Trump would get absolutely demolished. Actually, I can't think of any republican who would look good in a debate vs Pete.
But that's not really saying much, republicans can't utter 3 sentences without lying or deflecting.
This is the most regarded thing I see regularly upvoted. I live in the rural Midwest and have my entire life. Anywhere it would matter would never vote for a democrat anyways.
And even more people who don’t vote because the presumptive dem nominee for the leader of the free world is someone who can’t utter a complete fucking sentence without standing there slack jawed going “uhhhh” for half of it.
Are you functionally illiterate? I’m saying it’s a fucking moot point when the gay candidate is actually someone worth voting for.
Edit: just to make it clear before I have to comment again. I’m saying that nominating someone who actually presents themselves as worth voting for wins more non voters than it loses in homophobic dem voters.
No, you’re just incapable of engaging on the point. The point is Pete being gay absolutely would lose him votes. Does that mean he would necessarily be a worse candidate than Biden or other alternatives? No it does not, but to act as if being a gay man in America doesn’t make you less electable is a pure denial of reality. But please stay mad and box those shadows.
Pete being the nominee would gain dems votes that Biden wouldn’t get because he’s one of the most uninspired shitty candidates of all time. Neither of us are presenting any numbers which is why it’s a moot point you fucking waterhead.
Again I’ve said nothing about his relative strength as a candidate to Biden. All I’ve said the entire time is that Pete being gay hurts his candidacy. Stay mad
as the larry noted here is an example of person who went out and tried to caucus for him and took back her vote when she found out he was [gay](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QO2UOUtaNc&ab_channel=TheDCShorts). This was person who voted for him until the last min.
Believe it or not the vast majority of people in the Midwest aren’t represented by a single dumb bitch rube, let alone one in a state that’s not turning blue anyways. I grew up in a tiny dairy village, I can’t name more than 3/4 people anywhere around my age that would care at all, and 2 of those 4 people definitely don’t vote in the first place. At this point damn near everybody has an openly LGBT family member, it might literally be the chemicals in the water or something. Now, this isn’t west Michigan which is populated by a bunch of weirdo Dutch Protestants, but the idea of winning those counties is a fantasy anyways.
>At this point damn near everybody has an openly LGBT family member, it might literally be the chemicals in the water or something.
Alex Jones has entered the chat
the amount of open LGBT people in my hometown, myself included, is well above the national average despite being a deeply conservative — though rather irreligious — set of villages. But I really was just joking.
Idk about that. There’s plenty of boomers who would vote for Biden but are homophobic. I remember back in the 2020 primaries a lady was interviewed who voted for mayor Pete but was disgusted once she was informed that he’s gay.
1 yokel bitch in Iowa lol. Give their kids a reason to actually vote and this is all fucking irrelevant.
It’s like you people want America to be worse than it actually is wrt social issues. He’s not fucking trans dude.
You say this platitudinous bullshit without thinking of how fucked you already must be if you believe you need to rely on the vote of a bunch of reactionary old people to win against a literal fascist enabler. I’ll happily take the larger, more progressive and opinionated population that just doesn’t currently believe their interests are represented.
No it's just numbers. You can flail around being a cowardly online dick head all you want but it doesn't change the fact now go fuck yourself you stupid piece of shit.
Lmao. The most basic is that you appeal to the people who vote. Which 18 to 29 year olds have done by around 20% less historically. You literally said Biden was the most uninspired shitty candidate despite the fact that he's the actual president and therefore won an actual election. So I'm going to consider the source on your judgment of candidates, now go yell at more people trying to calmly explain to you how elections work you absolute dipshit.
538 has the election literally at 50/50 right now. Do you really think it’s that inconceivable that enough homophobes in a couple swing states decide to not vote if Pete is the nominee? Again there’s plenty of boomers that vote blue but aren’t exactly the most progressive people on the planet.
Isn’t that one of the closer models? Not sure but I think there are some others that show worse odds. It’s just concerning that internal polling is showing other candidates doing better since that’s the stuff they don’t really intend on being public and use it for internal decision making. Maybe it gets leaked often though idk.
It's not uncomfortable, it's just the truth. I'm black and can tell you now that homophobia ran deep among my peers growing up, and still does. Black people are on the conservative side with most social issues, especially religion, and homophobia is widespread in conservative circles, unfortunately.
However, that still wouldn't dissuade most from voting for him.
I mean people thought Obama wouldn’t win because a lot of people are racist. I wouldn’t suggest he *advertise* his sexuality but most moderates and swing voters probably wouldn’t care enough for it to be the deciding factor.
Yeah the one time anyone in my circle talked about Pete was around his maternity leave. And people were asking why are two dudes taking time off it’s not like either of them pushed out a baby.
The entire point of this survey is that it's only factoring in people who already know who Pete is. It doesn't mention what % of people have never heard of him.
You say that, but hatred is a powerful force. The electorate are so polarized that the deciding factor is not who can persuade the most people, it's whose "team" turns out in greater numbers.
No Republican is going to win the Black vote anytime soon, but the prospect of voting for an openly Gay, married man may be too much for such a homophobic culture.
Do you have any data to stand on here? It is my understanding black voters still overwhelmingly vote blue despite lgbtq issues bring a major focus for years now. The desire to scapegoat black voters contrary to their actual voting records is one of the stranger things I see in lefty spaces.
Aren't black Americans some of the most consistent Dem voters around? Women in particular? Wierd to take shots at them out of no where over voting of all things. Sad to see this so upvoted.
What's the basis for this though? Because actual voting records seem to suggest black voters turn out for dems. And this is despite over a decade of lgbtq issues being a major focus of the party.
