The Race for the 2020 POTUS elections

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,656
Much better than The Atlantic piece is came across a couple of days ago that seemed to try and point fingers because it claimed his record wasn't consistent. Times and circumstances change.

(Interesting also that at the end, Biden's friends seem to echo Booker's feelings that Biden's not ready to talk about race in our day and age. I think it's cute that they gave him book recommendations. I might check them out myself.)


On a different front, the WaPo's thinks that right now AL, MI and NH (Democrat-held) and TX, GA, AZ, ME, NC, IA and CO (Republican-held) are competitive Senate races. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/12/senate-seats-most-likely-flip/?utm_term=.d40d22a009a5
 

VIETgrlTerifa

Well-Known Member
Messages
29,401
A colleague of mine shared this long article about Buttigieg dissecting his book and looking to see what his policies did to those below the poverty line and those who lost their homes in South Bend to explain his apprehensiveness about him:


I think it, in probably a more extreme way than I would have, explains my own apprehensiveness about him and why I get nervous when the media and others tout his resume more than anything to support his candidacy. I admit a lot of things I found about him are due to probably basic differences in beliefs and my own biases regarding quick rises through our system of "meritocracy" getting in the way of seeing more of the positives about him, but I do think our biases are grounded in deep-seated beliefs that are the core of our being. Not saying he's wrong or right or those who support him or wrong or right (or at least get into that debate in this thread), but I personally find a lot of these things troubling and in his own words, he does showcase certain attitudes I find will be hard to get over personally.

This post isn't meant to change anyone's mind or anything, but I just wanted to share it if anyone was interested in why some are apprehensive about Pete Buttigieg. Of course, if he gets the candidacy, I will vote for him because it's important to get a Dem in office for reasons too many to count.

ETA: Because I came across it on Twitter, this is NOT The New Republic piece on Buttigieg that is pretty vile. I read the first paragraph and was to grossed out by the author to continue.
 
Last edited:

AngieNikodinovLove

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,404
^^^ Interesting... I don't mind a "quick rise"... less time to collect skeletons and be under the microscope.... look what Hillary went through. Trump also was a quick rise.... NOT an ounce of experience.... military, governor, senator, mayor.. nothing... and went in. Mayor Pete has a lot of this experience for only being 37 years old. Heck, Mayor Pete was the ONLY candidate on stage his night that was ever in the military. (I believe night one Tulsi had military experience)

Barack Obama had a quick rise too.. Outside of my home state of Illinois he was relatively unknown as a freshman Senator.

I much prefer this say over Biden so Harris and everyone can go back to 1912 looking at everything that was ever said or done.

Speaking of Mayor Pete.. he will be back here in LA July 25 soon with fundraisers hosted by Sean Hayes, Ryan Murphy & Ellen DeGeneres. Other donors: Katy Perry & Orlando Bloom, Jason Bateman, Matt Bomer, Mandy Moore, CAROLINE KENNEDY (exciting) and others.
 
Last edited:

clairecloutier

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,302
I actually posted that Current Affairs article a while ago in this thread, and it was discussed a bit here. I think my overall reaction was that the author makes some points worth considering, but it's also obvious that Buttigieg really pushes this author's particular buttons, so to speak. He has a point of view, and he pushes it hard in this piece.
 

VIETgrlTerifa

Well-Known Member
Messages
29,401
Ah I must have missed it. I think he recognizes his biases, but for me it doesn’t takeaway from the core of the piece which are also things I find troubling about his overall attitudes towards things. I can’t say I’m on board with him but like I said when push comes to shove, if he gets the nomination I’ll vote for him.
 

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,043
One question, @aftershocks, will you support and vote for the eventual Democratic nominee. I will. I have said it before, this election is much too important to let purity be the enemy of good.
Hopefully, the process will end up with the most viable candidate and running mate from this lot. At this juncture, I'm not feeling great because Trumpster has gotten and continues to get away with murder, while our country, the Dem field, Dem legislators and every other oppositionist to Trump world are treading water. The media is reprehensible more often than not.

I got a better look at the Harris-Biden exchange and what led up to it. Whoa, Harris was just waiting for 'black' topics to be brought up. There was Marianne Williamson (the 'woo-woo, let's make fun of her candidate') actually bringing out the importance of discussing the commonplace killing of 'black' people by the police, as well as the issue of reparations for African-Americans.

As soon as Harris smelled 'black' topic, she yelled out, "I'm a black woman, let me speak!" :lol: It wasn't her turn, and the moderators were in the process of moving on, yet they weakly allowed Harris to barge in on what Williamson had brought up in her very few opportunities to speak. Due to Harris' aggression, the mods gave Harris 30 seconds to have her say. Yet Harris decided to take way more than 30 seconds to divert the debate and launch a full frontal assault against Biden, on a topic which actually had nothing to do with what Williamson had just mentioned which Harris loudly suggested she was more 'qualified' to talk about! Another male candidate who will surely not get very far, and is no spring chicken himself, had the nerve to needle Biden about holding onto the torch too long! :drama: This, with ancient-looking Sanders standing right next to Biden fading into the woodwork. :duh:

The debate format is laughable. And I'm not convinced it's the best vehicle for choosing a strong, competent candidate who can fight for America on serious issues, while at the same time being able to neuter and take down Trump disaster. There are stupid people who actually believe the upturn in our economy is solely due to Trump being in office. :rolleyes: Nope, it took 8 years of the Obama administration working their butts off embattled by stonewalling from Repubs, to begin turning the economy around. Trump is the worthless, undeserving beneficiary of Obama/Biden administration's hard work!

