Buttigieg 2020

[henrygandorf 29174]

30 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Follow up questions: what does he smell like? do you think he would be friends with me? did you guys do gay stuff on the boats?

Thank you for your service. 

"what's a not-gay way to ask him to go camping with me?"

#ronswanson

['stache 21744]

Follow up questions: what does he smell like? do you think he would be friends with me? did you guys do gay stuff on the boats?
Thank you for your service. 

Their poopdeck had lots of seamen, so maybe?

[Ozzman 36]

I can neither confirm nor deny any and all allegations.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[bad_teammate 13132]

ugh fuck off pete what the hell is this bullshit?

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

Pete is catching some flack today over his opinion that “coastal elites” need to be more understanding of Trump voters and rural folks.

Lots of responses saying that the “coastal elites” narrative is bullshittery and that the rest of us understand Trump voters just fine and we no longer need to pander to them and try to understand them or give them the benefit of the doubt. They’re a lost cause and any efforts to placate them or bring them in are wasted.

The majority of the people responding are wishing Pete would not bother with trying to appease them at all and either call them out or just ignore them.

I don’t agree with the idea of him calling them out as racist and gross deplorables like some are calling for - that doesn’t seem to be Pete’s style but I am tired of being asked to try and understand them. Fuck them. They are a lost cause. Just pretend they don’t exist.

[henrygandorf 29174]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

ugh fuck off pete what the hell is this bullshit?

 

what's your gripe, exactly?  it's a fact that the troops from vietnam were not universally honored/respected.  there wasn't a standard "thank you for your service" appreciation that there's been since 9/11.  being a dem who understands the military (from actual freaking service) is something he absolutely should not shy away from.

[henrygandorf 29174]

3 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Pete is catching some flack today over his opinion that “coastal elites” need to be more understanding of Trump voters and rural folks.
 

Lots of responses saying that the “coastal elites” narrative is bullshittery and that the rest of us understand Trump voters just fine and we no longer need to pander to them and try to understand them or give them the benefit of the doubt. They’re a lost cause and any efforts to placate them or bring them in are wasted.

The majority of the people responding are wishing Pete would not bother with trying to appease them at all and either call them out or just ignore them.

I don’t agree with the idea of him calling them out as racist and gross deplorables like some are calling for - that doesn’t seem to be Pete’s style but I am tired of being asked to try and understand them. Fuck them. They are a lost cause. Just pretend they don’t exist.

 

unfortunately, as long as the electoral college is a thing, those states containing the lost causes are in play and a couple are pretty much essential, but only if you want to, you know, actually win an election.  pete is in one of those states, and it's definitely not his style to turn his back on his people/area of the country.  certainly no reason to this early in the process.

if he's the candidate, he's not going to lose the 'coastal elites' anyway.

[Biff Tannen 45491]

5 hours ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Follow up questions: what does he smell like? do you think he would be friends with me? did you guys do gay stuff on the boats?

Thank you for your service. 

I'm not giving you rep for this, though I want to, but I want Ozzman to understand your character on this board. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

lol South Bend went basically 75-25 for Hillary and its main industry is a major university, but sure Pete, go off king

The only candidate with semi-legit "I get Republicans to vote for me" cred is Killer Queen Klobuchar

2 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

what's your gripe, exactly?  it's a fact that the troops from vietnam were not universally honored/respected.  there wasn't a standard "thank you for your service" appreciation that there's been since 9/11.  being a dem who understands the military (from actual freaking service) is something he absolutely should not shy away from.

A few gripes...

(1) The "THEY WERE SPITTING ON VIETNAM VETS!" thing is complete, made-up horseshit. Conservatives literally saw it in movies and then pretended it was reality. It wasn't.
(2) Our worship of military culture post-9/11 is unhealthy and leads to a glee for perpetual, meaningless war. And the lib frenzy to be Unimpeachable Soldier Respecters is a reaction to conservatives beating them over the head with the made-up "THEY WERE SPITTING ON THE VIETNAM VETS!" bullshit.

Our Republican president got elected after saying he likes the ones who don't get captured. Enough with the bullshit performative respectfulness that we only seem to have for fucking cops and soldiers in this stupid country.

If you were a soldier, that's fine. I don't care. But I also don't admire your profound courage more than that of an EMT or school teacher. Inarguably, those people actually do more good for the world.

But this gets into the "If you don't bend the knee to a soldier regardless of merit or context you hate troops" thing, which is boring, self-defeating, and stupid.