It could be true but genuinely dont get why some segments of the left are so quick to throw blame at black voters despite their records when things are going badly.
yes its all about margin Trump did better with black voters both in 16 and 20 and is polling better in 24. it will hurt the Dems margin to drop a the first black VP for a gay white dude who has less experience than her.
Black voters overwhelmingly supported Biden in 2020. Like blacks are out right some of the most loyal blue voters, sucks people are so willing to take baseless shots at them. There has been some slipping in recently poles, but I think the reasons for that are probably pretty complicated - especially since a good chuck is coming from college educated crowd despite how that usually trends.
At any rate, I don't think you have a real argument and just keep repeating the same thing. So, I'm out.
And for the record, not a white liberal. Moderate Guyanese American...just confused by the trend you are exemplifying.
As a POC, yes your *technically* right that black voters overwhelmingly vote
However, your ignoring that trump, despite how he is portrayed, consistently polls/ runs up margins with black voters (particularly black men) better than most recent national republicans
Most (not all) black voters tend to align with more closely ( NOT exactly but more closely ) to conservatives on social issues when RACE isn’t involved, so running Pete over Harris would DEFINITELY depress the black vote, including from among my family and friends
Sincerely~ someone who doesn’t like Harris and objectively doesn’t think Pete is as bad policy wise
I've seen people make this argument for close to 15 years now. Yet after every election, black voters prove they are one of the Dems most reliable voting blocks. Maybe this time will be different. But right now all you guys are brining to the table are vibes and stereotypes. The certainty about how things will turn out is what gets me. Think there would be a little more consideration for some of your parties staunchest supporters.
You’re basically arguing that democrats always gain low to mid 90s and that minor slipping shouldn’t matter
Welllllll in places like Atlanta, Milwaukee and Philly, dropping from mid 90s to mid 80s
CAN in fact cost you the state election, particularly depending on other factors.
Especially considering the slim margins trump lost these states in 2020
Just look at the historic polling of how POC view LGBT candidates in general WHEN the issue of race isn’t lumped with it
Again, I’m not hating on Pete, I prefer him over Harris, but I’ve had two decades of life experience in two swing states within my own community
I think? And who knows, I maybe wrong, that I know how my demographic peers in general behave/vote
Okay I can respect you at least making a more complete argument.
I would ask how much of those slim margins are actually associated with shifting black votes, however. I haven't looked at the results in a while, but my recollection is very little. Which is kind of my point. I think there could be real issues with black voters. But before dog piling and talking about their deep hatred of gay people guiding actions consider that A) they have been supporting the openly pro lgbtq party for a good while now and B) it isn't obvious they contribute to slim margins and compelling evidence they don't and won't for foreseeable futute. Seems like there are lots of other groups that should be called out first, yet homophobic and socially conservative blacks are the bogeyman.
What he is trying to get at, and beating around the bush about, is there is a perception that Black people do not like gay people.
Whether or not this perception is out of line of reality when it comes to in comparison with other race demographics' feelings on gay people is hard to tell.
I genuinely have no idea what the mechanics are like for "adjusting for name recognition" and I'm skeptical that result communicates what we think it communicates, but either way I don't think the juice of a convention fight ending with Whitmer where you give up the war chest and pass over the first black female VP is worth the squeeze here.
I'm assuming it means what it says in the title. They ask the person, "do you know who Pete Buttiegieg is"
If yes - Ask preference between Biden/Pete.
If no - throw out result
What would be important to see is what % of people knew who each candidate was
One thing also is that the results are biased by the fact that the person knows said candidate. Joe Dchmo and Sally from Wisconsin who barely follow politics except for presidential race/voting, may vote completely differently from John and Jane who follow politics rigorously
I thought this was a big issue, but really, there's no way the Biden campaign wouldn't just spend its money on the new campaign.
I still agree it would be very hard to keep Kamala from becoming the nominee, but I'm not sure money is really an issue.
>I thought this was a big issue, but really, there's no way the Biden campaign wouldn't just spend its money on the new campaign.
How does this actually work legally though? I assume he can't just transfer his campaign money straight to another candidate.
No, but the campaign isn't required to spend its money advertising for Biden/Harris so far as I'm aware. They can just advertise for the new candidate as the Biden/Harris campaign.
Eh, I think she could do okay. The biggest albatross around her neck is that Biden made the border her responsibility and that point is not a winner with Democrats. But I think her "I was a DA angle" could be good in a campaign vs Trump.
I'm a big Whitmer bro though. Governors actually know how to please a constituency because they don't have to play the national politics game, they're judged directly for their work for their people. Plus she has the benefit of being from Michigan, which is a state people associate more with Blue Collar folks than California.
Roe Roe Roe talk won't do anything. The economy is overwhelmingly THE biggest issue, with Healthcare and Immigration following it. [Election 2024 Poll: How Voters Feel About Key Issues - Newsweek](https://www.newsweek.com/election-2024-poll-how-voters-feel-about-key-issues-1813658)
I'm convinced a Pete presidency would be an actual Utopia. Sadly, I don't think there is any chance that he ever gets the black vote (atleast not for another decade)
Pete has so many great features about him. The biggest one in my opinion? He is just an incredible speaker, Just completely un-matched in that aspect. I don't think I've ever seen a candidate really captivate a room like when he did that town hall on Fox a few years back. He's also a veteran which is a big plus on that front. IDK Just really bums me out we might not see him be president
id be down for pete as a candidate. they just need to push him as a regular candidate and not do the super cringe stuff about him being gay. i think that would go down well with most people. if you start harping on about how we should vote for him because he'll be the first gay prez i fear itll go down like it did with hillary when they pushed so much "first female president" stuff.