The media is a complete piece of crap for the most part during political campaign seasons. I'm going to barf if I have to continue listening to 20-something and 30-something political talking head analysts offering simplistic status quo in-your-face aggressive know-it-all soundbites that lack historical perspective and solid, common sense, in-depth knowledge.

This was about the best brief news summary I could find on Harris vs Biden 'busing brouhaha' (with Booker pile-on tangentially mentioned): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1ILpb0x93Q And even then, it only touches on the complicated nature of the issue behind the soundbites.

Biden should have referenced his book in which he took time to discuss his past stance on busing. The book though, is probably where Booker/Harris and their operatives had discovered the fodder with which to tactically slice and dice Biden.

To answer your question @Reuven, I'm very concerned about where we are heading, and I don't have any answers. Right now, Buttigieg comes across as very skilled, thoughtful, articulate and capable. But IMO, Biden has the wisdom, experience, decency, governing competence and knowledge to truly lead and serve. I also like what I've seen from Castro, and Warren has good ideas, but I'm not sure about her governance chops. The stickler question is whether or not Biden can skillfully campaign and dodge buckshot designed to wound him and his candidacy before this crazy field clears to those with the most substance and grit.

I wouldn't mind seeing the field whittled down to Biden, Castro, Buttigieg, Warren, Booker, Harris, Beto, Sanders, Gillenbrand, Klobuchar, Ryan, Williamson. And then further chopped to the first 9 names, and then to the first 8, so there can hopefully be more substantive debates. Again, I would vote for a Biden-Castro, Biden-Buttigieg, Biden-Warren, Biden-Booker, Buttigeig-Biden*, Buttiegieg-Castro, Buttigieg-Warren, Castro-Harris, Castro-Warren, Castro-Buttiegieg, Castro-Booker, Buttigieg-Booker, or Buttigieg-Harris ticket. Albeit whoever wins the nomination may not necessarily choose someone from the rest of this field as their running mate. *I doubt Biden would be picked, or willing to run again as VP.

I would not be thrilled about seeing either Warren, Harris, or Booker at the top of the ticket, and especially not Sanders. But I could be convinced by Biden, Buttigieg or Castro heading a Dem ticket. There's a long way to go. Trump should already have been led out the WH in handcuffs. That's the current and ongoing sour, deathly state of affairs. But setting aside the Dem race, at this juncture there isn't anyone within or without Washington D.C. capably strong and well-armed enough who cares to intervene, as we continue to careen headlong into the abyss.
 

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,043
My point, which I'm pretty sure everyone else got, is that the GoP were not willing to work with Obama because of his race.
Hmmm, I got news for you: The Repubs ain't really willin' to work with any Dem in the WH, of course especially not a 'black' man (not even one from a 'white' Mama), forget about Repubs working with a woman! That's why it was never Hillary's time, no matter how capable, competent, and good a leader she's proven herself to be, and could have been in the Oval Office. It will be next dimension and then some before a black woman ever ever wins U.S. presidential office, no matter how well WOCs can lead, and have led throughout centuries, whether we realize it or not.

The whole push for 'Michelle Obama for President,' and 'Oprah for President,' is an idealistic paper tiger. Mind you the movement or enthusiasm behind such pushes is the paper tiger. Michelle and Oprah are tough, badass boss ladies, who are actually too smart for the WH. Being U.S. Prez may be a distinguished honor (less so post-Trump), but the office of U.S. president is not, and has never been all it's 'trumped-up' to be. It's a difficult roller coaster, and too often POTUS' hands are tied. Ironically, Trump didn't want the office, until he realized it's puffy perks gave him a measure of power, at which point he decided it'd be cool to somehow turn the position into 'U.S. dictator for life.' We all know Trumpster's hands need to be tied in perpetuity, especially at 3:00 am in the morning. :drama:

I think Biden not very skillfully is trying to point out that he's successfully negotiated across the aisle as a senator and as a VP.* I believe that's an important distinction, even though negotiating is tough in the era of 'scorched-earth' Repub tactics. As someone mentioned in the debates: McConnell must go! As well, a lot of our logjam politics with lobbyists, right wing operatives, and corporate/pharma/Wall Street greed has got to be dismantled before true change will ever begin to become a possibility.

* But sh*t, everyone in D.C. actually knows that Hillary was also quite capable of working successfully across the aisle, since she did so to much praise as a senator. Powers in certain quarters simply never wanted Hillary to ever become U.S. president.

At this juncture, apparently Biden's 'busing brouhaha' is somewhat akin to 'Hillary's Benghazi,' which after it became a non-issue, turned into the monstrous saga of 'Hillary's emails.'

