nd term coming to an end I would put money on buttigieg.
 
Harris is the right candidate this time around. She is more of a substance candidate than the others but also checks the boxes.
.....the right candidate (to lose to Trump).
Remember even her pro-cop, anti-drug, pro Wall Street stance will be exploited when Trump pleads with his midwest constituents to give him another chance.
Then he'll invoke the WC and mention how she will declare war on the insurance companies and leave this country in worse condition than Venezuela is under Maduro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YourWifesBoyfriend
I agree with a lot of what you're saying. But we're also in an era where being a white male, non-socialist-icon is an instant disqualification for a healthy segment of the Democrat voting block. Identity politics is the sword the Democrats forged and it'll be the sword they use. We'll see what happens, I just feel like he'll be swallowed up by the rest.

To be honest, I agree with a lot of what you're saying too. Even with Buttigieg's impressive resume and political talents, he'd literally be dead meat in this current Democrat era of identity politics if he were a White, heterosexual married man. Ironically, Buttigieg being gay is the sole reason why he has a shot at surviving the leftist-leaning Democratic primary season.

Make no mistake, Buttigieg is a liberal, but like Ronald Reagan back in his conservative campaigning days,.Ronnie seemed more moderate in the eyes of the general public than he really was. IMHO, the same will hold true for Buttigieg -- which will make it hard for Trump to characterize him as a wild-eyed, radical socialist.
 
Even with Buttigieg's impressive resume and political talents, he'd literally be dead meat in this current Democrat era of identity politics if he were a White, heterosexual married man. Ironically, Buttigieg being gay is the sole reason why he has a shot at surviving the leftist-leaning Democratic primary season.
How so?
 
To be honest, I agree with a lot of what you're saying too. Even with Buttigieg's impressive resume and political talents, he'd literally be dead meat in this current Democrat era of identity politics if he were a White, heterosexual married man. Ironically, Buttigieg being gay is the sole reason why he has a shot at surviving the leftist-leaning Democratic primary season.

Make no mistake, Buttigieg is a liberal, but like Ronald Reagan back in his conservative campaigning days,.Ronnie seemed more moderate in the eyes of the general public than he really was. IMHO, the same will hold true for Buttigieg -- which will make it hard for Trump to characterize him as a wild-eyed, radical socialist.
The first paragraph is 100% spot on, and thats pretty sad. If he wasnt gay then he never would have had the platform that he has now.
 
It's just my opinion. I'll freely admit my perception could be colored by what I see as the "Debbie Wasserman Schultz"-style leaders that run the DNC. I just get the feeling the party would be 'embarrassed' to have 'another white male' as their standard bearer in 2020.

As it is, we've already heard the sniping that Buttigieg "isn't gay enough." Imagine the sniping if he was a heterosexual married to his high school sweetheart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crazyhole
I just get the feeling the party would be 'embarrassed' to have 'another white male' as their standard bearer in 2020.
Despite your claims, at most Hillary would be trans.
I dont think she even did a good job reaching out to them.
Oh you mean 'another white male' in general.
 
It's just my opinion. I'll freely admit my perception could be colored by what I see as the "Debbie Wasserman Schultz"-style leaders that run the DNC. I just get the feeling the party would be 'embarrassed' to have 'another white male' as their standard bearer in 2020.

As it is, we've already heard the sniping that Buttigieg "isn't gay enough." Imagine the sniping if he was a heterosexual married to his high school sweetheart.
The people polling in first and second place right now are straight old white males.
 
Oh you mean 'another white male' in general.

Haha. Right or wrong, I think a lot of Democrat-leaning activists felt 2016 was the return of "good ole boy politics" even though the beneficiary was a White woman. There was an air of inevitability about her candidacy that pissed off a lot of liberals.
 
The key words there are "right now." I will be shocked if either one wins the nomination.
But your assertion that democrats will only accept a minority seems to be media driven. Democrats want ideas and stability and reimstated norms.

60% of those polled are currently choosing a straight white old man. No one this cycle seems to be focused in on minority status or gender or sexual orientation as the reason they are making their decision.

Except for me who will never vote for another old person again.
 
Haha. Right or wrong, I think a lot of Democrat-leaning activists felt 2016 was the return of "good ole boy politics" even though the beneficiary was a White woman. There was an air of inevitability about her candidacy that pissed off a lot of liberals.
Return? It never went away lol. Obama was elected with a Democratic majority that didnt necessarily appeal to his progressive candidacy. That was manufactured for a Hillary regime....and it was rejected. Twice.
 
But your assertion that democrats will only accept a minority seems to be media driven.

You may be right. I may be overreacting to the backlash we've witnessed to Beto's candidacy and his dumb, knee-jerk 'apologies' for remarks that weren't that bad to begin with. I still think that the only white guy who has a legit shot in the Democratic primaries is a 37 year old gay veteran.
 
But your assertion that democrats will only accept a minority seems to be media driven. Democrats want ideas and stability and reimstated norms.

60% of those polled are currently choosing a straight white old man. No one this cycle seems to be focused in on minority status or gender or sexual orientation as the reason they are making their decision.

Except for me who will never vote for another old person again.

And by "reinstated norms" you mean abortion 'til birth, abolishing of ICE, and socialism.
 
ADVERTISEMENT