[Biff Tannen 45491]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

ugh fuck off pete what the hell is this bullshit?

 

Shocker.  B_T is not on board. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

I have thoughts, beliefs, and values. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Show me a "I'll show the world how soldier-respecting I am!" leader and I'll show you someone who is going to kill a lot of brown people.

 

[Biff Tannen 45491]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

I have thoughts, beliefs, and values. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Show me a "I'll show the world how soldier-respecting I am!" leader and I'll show you someone who is going to kill a lot of brown people.

 

As long as you promise to actually vote for whoever the D nominee ends up being, I could give two flying fucks.

[Ozzman 36]

I'm not giving you rep for this, though I want to, but I want Ozzman to understand your character on this board. 

I certainly don't have thin skin or take anything like that seriously. Rep away

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[henrygandorf 29174]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

lol South Bend went basically 75-25 for Hillary and its main industry is a major university, but sure Pete, go off king

The only candidate with semi-legit "I get Republicans to vote for me" cred is Killer Queen Klobuchar

A few gripes...

(1) The "THEY WERE SPITTING ON VIETNAM VETS!" thing is complete, made-up horseshit. Conservatives literally saw it in movies and then pretended it was reality. It wasn't.
(2) Our worship of military culture post-9/11 is unhealthy and leads to a glee for perpetual, meaningless war. And the lib frenzy to be Unimpeachable Soldier Respecters is a reaction to conservatives beating them over the head with the made-up "THEY WERE SPITTING ON THE VIETNAM VETS!" bullshit.

Our Republican president got elected after saying he likes the ones who don't get captured. Enough with the bullshit performative respectfulness that we only seem to have for fucking cops and soldiers in this stupid country.

If you were a soldier, that's fine. I don't care. But I also don't admire your profound courage more than that of an EMT or school teacher. Inarguably, those people actually do more good for the world.

But this gets into the "If you don't bend the knee to a soldier regardless of merit or context you hate troops" thing, which is boring, self-defeating, and stupid.

so first you say that "our worship of military culture post-9/11 is unhealthy", then you imply that it's always been that way by saying the disrespect for vietnam vets was "made-up horseshit."  make up your mind, dude.

i agree that some of the "respectfulness" can be bullshit, but you also say, "if you were a soldier, that's fine.  i don't care".  he was a soldier, and he does care.  therefore, i care what he publicly (via twitter) has to say about it.

if you want to explain how it's a tactical mistake in the context of his campaign, i'll happily listen to your side of it.

[Ozzman 36]

so first you say that "our worship of military culture post-9/11 is unhealthy", then you imply that it's always been that way by saying the disrespect for vietnam vets was "made-up horseshit."  make up your mind, dude.
i agree that some of the "respectfulness" can be bullshit, but you also say, "if you were a soldier, that's fine.  i don't care".  he was a soldier, and he does care.  therefore, i care what he publicly (via twitter) has to say about it.
if you want to explain how it's a tactical mistake in the context of his campaign, i'll happily listen to your side of it.

He wasn't a soldier. Don't insult him. He was a sailor.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[InkaUtexas 25486]

Ya know BT. I will let you tell my father he was not spit on in 1971 in Boston during a parade. 

Agree  the whole " we owe everything" is a bit old. And I do not like seeing servicemen/women traveling in their ACU's, but to say shit did not happen, well.... 

 

 

[henrygandorf 29174]

3 minutes ago, Ozzman said:

He wasn't a soldier. Don't insult him. He was a sailor.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

noted for future shit-talking.  i do pride myself on occasional accuracy.

[bad_teammate 13132]

1 minute ago, henrygandorf said:

so first you say that "our worship of military culture post-9/11 is unhealthy", then you imply that it's always been that way by saying the disrespect for vietnam vets was "made-up horseshit."  make up your mind, dude.

There is a grey area between "open disrespect" and "open worship". A fairly expansive grey area.

Vietnam vets were certainly mistreated by government, who should have done a lot more for them (as they should all soldiers and all citizens), but that's not Pete's angle here.

Quote

 if you want to explain how it's a tactical mistake in the context of his campaign, i'll happily listen to your side of it.

I have no idea if it's a "tactical mistake", I'm just saying it's either cynical political bullshit or historical ignorance. Both are a bad look on our supposedly smart and straight-shootin' boy.