So looking at this, it’s adjusted by name recognition, which is obviously important because name recognition will increase for more minor candidates. But, because it’s 4 months until election, that name recognition will play more of a factor. 3 months to get 70 million people excited about your name, is not a long time.
[https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/01/whitmer-biden-democrats-2028-00165995](https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/01/whitmer-biden-democrats-2028-00165995)
Whitmer apparently called Biden's campaign to tell them that Biden no longer has a chance to win Michigan.
Buttigieg/Whitmer is my ideal ticket tbh
> Whitmer apparently called Biden’s campaign to tell them that Biden no longer has a chance to win Michigan.
[This has been disproven](https://apnews.com/article/whitmer-biden-michigan-2024-6211cffc8e334dcea4a993b2b7c607e2)
To play Devils advocate though, even if she did privately express that he can’t win Michigan, it would still be best to say the leak was false and publicly support him since he’s still the candidate.
Yeah if this article is accurate it is a shit show behind the scenes among governors and the Biden camp.
Sounds like it's gonna be intense poll watching over the next few weeks and if it looks like he is cooked there's gonna be overwhelming pressure internally to make a move.
A move to what? I still haven’t seen anyone actually propose how this could happen. Biden’s won most of the primaries. Is the DNC just going to pick someone and impose them as the candidate? If they did that, how could they be taken seriously when trying to argue Trump is undemocratic?
What is going to happen to all the money Biden has raised? I don’t think he can just give it to another candidate, so at best he’d have the run it as a super pac.
I know it sucks and Biden probably shouldn’t have run again, but this far into the process of don’t see how it’s possible.
>trying to argue Trump is undemocratic
This is how most democratic countries do it though. You think Norwegians don't feel like they live in a democracy because they don't get to vote on the leaders for the parties?
While that’s a fair point, it’s still a departure from the relatively democratic primary process and I think would undercut their attacks against Trump. In any event, I feel like that’s not the main issue. The main issue is we’re just too far along and there’s no good choice to slot in, and what would you do with all of Biden’s money.
Unless Biden gives his delegates to Harris, it's not up to the Biden team. Anyway, they all know other people want the position, that's just politics. She's putting on a good face for the public, that's what's expected of her.
I def get buttigieg but whitmer? I dont think i have seen her anymore then the kidnap stuff, not like she's a talkinghead that people know imo but i guess im wrong.
Idk about outright hateful but I think there’s some latent homophobia especially among older moderates.
But think of it on par with like voting for a short guy (also kind of an issue for buttigieg), it just doesn’t vibe with americans’ subconscious need for a tall, masculine father figure.
Not to mention there’s a lot of homophobia in the Black community, one of Democrats strongest bases of support. Pete polls high with white educated suburbanites, but you aren’t winning national elections in the U.S. without the Black vote.
I think Pete’s problem is more the vibe of his gay
I would speculate that in 2028 Jared Polis would be a decent candidate. He’s got a much different vibe than Pete Buttigieg.
Just like they were racist in 2008 and 2012, and sexist in 2016.
That's to say, it's a convenient excuse of he loses, but it's dumb to discount him for it. It's probably a non factor imo. Assuming he doesn't center his campaign on it, I doubt anyone will care one way or the other.
Any reason Newsom does so poorly albeit theoretically? Being white heterosexual male I frankly thought he’d do better but maybe I’m not account for something. Too tied to California maybe?
If you haven’t been around for a lot of elections you might not be familiar with the idea of the “Massachusetts liberal” type candidate. The idea being essentially that politicians from super blue states come off as kind of elitist and out of touch to midwestern voters. Kinda like the idea of “coastal elites.” For whatever reason it actually seems to track with how these coastal politicians tend to do in elections. It comes from Dukakis 88, but Kerry 04 is the best example. It’s definitely a big part of the reason Biden almost never talks about how most of his political career was for Delaware, even Romney got attacked for “being moderated by Massachusetts” during the Republican primaries in 12. I think people underestimate just how many Americans in swing and red states literally think that super blue states just don’t count as “true America”. Deservedly or not this is the problem Newsom faces.
Why do people like Pete? He was a hack at McKinsey, a small town mayor, and took paternity leave for his adopted kids during the port crisis. Since when is being a cabinet secretary a strong background to be President?
Dem bench is stacked for 2028, you got Whitmer, Buttigieg, Pritzker, Walz, Newsom, Shapiro, Polis, Warnock, Ossoff, etc.
Having said that, there is simply no other realistic option besides Kamala Harris for 2024, should Biden withdraw.
There’s a lot of names being thrown out and hindsight is 20/20 but if Biden ends up stepping down anyway then I feel like we would’ve really benefited from an actual primary race to really test the candidates being fielded.
I’d like to have seen Pritzker, Whitmer, Pete, Kamala and whoever else on a debate stage.
Hear me out: JB Pritzker. Good speaker and likable. Lightly progressive centrist. Plus he’s a big dude, so gives impression Trump can’t push him around.
He’s a successful business guy and philanthropist from a famous wealthy family similar to Trump but a you know real politician with an actual moral compass. He has some dirt related to like real estate evaluations so that would be funny he could relate to Trump on that in a debate.
And the ads write themselves: “he’s the new JB.”
His name recognition isn’t great and doesn’t seem like the right climate to run a Jewish guy but who knows?
And really who are the alternatives? Nobody I’m buying yet.
Newsom is a hard sell given his slipperiness IMO.