Oh, and as pointed out in some follow-up news summaries, Harris was bused to school in the 1970s under a 'voluntary busing' program, which was not the type of program Biden opposed. As well, Harris' home state of California reportedly still has some of the most 'racially' segregated school districts in the country.
 
Last edited:

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,043
Not saying he's wrong or right or those who support him or wrong or right (or at least get into that debate in this thread), but I personally find a lot of these things troubling and in his own words, he does showcase certain attitudes I find will be hard to get over personally.
Yep sure, we each are trying to figure out who we like and how we perceive the candidates who are running. In the long run, hopefully someone strong and capable enough on the issues, with decent morals backed by cat 'n mouse fighting abilities, will emerge. We can't kid ourselves, Dems need to win back the WH!

Surely what you sense in Buttigieg is not more troubling than what we are dealing with in Trumpster every second. It will be a difficult morass to dig our county out of for many more years to come, even after Trump has been forcefully ejected!
 

VIETgrlTerifa

Well-Known Member
Messages
29,401
I did say I would vote for him if he gained the candidacy. I wouldn't be blinded stan of his, though I may act like it during the general election period. Kind of like how I pretended to love Michelle Kwan's Scheherezade program that season.
 

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,043
So it's a rare day that I agree with Marc Thiessen but I think he's spot on when it comes to his analysis of Biden's electability:

Come on. It's rather laughable that Thiessen has the nerve to cite Biden's "son Hunter's international business dealings having a curious pattern of intersecting with Biden's diplomatic efforts with governments of countries of concern to the U.S." In the era of Trump circus nepotism, and especially coupled with l'orange progeny's incompetence and pomposity, there is no equivalence to other U.S. presidents or vice-presidents! Not to this egregious extent, not even under Cheney's slick, secretive, under-the-radar rule.

If what Biden's son Hunter was involved with was in any way a serious issue, God help us, cuz we might as well wake up and realize every political interaction is corrupt. So as things now stand, how much corruptness do we want to continue putting up with, eh? :COP:

The article you linked may give pause for thoughtful reflection, but I'm not going to fall like a domino to every political-minded think piece. I'm going to try and think for myself and not be taken in by pundits who harbor their own motivations and prejudices.

As far as the economic stats quoted by Thiessen, I'm getting tired of people knee-jerk giving Trump way too much credit. Why don't we wish to realize the utter mess Trump is making of our institutions and our democracy? The border and immigration mess they have created is appalling... :scream:

There is a much more humane, and reasoned way of dealing with tough issues instead of the cruel, hard-line stances that are creating more havoc and long-term problems than most of us truly want to think about. So we don't.
 
Last edited:

Ania

Well-Known Member
Messages
469
A colleague of mine shared this long article about Buttigieg dissecting his book and looking to see what his policies did to those below the poverty line and those who lost their homes in South Bend to explain his apprehensiveness about him:

Sorry, I have to say I hated it. I thought that 80% of this article was a pedantic vanity project focused on critiquing Buttigieg's book vs. his record. Although again, much of the article was't even about the book. What the heck was this for:
"After Harvard, it is off to Oxford, where Buttigieg takes up his Rhodes Scholarship with pride. This period of the Buttigieg bildungsroman flits by quickly, but we should pause to note something about the function of Rhodes Scholarships in elite credentialing. Andrew Sullivan—of all people!—wrote a 1988 article poking fun at this sought-after honor (“there is no more glittering prize a young American can win”), and noting that those who win it seem to possess “fecklessness, excessive concern that peasants be aware of their achievement, and a certain hemophilia of character.” They are chosen “not for their creative brilliance but for their slogging ability to make all the right career moves and please their elders.”

The Rhodes recipient, he wrote, is the“apotheosis of the hustling apple-polisher, the résumé-obsessed goody goody,” honorees often having a kind of “bland eugenic perfection.” They “are good at seeking and getting approval. They were good boys at every stage. They were the kind of guys who were editor of the yearbook in high school.” (Or the president of the senior class.) From Oxford, he said, the Scholars tend to take up unexciting but well-paying professional positions, such as working for McKinsey & Company. Sullivan predicted that a Rhodes scholar could never be president, because being president involves making decisions, which they would be unable to do. (Four years later, with the election of Bill Clinton, he was proved both wrong and right.)
"

As for Buttigieg's record, I agree with you that the 1,000 houses in 1,000 days project was in many ways troubling. This article takes an unvarnished but balanced look at what happened, what some of the residents who were affected thought then and now (it's long but worth reading): https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/henrygomez/mayor-pete-buttigieg-south-bend-gentrification
I can relate to some uneasiness about Buttigieg but I'd rather read analyses of his record vs. paragraphs on whether he really understands the term 'false modesty' based on how he once used it in his book.
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,656
Many election systems, even new(er) ones still use Windows 7. Microsoft will stop issuing free updates for Windows 7 on Jan 14, 2020, making Windows 7 more vulnerable to hacking. https://www.apnews.com/e5e070c31f3c497fa9e6875f426ccde1

It's been over a year since Microsoft has announced the end of support for Windows 7. Why does it sound like election system vendors didn't immediately start the process of getting a newer software certified?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top