Also, it's not going to win him any Republicans. 75% of fucking Marines voted for Donald after Donald mocked a Gold Star family and said he likes the ones who don't get captured. Sorry, Pete, but none of them are voting for a gay Democrat no matter how hard you "TROOPS! TROOPS! TROOPS!"

Meanwhile, this is basically the only lens I've ever gotten into his foreign policy vision and it ain't encouraging.

3 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Ya know BT. I will let you tell my father he was not spit on in 1971 in Boston during a parade. 

Agree  the whole " we owe everything" is a bit old. And I do not like seeing servicemen/women traveling in their ACU's, but to say shit did not happen, well.... 

Well what? You're bringing your dad into this conversation as an emotional hand grenade. You think you're the only one with veteran family?

Yeah, I'm sure there were some incidents. Things happen everywhere.

But the reality of the United States post-Vietnam was that veterans returned to friendly citizens.

--------------------------------------------------------

According to a 1971 Lou Harris poll, 94 percent of Vietnam veterans reported receiving friendly homecomings from Americans in their age group who had not served in the military. Nor were they routinely spat upon, a myth that henchmen of U.S. President Richard Nixon propagated to stigmatize the antiwar movement.

In his 1998 book, The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam, sociologist Jerry Lembcke investigated hundreds of news reports about protesters spitting at returning soldiers. He couldn’t confirm a single one. Most of the alleged witnesses to these episodes told Lembcke that they had heard about a spitting from a friend or a relative instead of seeing it themselves.

They were also influenced by popular culture, which eagerly embraced the spitting myth. “I come back to the world and I see all those maggots at the airport,” Sylvester Stallone complained in First Blood, released in 1982, in which he played Vietnam veteran John Rambo. “Protesting me. Spitting. Calling me ‘baby killer’ . . . Who are they to protest me? Huh?” 

--------------------------------------------------------

[InkaUtexas 25486]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

There is a grey area between "open disrespect" and "open worship". A fairly expansive grey area.

Vietnam vets were certainly mistreated by government, who should have done a lot more for them (as they should all soldiers and all citizens), but that's not Pete's angle here.

I have no idea if it's a "tactical mistake", I'm just saying it's either cynical political bullshit or historical ignorance. Both are a bad look on our supposedly smart and straight-shootin' boy.

Also, it's not going to win him any Republicans. 75% of fucking Marines voted for Donald after Donald mocked a Gold Star family and said he likes the ones who don't get captured. Sorry, Pete, but none of them are voting for a gay Democrat no matter how hard you "TROOPS! TROOPS! TROOPS!"

Meanwhile, this is basically the only lens I've ever gotten into his foreign policy vision and it ain't encouraging.

Well what? You're bringing your dad into this conversation as an emotional hand grenade. You think you're the only one with veteran family?

Yeah, I'm sure there were some incidents. Things happen everywhere.

But the reality of the United States post-Vietnam was that veterans returned to friendly citizens.

--------------------------------------------------------

According to a 1971 Lou Harris poll, 94 percent of Vietnam veterans reported receiving friendly homecomings from Americans in their age group who had not served in the military. Nor were they routinely spat upon, a myth that henchmen of U.S. President Richard Nixon propagated to stigmatize the antiwar movement.

In his 1998 book, The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam, sociologist Jerry Lembcke investigated hundreds of news reports about protesters spitting at returning soldiers. He couldn’t confirm a single one. Most of the alleged witnesses to these episodes told Lembcke that they had heard about a spitting from a friend or a relative instead of seeing it themselves.

They were also influenced by popular culture, which eagerly embraced the spitting myth. “I come back to the world and I see all those maggots at the airport,” Sylvester Stallone complained in First Blood, released in 1982, in which he played Vietnam veteran John Rambo. “Protesting me. Spitting. Calling me ‘baby killer’ . . . Who are they to protest me? Huh?” 

--------------------------------------------------------

No, just said you can ask him. I trust him and what he said. 

[henrygandorf 29174]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

There is a grey area between "open disrespect" and "open worship". A fairly expansive grey area.

Vietnam vets were certainly mistreated by government, who should have done a lot more for them (as they should all soldiers and all citizens), but that's not Pete's angle here.

I have no idea if it's a "tactical mistake", I'm just saying it's either cynical political bullshit or historical ignorance. Both are a bad look on our supposedly smart and straight-shootin' boy.