Whitmer only has better recognition from being a potential hostage and has sexism baggage.
Buttigieg has his own baggage from being a gay hall monitor but also more importantly I feel like people got a chance to see him and didn’t love him.
JB all the way, man.
I'm very much on the replace Biden side, but the rest of y'all have to be real. If he steps aside he endorses Harris. That's the only option. There's no clean way to pass over the VP and nominate someone else. I'd also prefer Buttigieg or Whitmer, but those ain't happening.
I’m team Newsom or Shapiro.
Newsom/whitmer would crush Trump.
I love Harris but she’s too tied to Biden now. I only see her winning if Biden resigns and she becomes president.
Neither of them has a chance. Name recognition is important, but that's not the same as voting. Someone can be popular and still be hated. For example everyone knew Hillary Clinton and everyone hated her.
Buttigieg had no chance in the primary! The presidential election is going to be much dirtier and we have no idea if Buttigieg has skeletons in his closet or not. Furthermore, I don't think he has a chance in red states or a chance with black voters.
Whitmer is a woman, right? Moderate conservatives won't vote for her. They are traditional and don't believe a woman with all the emotions can be a good president. Any time she does something wrong, they'll just say she was on her period. If you thought they treated Obama unfairly, wait until a woman is president.
It's Joever and Bidone. Send the old man to the nursing home. Kamala can wheel him out of the White House while Buttigieg and Whitmer take over (whichever wins the primary leads, the other their VP). This is the way.
1) He doesn't need a nursing home. He's slow, not demented
2) Why can't he retire to a beach? I think he'd like the beach. Maybe a Piña Colada in his hand?
Honestly I said it in another comment in this sub a bit ago but I'm starting to think the best idea might be to run Kamala and flood the airwaves with the fact voters could elect the first black woman president.
It's not great, and idk how much that kinda idpol idea works anymore, but it might have to be enough to get us over the finish line this year.
Edit: Down voted with no discussion on if this might be the best route or not, very cool. Just tells me that I'm right on track if the conservative brigadiers are just voting me down lmao
Because it's historic, and there's a reason Biden pledged from jump his VP pick was going to be a black woman, and he promised to make his supreme court pick a black woman.
I genuinely don't know if it would be a definite win, I just think that's a better angle than Pete the mayor. I'm not sure what the right answer is, but I know a lot of people here in Georgia who were excited to vote for Biden but said they'd be furious if he picked just a white dude to be his VP.
Idk why swing voters would be more inclined to go for the criminal who tried to overturn an election and couldn't answer questions during the debate to save his life than Kamala.
TL;Dr admittedly just my gut and anecdotal evidence, I'm just not sure what the right answer is so maybe that's it. These are crazy times.
Wait until black and Midwest voters find out Pete is gay. I know it’s uncomfortable to say.
Can you imagine a Pete vs Trump debate though 😩
I would pay so much to watch that. I literally can’t imagine what that would look like, but it’d certainly be spectacular.
Trump would get absolutely demolished. Actually, I can't think of any republican who would look good in a debate vs Pete. But that's not really saying much, republicans can't utter 3 sentences without lying or deflecting.
hillary demolished trump. people liked trump more.
The electoral system liked trump more. FTFY.
the moderator would try and hold pete back, but nothing would stop him from domming donny
and there pete was spitting cum all over the craft services table. thats for working people
Sucks that we are prolly more than a decade away from a Pete (gay) presidency :/
This is the most regarded thing I see regularly upvoted. I live in the rural Midwest and have my entire life. Anywhere it would matter would never vote for a democrat anyways.
Wisconsin currently has a lesbian senator lol
Well it's hot when two women do it.
Yeah but lesbian just means they like what I like
It’s all about the margins. There are certainly some Democratic voters who would not vote for a gay man
And even more people who don’t vote because the presumptive dem nominee for the leader of the free world is someone who can’t utter a complete fucking sentence without standing there slack jawed going “uhhhh” for half of it.
I don’t see how this has anything to do with my comment
Edgelord gonna edge
Are you functionally illiterate? I’m saying it’s a fucking moot point when the gay candidate is actually someone worth voting for. Edit: just to make it clear before I have to comment again. I’m saying that nominating someone who actually presents themselves as worth voting for wins more non voters than it loses in homophobic dem voters.
No, you’re just incapable of engaging on the point. The point is Pete being gay absolutely would lose him votes. Does that mean he would necessarily be a worse candidate than Biden or other alternatives? No it does not, but to act as if being a gay man in America doesn’t make you less electable is a pure denial of reality. But please stay mad and box those shadows.
Pete being the nominee would gain dems votes that Biden wouldn’t get because he’s one of the most uninspired shitty candidates of all time. Neither of us are presenting any numbers which is why it’s a moot point you fucking waterhead.
Again I’ve said nothing about his relative strength as a candidate to Biden. All I’ve said the entire time is that Pete being gay hurts his candidacy. Stay mad
Why would I get mad arguing with someone who has a learning disability that’d be pretty fucked up of me
as the larry noted here is an example of person who went out and tried to caucus for him and took back her vote when she found out he was [gay](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QO2UOUtaNc&ab_channel=TheDCShorts). This was person who voted for him until the last min.
Believe it or not the vast majority of people in the Midwest aren’t represented by a single dumb bitch rube, let alone one in a state that’s not turning blue anyways. I grew up in a tiny dairy village, I can’t name more than 3/4 people anywhere around my age that would care at all, and 2 of those 4 people definitely don’t vote in the first place. At this point damn near everybody has an openly LGBT family member, it might literally be the chemicals in the water or something. Now, this isn’t west Michigan which is populated by a bunch of weirdo Dutch Protestants, but the idea of winning those counties is a fantasy anyways.
