Mayor Pete wont answer questions

[Crazyhole]

About what his foreign policy would look like.

https://www.businessinsider.com/pet...wer-nyts-foreign-policy-questions-2020-2?op=1


I'm willing to bet that Biden goes on the offense over thi .

 

[Sir Galahad]

I’ve watched two of the debates, he doesn’t answer any questions. He dances around all of them, I can’t believe the others let him get away with it. Reminds me a lot of Obama during his run.

 

[Crazyhole]

I’ve watched two of the debates, he doesn’t answer any questions. He dances around all of them, I can’t believe the others let him get away with it. Reminds me a lot of Obama during his run.

I have to wonder if he's quietly playing the identity politics card, thinking that just being young and gay is enough to get him the nomination. It's been surprisingly effective up to this point, as there's no reason that the mayor of a small city should be one of the frontrunners.

 

[btbones]

I have to wonder if he's quietly playing the identity politics card, thinking that just being young and gay is enough to get him the nomination. It's been surprisingly effective up to this point, as there's no reason that the mayor of a small city should be one of the frontrunners.

Well when you look at him and listen to him speak and interact with people then contrast that with Sanders , Biden and Warren he’s an easy choice for those folks

 

[UCFWayne]

hes just sitting back and letting the crazy's destroy themselves. hes smart to not say anything. ill give him that. still should be a front runner since hes hes barely run a small town let alone reped a state.

 

[btbones]

hes just sitting back and letting the crazy's destroy themselves. hes smart to not say anything. ill give him that. still should be a front runner since hes hes barely run a small town let alone reped a state.

Yeah. he is a very likeable and intelligent guy. I would think down the road he could be a very powerful force on the democratic side

 

[UCFWayne]

Yeah. he is a very likeable and intelligent guy. I would think down the road he could be a very powerful force on the democratic side

his inexperience will cost him right now, but he should be feared in 8 years.

 

[fried-chicken]

Pete would not be very exciting for left leaning dems but if we are going to get a centrist I much prefer him over Biden due to competency and communication skills along with the fact that he undeniably smart.

 

[UCFKnight85]

He just said we should legalize heroin and meth possession.

He's a genius.

 

[fried-chicken]

Sanders 25
Pete 20
Biden 15
Warren 13

Newest New Hampshire poll

 

[fried-chicken]

He just said we should legalize heroin and meth possession.

He's a genius.

85 stays lying

 

[UCFKnight85]

85 stays lying

Color me shocked you don't know anything about your own golden boy. Please issue retraction for being ignorant blowhard when ready.

Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said on Sunday that under his administration, heroin possession would not be illegal or would at most be a misdemeanor.

“Mayor, you not only want to decriminalize marijuana, you want to decriminalize all drug possession. You say the better answer is treatment, not incarceration,” Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace said. “Isn’t the fact that it’s illegal to have, to possess meth and heroin, doesn’t that at least in some way, the fact that it’s illegal act as some deterrent to trying it in the first place?”

“I think of what we need to focus on is where you have distribution,” Buttigieg said.

 

[fried-chicken]

Color me shocked you don't know anything about your own golden boy. Please issue retraction for being ignorant blowhard when ready.

Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said on Sunday that under his administration, heroin possession would not be illegal or would at most be a misdemeanor.

“Mayor, you not only want to decriminalize marijuana, you want to decriminalize all drug possession. You say the better answer is treatment, not incarceration,” Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace said. “Isn’t the fact that it’s illegal to have, to possess meth and heroin, doesn’t that at least in some way, the fact that it’s illegal act as some deterrent to trying it in the first place?”

“I think of what we need to focus on is where you have distribution,” Buttigieg said.

The part you bolded is quite literally an interpretation of a right wing publication writer and a Fox News host.

He will not support sending people to prison for being a drug addict.

That's not legalized, he's just not going to incarcerate drug addicts. It's not effective in solving the problem and it does more harm than good.

I would venture to bet that it would be treatment and support. It's actually a great idea and long over due.

 

[Cubs79]

Pete would not be very exciting for left leaning dems but if we are going to get a centrist I much prefer him over Biden due to competency and communication skills along with the fact that he undeniably smart.

I agree with that though I would actually go with Klobuchar over Pete. I think Pete needs to run for Senate or Governor or something. I think he has a potentially bright future in the party, but it is quite the leap going from a mayor of a pretty small town to president.

 

[Cubs79]

Color me shocked you don't know anything about your own golden boy. Please issue retraction for being ignorant blowhard when ready.

Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said on Sunday that under his administration, heroin possession would not be illegal or would at most be a misdemeanor.