Also, it's not going to win him any Republicans. 75% of fucking Marines voted for Donald after Donald mocked a Gold Star family and said he likes the ones who don't get captured. Sorry, Pete, but none of them are voting for a gay Democrat no matter how hard you "TROOPS! TROOPS! TROOPS!"

ok, so they were certainly mistreated by the govt.  got it.  tag me when you pivot again.  there are expansive gray areas in all directions.

pete served, so he doesn't have to have an angle on vietnam memorial day, a day most people are unaware of.  this isn't part of his platform, this is part of his personality.  he's allowed to share his perspective. 

he isn't tweeting this 20 months ahead of election day to "win republicans".  if you've listened to him in any of his dozens of interviews, you should be able to pick up some consistency from his rhetoric.  he's still introducing himself to the american people.  if you are having trouble telling the difference, i don't know what to tell you.

 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

38 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Pete is catching some flack today over his opinion that “coastal elites” need to be more understanding of Trump voters and rural folks.
 

 

Lots of responses saying that the “coastal elites” narrative is bullshittery and that the rest of us understand Trump voters just fine and we no longer need to pander to them and try to understand them or give them the benefit of the doubt. They’re a lost cause and any efforts to placate them or bring them in are wasted.

The majority of the people responding are wishing Pete would not bother with trying to appease them at all and either call them out or just ignore them.

I don’t agree with the idea of him calling them out as racist and gross deplorables like some are calling for - that doesn’t seem to be Pete’s style but I am tired of being asked to try and understand them. Fuck them. They are a lost cause. Just pretend they don’t exist.

 

I love how the "coastal elites" can't possibly understand Trump voters — according to people in red states who are nonetheless experts on what those of us on the coasts know and think. 

[Bama Chick 28596]

I love how the "coastal elites" can't possibly understand Trump voters — according to people in red states who are nonetheless experts on what those of us on the coasts know and think. 

And that’s the backlash in a nutshell to Pete’s opinion.

Of course it’s completely overblown because, hey it’s Twitter, but I kind of agree with it.

FFS, I live behind enemy lines. I don’t need to “understand” Trumpkins. I work with them. I’m friends with them. I’m related to them. How about they try to understand me for fucking once?

And “coastal elites” is such a dog whistle bullshit term. There are plenty of Trumpturds on the coasts too. And plenty of liberals marooned in red states.

We aren’t living in political ghettos.

[bad_teammate 13132]

10 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

he isn't tweeting this 20 months ahead of election day to "win republicans".

You asked if it was a "tactical mistake" and that's the only thing I thought was relevant in terms of your question.

He's a 37-year-old running for president, if you want to delude yourself regarding the astonishing reach of his ambition I guess you're welcome to it, but I'm on my guard. I like him, but it's a little too neat at this point. He's been planning this since his teenage years.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

4 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

FFS, I live behind enemy lines. I don’t need to “understand” Trumpkins. I work with them. I’m friends with them. I’m related to them. How about they try to understand me for fucking once?

This reminds of the media’s absurd obsession with the fervent Hillary Clinton voters.  Oh wait, that never existed because the media completely ignored them while breaking their backs trying to understand the Trump supporters.

Our media is dogshit and they’ll probably elect Trump again because there was no self reflection or sense of responsibility the last go around.

[babysdaddy 2718]

I love how the "coastal elites" can't possibly understand Trump voters — according to people in red states who are nonetheless experts on what those of us on the coasts know and think. 

Is this like pulling the reverse racism card in politics?

[austingirl 2184]

I'm loving his husband on Twitter.

 

[Biff Tannen 45491]

1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

And plenty of liberals marooned in red states.

Welcome to Austin.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

3 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

 

And that’s the backlash in a nutshell to Pete’s opinion.

Of course it’s completely overblown because, hey it’s Twitter, but I kind of agree with it.

FFS, I live behind enemy lines. I don’t need to “understand” Trumpkins. I work with them. I’m friends with them. I’m related to them. How about they try to understand me for fucking once?

And “coastal elites” is such a dog whistle bullshit term. There are plenty of Trumpturds on the coasts too. And plenty of liberals marooned in red states.

We aren’t living in political ghettos.

 

Yeah, I know Trump voters here in VA, back in TX, and among extended family in OH.  And we all see the guy they support.  It's no big mystery.

Trump has brought the worst out in his supporters.  The way forward isn't to indulge them, but rather to bring out the best in as many people as possible with good policies and a positive vision for the country. 