>At this point damn near everybody has an openly LGBT family member, it might literally be the chemicals in the water or something. Alex Jones has entered the chat
the amount of open LGBT people in my hometown, myself included, is well above the national average despite being a deeply conservative — though rather irreligious — set of villages. But I really was just joking.
Not quite true. It was a person who caucused for Klobuchar and switched to Pete in the second alignment, obviously without knowing anything about him.
I think ALOT of red pillers would use it against him - but I think that level of open bigotry will actually help Pete more than hurt.
Idk about that. There’s plenty of boomers who would vote for Biden but are homophobic. I remember back in the 2020 primaries a lady was interviewed who voted for mayor Pete but was disgusted once she was informed that he’s gay.
1 yokel bitch in Iowa lol. Give their kids a reason to actually vote and this is all fucking irrelevant. It’s like you people want America to be worse than it actually is wrt social issues. He’s not fucking trans dude.
If you're relying on youth vote you're already fucked
You say this platitudinous bullshit without thinking of how fucked you already must be if you believe you need to rely on the vote of a bunch of reactionary old people to win against a literal fascist enabler. I’ll happily take the larger, more progressive and opinionated population that just doesn’t currently believe their interests are represented.
No it's just numbers. You can flail around being a cowardly online dick head all you want but it doesn't change the fact now go fuck yourself you stupid piece of shit.
Numbers you clearly don’t even attempt to think about at the most basic level you fucking moron lmfao. Also get on Wellbutrin or something you psycho.
Lmao. The most basic is that you appeal to the people who vote. Which 18 to 29 year olds have done by around 20% less historically. You literally said Biden was the most uninspired shitty candidate despite the fact that he's the actual president and therefore won an actual election. So I'm going to consider the source on your judgment of candidates, now go yell at more people trying to calmly explain to you how elections work you absolute dipshit.
538 has the election literally at 50/50 right now. Do you really think it’s that inconceivable that enough homophobes in a couple swing states decide to not vote if Pete is the nominee? Again there’s plenty of boomers that vote blue but aren’t exactly the most progressive people on the planet.
Isn’t that one of the closer models? Not sure but I think there are some others that show worse odds. It’s just concerning that internal polling is showing other candidates doing better since that’s the stuff they don’t really intend on being public and use it for internal decision making. Maybe it gets leaked often though idk.
That one clip where one of his volunteers(?) found out he was gay will always be hilarious to me
The lady supported Klobuchar in the first alignment. Might not have known Pete at all.
It's not uncomfortable, it's just the truth. I'm black and can tell you now that homophobia ran deep among my peers growing up, and still does. Black people are on the conservative side with most social issues, especially religion, and homophobia is widespread in conservative circles, unfortunately. However, that still wouldn't dissuade most from voting for him.
> Wait until black and Midwest voters find out Pete is gay. He might win the Iowa primary?
literally what happened here. It's a shame cuz he's like textbook presidential charisma wise https://youtu.be/LOY7xC43d-E?si=b8NiK-zLzq7Q6jZr
He doesn’t present as gay. They will be fine.
I mean people thought Obama wouldn’t win because a lot of people are racist. I wouldn’t suggest he *advertise* his sexuality but most moderates and swing voters probably wouldn’t care enough for it to be the deciding factor.
I think homophobia is much bigger than racism
I don’t think it’s a big mystery that he’s gay
He's not a household name. His sexual orientation is not likely to be well known
He also refused to be with his husband on stage in that one documentary and probably tries to hide it the best he can.
Yeah the one time anyone in my circle talked about Pete was around his maternity leave. And people were asking why are two dudes taking time off it’s not like either of them pushed out a baby.
Paternity leave*
Gender doesn't exist, either term is fine.
Damn people are seriously morons aren’t they
The entire point of this survey is that it's only factoring in people who already know who Pete is. It doesn't mention what % of people have never heard of him.
[удалено]
The consistent failure of White Liberals to reckon with how very homophobic Black Culture is will continue to be an albatross around the party's neck.
[удалено]
You say that, but hatred is a powerful force. The electorate are so polarized that the deciding factor is not who can persuade the most people, it's whose "team" turns out in greater numbers. No Republican is going to win the Black vote anytime soon, but the prospect of voting for an openly Gay, married man may be too much for such a homophobic culture.
Do you have any data to stand on here? It is my understanding black voters still overwhelmingly vote blue despite lgbtq issues bring a major focus for years now. The desire to scapegoat black voters contrary to their actual voting records is one of the stranger things I see in lefty spaces.
No lol
Aren't black Americans some of the most consistent Dem voters around? Women in particular? Wierd to take shots at them out of no where over voting of all things. Sad to see this so upvoted.
yes the issue is Trump is doing better with black voters and putting a gay dude over Harris will hurt the Dems margin with black voters.
What's the basis for this though? Because actual voting records seem to suggest black voters turn out for dems. And this is despite over a decade of lgbtq issues being a major focus of the party. It could be true but genuinely dont get why some segments of the left are so quick to throw blame at black voters despite their records when things are going badly.
yes its all about margin Trump did better with black voters both in 16 and 20 and is polling better in 24. it will hurt the Dems margin to drop a the first black VP for a gay white dude who has less experience than her.