“Mayor, you not only want to decriminalize marijuana, you want to decriminalize all drug possession. You say the better answer is treatment, not incarceration,” Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace said. “Isn’t the fact that it’s illegal to have, to possess meth and heroin, doesn’t that at least in some way, the fact that it’s illegal act as some deterrent to trying it in the first place?”

“I think of what we need to focus on is where you have distribution,” Buttigieg said.

Dude, he is saying it should be treated as a health issue not a criminal issue. It isn't that radical of a stance.

 

[UCFKnight85]

The part you bolded is quite literally an interpretation of a right wing publication writer and a Fox News host.

He will not support sending people to prison for being a drug addict.

That's not legalized, he's just not going to incarcerate drug addicts. It's not effective in solving the problem and it does more harm than good.

I would venture to bet that it would be treatment and support. It's actually a great idea and long over due.

First, you called me a liar and I just showed you stupid you were to do so. Waiting for you to acknowledge.

Second, "decriminalization" or "legalization" - whatever. It's fuking meth and heroin and we shouldn't be assigning either status to drugs that literally fry your brain from the first time you take it. Promote treatment all you want, I'm for it too, but it's braindead stupid to take this stance. Especially when legalizing possession just makes it harder to get people into treatment.

 

[fried-chicken]

First, you called me a liar and I just showed you stupid you were to do so. Waiting for you to acknowledge.

Second, "decriminalization" or "legalization" - whatever. It's fuking meth and heroin and we shouldn't be assigning either status to drugs that literally fry your brain from the first time you take it. Promote treatment all you want, I'm for it too, but it's braindead stupid to take this stance. Especially when legalizing possession just makes it harder to get people into treatment.

You were lying.

 

[fried-chicken]

I agree with that though I would actually go with Klobuchar over Pete. I think Pete needs to run for Senate or Governor or something. I think he has a potentially bright future in the party, but it is quite the leap going from a mayor of a pretty small town to president.

In normal circumstances I would agree that experience is important. But when you're running against a dude who's political experience amounted to saying that the black dude was born in Africa I think experience has shown to be less than required.

It's all about unification, broad appeal, and motivation the base.

Each candidate is weak in at least one area. I believe Pete is probably more well rounded than Klobs. They are equal in unification and broad appeal with Pete having an edge in motivating turnout.

 

[Crazyhole]

Biden would probably call Pete a "lying dogfaced pony soldier" like he did to the woman who dared question him.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Please then, lunatics, have Mayor Petey win the nod and insist he tell everyone that people should be able to possess meth and heroin in the middle of an opioid death epidemic

good luck

 

[Crazyhole]

Please then, lunatics, have Mayor Petey win the nod and insist he tell everyone that people should be able to possess meth and heroin in the middle of an opioid death epidemic

good luck

It's a weird contrarian position to take for sure. The hardcore libertarians love it but I can't see it selling with the vast majority of Americans. Pot legalization? Easy, low hanging fruit. Heroin? Yeah, that probably wont sell.

 

[KNIGHTTIME^]

Sanders 25
Pete 20
Biden 15
Warren 13

Newest New Hampshire poll

If He's Hampshire wasn't full of racist and anti-Native Americans, Warren would be walking away with NH.

 

[UCFKnight85]

It's a weird contrarian position to take for sure. The hardcore libertarians love it but I can't see it selling with the vast majority of Americans. Pot legalization? Easy, low hanging fruit. Heroin? Yeah, that probably wont sell.

It's also a hilarious stance to take by someone who was arresting far more people for weed possession than his predecessor.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...gieg-on-rising-arrests-of-blacks-on-marijuana

I guess weed possession is a bridge too far, but heroin, method, and fentanyl laced opioids is perfectly fine.

This guy also can't seem to effectively govern or police his own small town.

https://freebeacon.com/politics/south-bends-violent-crime-continues-to-skyrocket-under-buttigieg/

 

[fried-chicken]

It's also a hilarious stance to take by someone who was arresting far more people for weed possession than his predecessor.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...gieg-on-rising-arrests-of-blacks-on-marijuana

I guess weed possession is a bridge too far, but heroin, method, and fentanyl laced opioids is perfectly fine.

This guy also can't seem to effectively govern or police his own small town.

https://freebeacon.com/politics/south-bends-violent-crime-continues-to-skyrocket-under-buttigieg/

Are you saying you want weed legalized or is this just you telling democrats why they shouldn't like Buttigieg?

 

[UCFKnight85]

Are you saying you want weed legalized or is this just you telling democrats why they shouldn't like Buttigieg?

Um, pretty sure I'm on record here saying I'm fine with weed legalization or at least decriminalization.

I'm just pointing out what a hypocrite your golden boy is.