I mean, I get why Trump supporters can seem like good, reachable folks to Mayor Pete.  Before Trump, I would have characterized the ones I know the same way (most of them, at least — a sizeable chunk of Trump voters are just bad people).  A good illustration of the problem is when Trump supporters in a community are aghast that an illegal they know who runs a local restaurant is getting deported, even though they support Trump's policies in general (we know him, he's one of the good ones, not like all the rapists pouring over our borders).  It's not purely about bias, racism, etc., although that is part of it.  It's more broadly a problem with empathizing beyond one's own identity group, whether due to stupidity, deep-seated ignorance, or various personal struggles.  You can't really fix those things on a societal level in the short term. 

[Brisketexan 104537]

They were also influenced by popular culture, which eagerly embraced the spitting myth. “I come back to the world and I see all those maggots at the airport,” Sylvester Stallone complained in First Blood, released in 1982, in which he played Vietnam veteran John Rambo. “Protesting me. Spitting. Calling me ‘baby killer’ . . . Who are they to protest me? Huh?” 
--------------------------------------------------------

Wait, we’re questioning the historical accuracy of Rambo?

Fuck this planet.

[Bruh Man 3160]

 

[Gil Bang 25894]

I think I love him, so what am I so afraid of? 

You’re afraid that you’re not sure of a love that there’s no cure for. Maybe.

[SKJ 1305]

I tend to agree with Yang's take on how Trump got elected: We automated a shitload of jobs in all the states that swung his way. He has said many times it's right in the data.

They thought he was going to do something for them. He didn't.

I wish more candidates for behind his human-centered capitalism idea. Sure, maybe a dem can swing them back since he hasn't changed anything there, v but no one is advancing any ideas that would really do it.

Yang has said the only reason he's running is to advance the ideas that would help save us from the upcoming onslaught that brought us Trump... It's time for someone to take notice, even if it's not him.

[bad_teammate 13132]

7 hours ago, Bruh Man said:

 

Pete was awesome, but Bill Maher is a beating and I couldn't finish.

An old man who is constantly triggered by trans people and young people.

[bad_teammate 13132]

Look at the ratio. Whoops.

That's what you get for being right, Pete. Keep being right!

[Fozzz 152]

This is a must read piece on Mayor Pete. 

http://currentaffairs.org/2019/03/all-about-pete

[Fozzz 152]

Lol this guy is a joke. 

Buttigieg himself is quite explicit about pitching himself this way. Asked about why anyone should vote for him over other candidates, he did not cite a superior governing agenda. Instead he said: 

You have a handful of candidates from the middle of the country, but very few of them are young. You have a handful of young candidates, but very few of them are executives. We have a handful of executives but none of them are veterans, and so it’s a question of: What alignment of attributes do you want to have?

Alignment of attributes? Are we building a Sims character? This is McKinsey-speak: optimizing candidate attribute matrix for maximal cross-national vote share. Unfortunately, many in the political press still find this meaningful. Have a read through the profiles and see how much time is spent thinking about Buttigieg’s Attribute Alignment versus asking him to name a single thing he plans to do to help working people. 

A labor organizer friend of mine has a test he uses for politicians: When they talk, is it all about themselves, or all about the causes they care about? Do they talk incessantly about their Journey and their Homespun Values, or do they talk about people’s needs, the power structure, and how to build a more just world? Pete’s book is, for the most part, all about Pete. That’s not what you want.

[BradInATX 9208]

1 hour ago, Fozzz said:

This is a must read piece on Mayor Pete. 

http://currentaffairs.org/2019/03/all-about-pete

- He's successful

- He's white

- He speaks with nuance and thoughtfulness and hasn't fleshed it every tiny policy detail 20 months prior to the election

ergo he's terrible.

 

Did I miss anything? What a stupid fucking article.

 

[Brisketexan 104537]

- He's successful
- He's white
- He speaks with nuance and thoughtfulness and hasn't fleshed it every tiny policy detail 20 months prior to the election
ergo he's terrible.
 
Did I miss anything? What a stupid fucking article.
 

He doesn’t have the perspective and experience of someone who grew up poor, homeless, minority, and abused. So clearly, Bernie is the antidote for that.

[bad_teammate 13132]

ugh

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

He doesn’t have the perspective and experience of someone who grew up poor, homeless, minority, and abused. So clearly, Bernie is the antidote for that.

If the poor, homeless, minority, and abused support Bernie then yes, unironically yes.

[Fozzz 152]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

He doesn’t have the perspective and experience of someone who grew up poor, homeless, minority, and abused. So clearly, Bernie is the antidote for that.