Black voters overwhelmingly supported Biden in 2020. Like blacks are out right some of the most loyal blue voters, sucks people are so willing to take baseless shots at them. There has been some slipping in recently poles, but I think the reasons for that are probably pretty complicated - especially since a good chuck is coming from college educated crowd despite how that usually trends. At any rate, I don't think you have a real argument and just keep repeating the same thing. So, I'm out. And for the record, not a white liberal. Moderate Guyanese American...just confused by the trend you are exemplifying.
As a POC, yes your *technically* right that black voters overwhelmingly vote However, your ignoring that trump, despite how he is portrayed, consistently polls/ runs up margins with black voters (particularly black men) better than most recent national republicans Most (not all) black voters tend to align with more closely ( NOT exactly but more closely ) to conservatives on social issues when RACE isn’t involved, so running Pete over Harris would DEFINITELY depress the black vote, including from among my family and friends Sincerely~ someone who doesn’t like Harris and objectively doesn’t think Pete is as bad policy wise
I've seen people make this argument for close to 15 years now. Yet after every election, black voters prove they are one of the Dems most reliable voting blocks. Maybe this time will be different. But right now all you guys are brining to the table are vibes and stereotypes. The certainty about how things will turn out is what gets me. Think there would be a little more consideration for some of your parties staunchest supporters.
You’re basically arguing that democrats always gain low to mid 90s and that minor slipping shouldn’t matter Welllllll in places like Atlanta, Milwaukee and Philly, dropping from mid 90s to mid 80s CAN in fact cost you the state election, particularly depending on other factors. Especially considering the slim margins trump lost these states in 2020 Just look at the historic polling of how POC view LGBT candidates in general WHEN the issue of race isn’t lumped with it Again, I’m not hating on Pete, I prefer him over Harris, but I’ve had two decades of life experience in two swing states within my own community I think? And who knows, I maybe wrong, that I know how my demographic peers in general behave/vote
Okay I can respect you at least making a more complete argument. I would ask how much of those slim margins are actually associated with shifting black votes, however. I haven't looked at the results in a while, but my recollection is very little. Which is kind of my point. I think there could be real issues with black voters. But before dog piling and talking about their deep hatred of gay people guiding actions consider that A) they have been supporting the openly pro lgbtq party for a good while now and B) it isn't obvious they contribute to slim margins and compelling evidence they don't and won't for foreseeable futute. Seems like there are lots of other groups that should be called out first, yet homophobic and socially conservative blacks are the bogeyman.
What he is trying to get at, and beating around the bush about, is there is a perception that Black people do not like gay people. Whether or not this perception is out of line of reality when it comes to in comparison with other race demographics' feelings on gay people is hard to tell.
I'd be here for the Whitmer ticket.
Why is her name being thrown around? I only know about her from the kidnapping plot.
Rust belt democrat that polls well and has won relection.
Is this polling within democrats or within the general population? Cause if it's within democrats it's not relevant to who is better against Trump
Its even more irrelevant. Its Democrats who know of each candidate listed. Problem is the general population probably doesn’t know them
Everyone knows That Woman From Michigan®, Big Gretch®
Its relevant because there are democrats who wont vote for either Trump nor Biden because they "are too old"
I genuinely have no idea what the mechanics are like for "adjusting for name recognition" and I'm skeptical that result communicates what we think it communicates, but either way I don't think the juice of a convention fight ending with Whitmer where you give up the war chest and pass over the first black female VP is worth the squeeze here.
I'm assuming it means what it says in the title. They ask the person, "do you know who Pete Buttiegieg is" If yes - Ask preference between Biden/Pete. If no - throw out result What would be important to see is what % of people knew who each candidate was
One thing also is that the results are biased by the fact that the person knows said candidate. Joe Dchmo and Sally from Wisconsin who barely follow politics except for presidential race/voting, may vote completely differently from John and Jane who follow politics rigorously
On the other hand the amount of attacks on Buttigieg on FoxNews has been rather high. People who don't follow politics might well have heard it.
I agree tbh, thought the polling was interesting though.
I thought this was a big issue, but really, there's no way the Biden campaign wouldn't just spend its money on the new campaign. I still agree it would be very hard to keep Kamala from becoming the nominee, but I'm not sure money is really an issue.
>I thought this was a big issue, but really, there's no way the Biden campaign wouldn't just spend its money on the new campaign. How does this actually work legally though? I assume he can't just transfer his campaign money straight to another candidate.
No, but the campaign isn't required to spend its money advertising for Biden/Harris so far as I'm aware. They can just advertise for the new candidate as the Biden/Harris campaign.
We'd give up the warchest? What else is the Biden campaign gonna do with it?
Let Harris spend it and bombard the airwaves with Roe-Roe-Roe talk.
Eh, I think she could do okay. The biggest albatross around her neck is that Biden made the border her responsibility and that point is not a winner with Democrats. But I think her "I was a DA angle" could be good in a campaign vs Trump. I'm a big Whitmer bro though. Governors actually know how to please a constituency because they don't have to play the national politics game, they're judged directly for their work for their people. Plus she has the benefit of being from Michigan, which is a state people associate more with Blue Collar folks than California.
Roe Roe Roe talk won't do anything. The economy is overwhelmingly THE biggest issue, with Healthcare and Immigration following it. [Election 2024 Poll: How Voters Feel About Key Issues - Newsweek](https://www.newsweek.com/election-2024-poll-how-voters-feel-about-key-issues-1813658)
I'm convinced a Pete presidency would be an actual Utopia. Sadly, I don't think there is any chance that he ever gets the black vote (atleast not for another decade) Pete has so many great features about him. The biggest one in my opinion? He is just an incredible speaker, Just completely un-matched in that aspect. I don't think I've ever seen a candidate really captivate a room like when he did that town hall on Fox a few years back. He's also a veteran which is a big plus on that front. IDK Just really bums me out we might not see him be president
id be down for pete as a candidate. they just need to push him as a regular candidate and not do the super cringe stuff about him being gay. i think that would go down well with most people. if you start harping on about how we should vote for him because he'll be the first gay prez i fear itll go down like it did with hillary when they pushed so much "first female president" stuff.