 

[Cubs79]

Please then, lunatics, have Mayor Petey win the nod and insist he tell everyone that people should be able to possess meth and heroin in the middle of an opioid death epidemic

good luck

Arent you kind of proving his point? It is illegal now, and there is an epidemic of abuse, so obviously he can argue we aren't going about it the right way. And BTW, he isn't making it legal to sell and would still go after dealers, he just wants addicts to get treatment instead of being treated as criminals. Again, you don't have to agree with him, but this isn't that radical of an idea.

 

[fried-chicken]

Um, pretty sure I'm on record here saying I'm fine with weed legalization or at least decriminalization.

I'm just pointing out what a hypocrite your golden boy is.

But it doesn't make any sense. You're attacking him for having a good idea. I think most Americans agree that you don't treat chemical addiction by locking people up.

You also don't prevent people from trying meth by the threat of jail time. Most first time users do it in a social setting without fear of the police busting down the door. Then they are hooked.

There's plenty to disagree with Pete on but this ain't it.

 

[UCFKnight85]

But it doesn't make any sense. You're attacking him for having a good idea. I think most Americans agree that you don't treat chemical addiction by locking people up.

You also don't prevent people from trying meth by the threat of jail time. Most first time users do it in a social setting without fear of the police busting down the door. Then they are hooked.

There's plenty to disagree with Pete on but this ain't it.

lol now you're just side stepping my point.

He wants to legalize meth and heroin possession, but in action, he threw more people in jail for weed possession. Do you not see the sheer hypocrisy here?

This is like someone saying they want a nationwide semiauto rifle ban while having a safe at home with 20 AR15's.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Arent you kind of proving his point? It is illegal now, and there is an epidemic of abuse, so obviously he can argue we aren't going about it the right way. And BTW, he isn't making it legal to sell and would still go after dealers, he just wants addicts to get treatment instead of being treated as criminals. Again, you don't have to agree with him, but this isn't that radical of an idea.

No, you're just conflating 2 different issues. There are many, many treatment programs going into place already but doing that does not require legalization of possession. Keeping these as illegal substances still provides some level of deterrence and provides police arrest powers when it's required, which it often will be with meth heads or heroin addicts.

 

[Boosted87]

Second, "decriminalization" or "legalization" - whatever. It's fuking meth and heroin and we shouldn't be assigning either status to drugs that literally fry your brain from the first time you take it. Promote treatment all you want, I'm for it too, but it's braindead stupid to take this stance. Especially when legalizing possession just makes it harder to get people into treatment.

There's a huge difference though. Establishing policy not to arrest people for possession under some certain threshhold amount would be substantially different than legalizing it for sale in a Meth Shop or whatever. You can still make it illegal to possess, but it's just confiscated or you get a fine. I have no idea what Mayor Pete's exact position is on this topic, but enacting policies that focus on dealers / distributors for criminality and treatment for users is pretty reasonable.

 

[UCFKnight85]

There's a huge difference though. Establishing policy not to arrest people for possession under some certain threshhold amount would be substantially different than legalizing it for sale in a Meth Shop or whatever. You can still make it illegal to possess, but it's just confiscated or you get a fine. I have no idea what Mayor Pete's exact position is on this topic, but enacting policies that focus on dealers / distributors for criminality and treatment for users is pretty reasonable.

It's not reasonable for a drug that can fry a brain and ruin a life on first usage. Keeping it illegal maintains some level of deterrence, and coupling that with serious treatment programs makes sense. Illegal means the police still have intervention and arrest powers when they need them.

 

[Crazyhole]

It's not reasonable for a drug that can fry a brain and ruin a life on first usage. Keeping it illegal maintains some level of deterrence, and coupling that with serious treatment programs makes sense. Illegal means the police still have intervention and arrest powers when they need them.

How did this work out with prohibition? Alcohol ruins far more lives than heroin and we tried making it illegal. Didnt work, it just made more criminals.

 

[Boosted87]

It's not reasonable for a drug that can fry a brain and ruin a life on first usage. Keeping it illegal maintains some level of deterrence, and coupling that with serious treatment programs makes sense. Illegal means the police still have intervention and arrest powers when they need them.

I mean, a fine deters speeding right? I don't think anyone is really arguing to legalize it.

 

[Cubs79]

It's not reasonable for a drug that can fry a brain and ruin a life on first usage. Keeping it illegal maintains some level of deterrence, and coupling that with serious treatment programs makes sense. Illegal means the police still have intervention and arrest powers when they need them.

This might work with some softer drugs, but I don't think your typical heroin or meth user would be deterred because they might get arrested. You are right that these are serious drugs that cause serious problems, which means the people using them are probably really serious about using them.