Yes. I'm also genuinely glad that there's no left-leaning version of Fox News to spread false rumors about it. (Wait, what thread are we in?)Can't stand the guy but I hope he's ok.So apparently Trump went to Walter Reed today -- reportedly for an unplanned physical. (he's already had one this year)
This is pretty amazing ... and beautiful.Buttigieg 25%
Warren 16%
Biden 15%
Sanders 15%
Not sure how much winning/placing in IA, NH helps Pete in NV or SC, but it'll be a massive boost after those either way.This is pretty amazing ... and beautiful.
If he maintains that separation (or builds on it) through the caucus, it should greatly help in South Carolina as well. South Carolinians love a front-runner.
This could be what she posted.I still feel like we don't know a lot about his policy. Krista posted a link somewhere, but I can't find it.
It helps because lots of people still don’t really know much about him, and an even larger number of people have never really listened to him speak.Not sure how much winning/placing in IA, NH helps Pete in NV or SC, but it'll be a massive boost after those either way.
True, but NV and SC have had TONS of coverage by the candidates -- so he'd have very little time to capitalize. IMO (and it's a guess) an IA win and 2nd in NH (or whatev) would help him more in the states that haven't already been carpet bombed.It helps because lots of people still don’t really know much about him, and an even larger number of people have never really listened to him speak.
The more people pay attention to and listen to Pete.....the more they like him.
Most people aren’t paying attention yet. 80-90% of America doesn’t care about this phase of the “campaign.” 80-90% of people still aren’t paying attention, and won’t until a couple weeks before their state has a primary.True, but NV and SC have had TONS of coverage by the candidates -- so he'd have very little time to capitalize. IMO (and it's a guess) an IA win and 2nd in NH (or whatev) would help him more in the states that haven't already been carpet bombed.
I think any boost he gets will help. He just needs to avoid finishing a distant 3rd or 4th in SC, IMO. If he makes up ground then it won't matter that he doesn't win.Not sure how much winning/placing in IA, NH helps Pete in NV or SC, but it'll be a massive boost after those either way.
And yeah... mis-posted a couple things yesterday losing track of my tabs. Sorry to derail the conversation.
When do nominees start announcing a potential running mate? - not only do I really like Abrams so would be excited about her running with Pete but I also think she could really boost his fallibility in the AA community. Would be interesting if he came out soon with that.I've been reading/watching stuff on Stacey Abrams ever since @cap'n grunge started his Dem Ticket Combos thread. If there ever was a ticket made in heaven, it's Buttigieg/Abrams. She normalizes the "save your messin'. i'm getting #### DONE & done right" the way Mayor Pete normalizes the New Decency.
The bumper sticker: Buttigieg/Abrams 2020 - We got everything but old!
Usually not long before the Convention. Long way to go.When do nominees start announcing a potential running mate - not only do I really like Abrams so would be excited about her running with Pete but I also think she could really boost his fallibility in the AA community. Would be interesting if he came out soon with that.
nothing say you cant, but that's usually a convention thing and certainly not a frontrunner move.When do nominees start announcing a potential running mate? - not only do I really like Abrams so would be excited about her running with Pete but I also think she could really boost his fallibility in the AA community. Would be interesting if he came out soon with that.
What is the reason for that - just how it normally works? Or is it because sometimes the other candidates end up being the running mates?Usually not long before the Convention. Long way to go.
Ego & tradition. Veep's a necessary evil - it's remarkably hard to endure the rigors of a national campaign and then have to share it the last two months, so it's always put off til absolutely necessary. It has been talked about early as a Hail Mary pass for flailing campaigns in the past, but nothing more. Tho a toxic combo, Dubya/Cheney showed how potent a partnership can be, however.What is the reason for that - just how it normally works? Or is it because sometimes the other candidates end up being the running mates?
Pete is building up in both states, as we speak.True, but NV and SC have had TONS of coverage by the candidates -- so he'd have very little time to capitalize. IMO (and it's a guess) an IA win and 2nd in NH (or whatev) would help him more in the states that haven't already been carpet bombed.
I think it plays out that way for a couple reasons, the candidate does not want to be presumptuous - and the VP choice does not want to burn any potential bridges before the nomination is confirmed.What is the reason for that - just how it normally works? Or is it because sometimes the other candidates end up being the running mates?
Doesn't Pete have a good amount of cash on hand for that type of push?Pete is building up in both states, as we speak.
First Priority was certainly Iowa. Then he started to build out New Hampshire. In the last couple of weeks, they have announced more staff and offices in Nevada and South Carolina.
I think its just part of his strategy - build a foundation, and then build up. If you build up too quickly, you risk it all falling down.
Pete's path runs through Iowa, and using that to build on for future states. The foundations are being laid now - and I think if he wins Iowa, you will see a much bigger presence in the Super Tuesday states - including advertising specifically in those states.
Cash & party machinery shouldn't be a problem. His first job was at McKinsey & Co and he ran for DNC Chair not long ago, so he knows how the sausage gets made. Like most stars say, "It took me 20 yrs to become an overnite sensation".Doesn't Pete have a good amount of cash on hand for that type of push?
Booker might be a good choice too.I think I actually want a Senator in that VP spot. Someone who can help with governing to reach out to Congress to actually get stuff done. That's why Klobuchar would be a good choice. I get that she doesn't bring a ton to the ticket electoral wise but I'd also like successful governance.