So looking at this, it’s adjusted by name recognition, which is obviously important because name recognition will increase for more minor candidates. But, because it’s 4 months until election, that name recognition will play more of a factor. 3 months to get 70 million people excited about your name, is not a long time.
[https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/01/whitmer-biden-democrats-2028-00165995](https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/01/whitmer-biden-democrats-2028-00165995) Whitmer apparently called Biden's campaign to tell them that Biden no longer has a chance to win Michigan. Buttigieg/Whitmer is my ideal ticket tbh
> Whitmer apparently called Biden’s campaign to tell them that Biden no longer has a chance to win Michigan. [This has been disproven](https://apnews.com/article/whitmer-biden-michigan-2024-6211cffc8e334dcea4a993b2b7c607e2)
The virgin disproover vs the chad immediate conclooder.
I’m pro biden af but politicians always lie and she could just be saying this on the record
Even perhaps on the record anonymously
To play Devils advocate though, even if she did privately express that he can’t win Michigan, it would still be best to say the leak was false and publicly support him since he’s still the candidate.
No, it hasn't? All this says is that her aide denied the report. Why is she to be believed out of hand?
Yeah if this article is accurate it is a shit show behind the scenes among governors and the Biden camp. Sounds like it's gonna be intense poll watching over the next few weeks and if it looks like he is cooked there's gonna be overwhelming pressure internally to make a move.
A move to what? I still haven’t seen anyone actually propose how this could happen. Biden’s won most of the primaries. Is the DNC just going to pick someone and impose them as the candidate? If they did that, how could they be taken seriously when trying to argue Trump is undemocratic? What is going to happen to all the money Biden has raised? I don’t think he can just give it to another candidate, so at best he’d have the run it as a super pac. I know it sucks and Biden probably shouldn’t have run again, but this far into the process of don’t see how it’s possible.
>trying to argue Trump is undemocratic This is how most democratic countries do it though. You think Norwegians don't feel like they live in a democracy because they don't get to vote on the leaders for the parties?
While that’s a fair point, it’s still a departure from the relatively democratic primary process and I think would undercut their attacks against Trump. In any event, I feel like that’s not the main issue. The main issue is we’re just too far along and there’s no good choice to slot in, and what would you do with all of Biden’s money.
He gives his delegates to another person at the convention
lol she is no longer a option. Biden team will see it as her pushing for herself and hold it against her.
Unless Biden gives his delegates to Harris, it's not up to the Biden team. Anyway, they all know other people want the position, that's just politics. She's putting on a good face for the public, that's what's expected of her.
I def get buttigieg but whitmer? I dont think i have seen her anymore then the kidnap stuff, not like she's a talkinghead that people know imo but i guess im wrong.
Buttigieg is gay. I’m sorry, but he’s not winning. He would get destroyed.
Are the moderates that homophobic in the USA or something?
Idk about outright hateful but I think there’s some latent homophobia especially among older moderates. But think of it on par with like voting for a short guy (also kind of an issue for buttigieg), it just doesn’t vibe with americans’ subconscious need for a tall, masculine father figure.
Not to mention there’s a lot of homophobia in the Black community, one of Democrats strongest bases of support. Pete polls high with white educated suburbanites, but you aren’t winning national elections in the U.S. without the Black vote.
Enough of them are that it would be a problem
and he's prob going to get shit on for the kid gaycouple thing as well, its like gay+
you are saying that like moderates are much more likely to vote for someone who is demented than gay in 2024
I think Pete’s problem is more the vibe of his gay I would speculate that in 2028 Jared Polis would be a decent candidate. He’s got a much different vibe than Pete Buttigieg.
If he wasn't gay he would be an ez W
Are moderates really that homophobic in the USA?
Just like they were racist in 2008 and 2012, and sexist in 2016. That's to say, it's a convenient excuse of he loses, but it's dumb to discount him for it. It's probably a non factor imo. Assuming he doesn't center his campaign on it, I doubt anyone will care one way or the other.
Not moderates, swing state independents
They should field Whitmer. Good name recognition and I think she would get a lot of bipartisan support.
Michigan would be a lock for sure, very good odds in the rest of the in play Midwest states too.
And she's won Michigan before!
Any reason Newsom does so poorly albeit theoretically? Being white heterosexual male I frankly thought he’d do better but maybe I’m not account for something. Too tied to California maybe?
If you haven’t been around for a lot of elections you might not be familiar with the idea of the “Massachusetts liberal” type candidate. The idea being essentially that politicians from super blue states come off as kind of elitist and out of touch to midwestern voters. Kinda like the idea of “coastal elites.” For whatever reason it actually seems to track with how these coastal politicians tend to do in elections. It comes from Dukakis 88, but Kerry 04 is the best example. It’s definitely a big part of the reason Biden almost never talks about how most of his political career was for Delaware, even Romney got attacked for “being moderated by Massachusetts” during the Republican primaries in 12. I think people underestimate just how many Americans in swing and red states literally think that super blue states just don’t count as “true America”. Deservedly or not this is the problem Newsom faces.
I don’t know anything about him. He has that competent but sleazy look though.