You should bother reading the piece. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

This is a good paragraph to explain the reason to put on your skepticism goggles and not chug the Pete Flavor-Aid right away. We're a year out from the primaries, this is the time to dive deep into each of our choices.

Quote

Before I dive into Shortest Way Home’s account of the life and career of Peter Buttigieg, let me be up front about my bias. I don’t trust former McKinsey consultants. I don’t trust military intelligence officers. And I don’t trust the type of people likely to appear on “40 under 40” lists, the valedictorian-to-Harvard-to-Rhodes-Scholarship types who populate the American elite. I don’t trust people who get flattering reams of newspaper profiles and are pitched as the Next Big Thing That You Must Pay Attention To, and I don’t trust wunderkinds who become successful too early. Why? Because I am somewhat cynical about the United States meritocracy. Few people amass these kind of  résumés if they are the type to openly challenge authority. Noam Chomsky says that the factors predicting success in our “meritocracy” are a “combination of greed, cynicism, obsequiousness and subordination, lack of curiosity and independence of mind, [and] self-serving disregard for others.” So when journalists see “Harvard” and think “impressive,” I see it and think “uh-oh.”

Beto writing stupid/gross stuff in his teens, wandering over to NYC in his 20s to be a layabout searcher, driving drunk in his mid/late 20s and causing an accident and trying to leave the scene, then going on to become a charming goofus dad/politician is a narrative we can identify with as humans because we, also, are idiots.

Pete VS. Beto

 

And again, for those of you who get so nervous, I like Pete. I will gleefully vote for him in the general.

[henrygandorf 29174]

you know you're starting to make some noise when the hit pieces start popping up.

gonna be a long 11 months til iowa and nh.

[tantric superman 4667]

I'm going to say this once just because I think it's relevant.But I also think saying anything about it more than once, is dangerous because it shouldn't be relevant.

My mom hates Trump enough that getting him out of the White House is maybe the one thing in the world she would be willing to sell her hard core Catholic soul to the devil for.

She also indicated that she likes Mayor Pete.

"But I wonder who he is going to bring into the White House.  (Long pause).  His (pause).  Boyfriend?"  

In all honesty, I trust her to overcome those concerns in the face of four more years of Trump.  But other olds?

If Pete's the Dem's choice and it's the olds who keep him from becoming President, then I can live with four more years of Trump.  But goddammit.  The idea that there are people out there who would allow one innocuous, irrelevant trait to outweigh the utter vileness that is Trump?  Sad!

 

That's all I have to say about that.

[bad_teammate 13132]

5 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

If Pete's the Dem's choice and it's the olds who keep him from becoming President, then I can live with four more years of Trump.  But goddammit.  The idea that there are people out there who would allow one innocuous, irrelevant trait to outweigh the utter vileness that is Trump?  Sad!

If Pete wins the primary, we all go to war for Pete.

Nice gay boys who dress, act, and talk like nice straight boys are easy to sell to old ladies. Just gotta try. Just gotta put in the work. As long as Pete doesn't slap on a cock-ring in the middle of a pride parade, we can do it.

Have faith.

[Fozzz 152]

2 hours ago, BradInATX said:

- He's successful

- He's white

- He speaks with nuance and thoughtfulness and hasn't fleshed it every tiny policy detail 20 months prior to the election

ergo he's terrible.

 

Did I miss anything? What a stupid fucking article.

 

You sound like Johnny Sack, Brad. 

[Brisketexan 104537]

56 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

You should bother reading the piece. 

I did.

It's well-written and detailed.

Which makes it a well-written and detailed standard progressive purity-test piece.

[BradInATX 9208]

You sound like Johnny Sack, Brad. 

Explain

[David Dennison 18646]

3 hours ago, Fozzz said:

Lol this guy is a joke. 

You support Tulsi Gabbard.

[Biff Tannen 45491]

If B_T and Fozzz are against Mayor Pete, that makes me think he's probably a good choice.

[Hank Kingsley 20676]

I''m happy to read dissenting opinions, and appreciate writers like Nathan Robinson that challenge people's thought processes. 

But in the end, it's just a bitter hit piece with a lot of pessimistic assumptions from a Bernie/Warren guy that has noticed Pete's momentum.

I've read The Shortest Way Home. It's fine. It's not meant to be anything more than an easily digestible peek into his life story.  Why Robinson chose to dissect it like it was Mein Kampf or something is curious.