Certainly some merit to this point of view. Two outsiders may not be the best way to get policy done....but a GOP Senate controlled Senate is not going to get anything done. We need coattails more than anything.I think I actually want a Senator in that VP spot. Someone who can help with governing to reach out to Congress to actually get stuff done. That's why Klobuchar would be a good choice. I get that she doesn't bring a ton to the ticket electoral wise but I'd also like successful governance.
Whoa.Looking at the list of Democratic Senators, this would be a pretty interesting pick:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammy_Duckworth
An American hero, a woman, a minority, and from the Midwest.
yeah, cuz senators been bringing such honor, efficacy & leadership to the process lately......cap'n grunge said:I think I actually want a Senator in that VP spot. Someone who can help with governing to reach out to Congress to actually get stuff done. That's why Klobuchar would be a good choice. I get that she doesn't bring a ton to the ticket electoral wise but I'd also like successful governance.
He;s just giving you more rope.At this point whoever wouldn't want him to win the Democratic primary.
Is this trying for a "gotcha" moment or where is it going?
This was just kind of funny really. Misrepresenting black support for the Douglass Plan wasn't very cool.Stock photos? You kiddin' me?
Seriously, do people not understand what a "stock" photo is? While I understand that anything related to politics can get complicated, stock photos used by an ad firm are not something that shocks or offends me.
I am honestly more offended by his Jimi Hendrix cover.
Still has my vote.
Thnx for the link. This appears to be a valid discussion. I just got a lol out of the stock photo complaint (not directed at you). Also, I will be the first to admit that I am not educated on this particular topic.This was just kind of funny really. Misrepresenting black support for the Douglass Plan wasn't very cool.
Nah, I probably deserve that. I already jumped the shark on critiquing PB when I brought up his choice of fried chicken & collard greens in his lunch with Al Sharpton.Thnx for the link. This appears to be a valid discussion. I just got a lol out of the stock photo complaint (not directed at you). Also, I will be the first to admit that I am not educated on this particular topic.
I scanned the article, but I have to leave at the moment. I will read it better, later this afternoon.
LOL. No one deserves Jim Mora.ren hoek said:Nah, I probably deserve that.
Speaking of jumping, I've jumped onto the Ravens bandwagon since we last spoke here. On my drive from Churchill out to PRP, I spotted at least 5 Balt window/bumper stickers.ren hoek said:I already jumped the shark ...
Peteyjudge is not a moderate. He is simply not an idealogue and his mission to do as much governing as possible keeps him a fluid spot on the spectrumIf it weren't Pete, I doubt this would be a big deal (the Intercept article, btw, is written by a hardcore progressive that I'm guessing hates Pete). The campaign should've done a better job of clarifying, but it seems to largely be a misunderstanding. One the campaign should've done a better job of making sure didn't happen, but still nothing that seems to overtly be an attempt at misleading people.
It's a good plan, and he's trying. He's got some obstacles, and he's made mistakes. Who knows if he can overcome them, but he's trying.
Our boy is about to be tested in a big way. As a gay Christian young moderate, the arrows will come from a lot of different angles.
But I believe he has the demeanor and character to find a way to unify this country better than any other candidate.
meh, who cares really...it is offensive, yes. Should it influence your vote, no.ren hoek said:Backlash over photo of Kenyan woman used for American campaign
There was outrage after an American firm used a photo of a Kenyan woman with a child to campaign for a 2020 presidential candidate.
Ryan Grim, who is the Bureau Chief for The Intercept, on Friday lashed out at the PR firm behind Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg.
”On top of everything else, the Buttigieg campaign used a stock photo from Kenya to promote its Frederick Douglass Plan for Black America,” he said on Twitter.
The bureau chief even tagged Nicholas Githiri, the photographer behind the picture that was used in Buttigieg’s manifesto.
A spot check by Citizen Digital on Saturday showed that the picture was yet to be pulled down.
Jodi Jacobson said on Twitter:” This is worse than lazy” while @Clarknt67 added: ”A trained visual arts professional reads the metadata in an image before posting. This is not rocket science.”
”Spin: Mayor Peye is the only candidate whose Black outreach went all the way to Africa. lol,” Tuxedo Mask quipped while James Baker joked: ”He’s talking in terms of the Diaspora…”
Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg is an American politician who has been the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, since 2012.
He is a candidate for the Democratic Party nomination in the 2020 United States presidential election.
https://citizentv.co.ke/news/u-s-firm-goofs-using-photo-of-kenyan-woman-for-buttigieg-2020-campaign-293860/
I didn't listen to the video but I assume it's the same as my cut and paste here:
In the early days of the Tea Party, the primary message was fiscal discipline. In that context, I don't think harsh criticism of what he said is fair."There are some, especially in my party, who think that the Tea Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican Party," Buttigieg said at the time. "But there are many others who believe that the Tea Party is motivated by real concerns about the direction of our government and the responsiveness of our government to citizens—and above all, a frustration with business as usual. That is what motivated me to run," he continued. "And so, while we may come from often very different perspectives, I believe we might have a lot in common on that front."
Yeah...Im trying to understand what the negative is about what he just said there?I didn't listen to the video but I assume it's the same as my cut and paste here:
In the early days of the Tea Party, the primary message was fiscal discipline. In that context, I don't think harsh criticism of what he said is fair.