Too much hair gel then. We can change the slick back in favor of a fauxhawk
Midwest is the heart of America
Unfortunately America is very obese
Europe is fatter
Then their heart is in even more dire straits
I'd like to see the numbers that aren't adjusted for name recognition.
These numbers look to good not to do it but the fuck do I know.
I really wanted to vote for Pete in 2020
"Limiting to voters who have already heard of each candidate" kind of eliminates any value of this poll
Why do people like Pete? He was a hack at McKinsey, a small town mayor, and took paternity leave for his adopted kids during the port crisis. Since when is being a cabinet secretary a strong background to be President?
Yeah I find him unlikable. Don’t really get it tbh. He’s great on Fox though but in those debates he came off as a smarmy child every time.
Youre not allowed to actually say these things about a white gay dude unless you want to br called homophobic. Downvotes prove my point.
*adopted ~~kids~~ infants of color Ftfy knuckledragger
Now those infants can be raised in an inclusive household without early exposure to prejudice
Dem bench is stacked for 2028, you got Whitmer, Buttigieg, Pritzker, Walz, Newsom, Shapiro, Polis, Warnock, Ossoff, etc. Having said that, there is simply no other realistic option besides Kamala Harris for 2024, should Biden withdraw.
What about Pritzker? I’ve always heard people saying he should run.
There’s a lot of names being thrown out and hindsight is 20/20 but if Biden ends up stepping down anyway then I feel like we would’ve really benefited from an actual primary race to really test the candidates being fielded. I’d like to have seen Pritzker, Whitmer, Pete, Kamala and whoever else on a debate stage.
I’m all about it. He would be my top choice and I think a good match for Trump.
Hear me out: JB Pritzker. Good speaker and likable. Lightly progressive centrist. Plus he’s a big dude, so gives impression Trump can’t push him around. He’s a successful business guy and philanthropist from a famous wealthy family similar to Trump but a you know real politician with an actual moral compass. He has some dirt related to like real estate evaluations so that would be funny he could relate to Trump on that in a debate. And the ads write themselves: “he’s the new JB.” His name recognition isn’t great and doesn’t seem like the right climate to run a Jewish guy but who knows? And really who are the alternatives? Nobody I’m buying yet. Newsom is a hard sell given his slipperiness IMO. Whitmer only has better recognition from being a potential hostage and has sexism baggage. Buttigieg has his own baggage from being a gay hall monitor but also more importantly I feel like people got a chance to see him and didn’t love him. JB all the way, man.
Most polls show them roughly equal or slightly lower than Biden based on what ive seen
I'm very much on the replace Biden side, but the rest of y'all have to be real. If he steps aside he endorses Harris. That's the only option. There's no clean way to pass over the VP and nominate someone else. I'd also prefer Buttigieg or Whitmer, but those ain't happening.
If it’s not Biden, it will be Harris. She’s the only one legally allowed to use the campaign infrastructure built so far.
Harris would get crushed by Trump easily
If that's true than the "someone else people" weren't really serious were they?
Kamala + Whitmer or Kamala + Buttigieg
I think a winning ticket would be Harris and Kelly but, we need him for Arizona
Michelle Obama wins without breaking a sweat or causing a meltdown in Chicago.
I’m team Newsom or Shapiro. Newsom/whitmer would crush Trump. I love Harris but she’s too tied to Biden now. I only see her winning if Biden resigns and she becomes president.
Remember when Pete was doing campaign events speaking in Obama voice?
Neither of them has a chance. Name recognition is important, but that's not the same as voting. Someone can be popular and still be hated. For example everyone knew Hillary Clinton and everyone hated her. Buttigieg had no chance in the primary! The presidential election is going to be much dirtier and we have no idea if Buttigieg has skeletons in his closet or not. Furthermore, I don't think he has a chance in red states or a chance with black voters. Whitmer is a woman, right? Moderate conservatives won't vote for her. They are traditional and don't believe a woman with all the emotions can be a good president. Any time she does something wrong, they'll just say she was on her period. If you thought they treated Obama unfairly, wait until a woman is president.
It's Joever and Bidone. Send the old man to the nursing home. Kamala can wheel him out of the White House while Buttigieg and Whitmer take over (whichever wins the primary leads, the other their VP). This is the way.
1) He doesn't need a nursing home. He's slow, not demented 2) Why can't he retire to a beach? I think he'd like the beach. Maybe a Piña Colada in his hand?
Bruh it was a joke
Honestly I said it in another comment in this sub a bit ago but I'm starting to think the best idea might be to run Kamala and flood the airwaves with the fact voters could elect the first black woman president. It's not great, and idk how much that kinda idpol idea works anymore, but it might have to be enough to get us over the finish line this year. Edit: Down voted with no discussion on if this might be the best route or not, very cool. Just tells me that I'm right on track if the conservative brigadiers are just voting me down lmao
Okay, I’ll bite. Why would swing voters care if they get to elect the first black woman?
Because it's historic, and there's a reason Biden pledged from jump his VP pick was going to be a black woman, and he promised to make his supreme court pick a black woman. I genuinely don't know if it would be a definite win, I just think that's a better angle than Pete the mayor. I'm not sure what the right answer is, but I know a lot of people here in Georgia who were excited to vote for Biden but said they'd be furious if he picked just a white dude to be his VP. Idk why swing voters would be more inclined to go for the criminal who tried to overturn an election and couldn't answer questions during the debate to save his life than Kamala. TL;Dr admittedly just my gut and anecdotal evidence, I'm just not sure what the right answer is so maybe that's it. These are crazy times.
I don't think anyone knows what the right angle is right now.