What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

*** Official Pete Buttigieg Thread *** (8 Viewers)

Ditkaless Wonders said:
The attacks are just confirmation that he is worthy of attacking.  One does not attack candidates who are irrelevant, who have no chance of winning.  This stage was inevitable. 
Click to expand...
What is it confirmation of when you have the most money and most donors and the press decides not to cover you?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IC FBGCav said:
Me too. All for that.

http://www.pbs.org/publiceditor/blogs/pbs-public-editor/wheres-the-bern/
Click to expand...
Yeah, that article does a great job explaining Bernie's lack of coverage.  I really liked this part:

Fair And Balanced?

You might be thinking that a 100-percent objective approach – a safe way to avoid upsetting a particular candidate’s flock – might be allocating a guaranteed block of time to every legitimate candidate. They’d get, say, five minutes, regardless of how active or newsworthy the politicking was that week, or what polls were saying about a candidate’s viability.

This would be a recipe for televised disaster. Today you’d need at least an hour-long show, once a week, just to give each candidate five minutes. It would also force reporters and editors to inflate an unchanged campaign, with no new or significant speeches, policy papers or town-hall meetings, just to fill a prescribed time slot.

Phony fairness and balance could lead to false equivalencies. Audiences would likely also ask for equal treatment for their candidates. For example, if a news show accurately revealed a big lie by Candidate A, blind fairness could dictate that reporters find something negative to say about Candidate B, even if it is nowhere near as significant as the lie from Candidate A.

I preach that objectivity is a mythical standard in journalism. We often pound our chests and promise objectivity to our audiences, even though it’s something few people believe we actually deliver.

Journalists are humans and we all make subjective decisions every day. We’re subjective when we choose the words to describe something or someone. Editors are subjective in deciding what news you’ll see or hear, and how much space or time will be devoted to a story. Meanwhile, individual viewers or readers use their own subjectivity and bias to decide what news they’ll ultimately believe.

Is NewsHour Unfair to Bernie?

Instead of asking if a journalist is objective, we should demand that the news be demonstrably accurate and fair.

So, the questions stand: Is the PBS NewsHour portraying the Sanders campaign accurately? The record shows that it is. Was it unfair to leave him out of this one episode of Politics Monday? OK, maybe. NewsHour reporters and producers could have probably found a way to legitimately talk a bit about Sanders in the 13 minutes of Politics Monday without harming the segment’s flow. But they shouldn’t be sent to the stockades for skipping him this time.

What I took away from this Bernie brouhaha is the impressive level of enthusiasm among his supporters. I don’t yet see the same behind the other candidates. His people truly feel the Bern. That alone is good copy for any reporter.
Click to expand...

 
I only know about maybe five mayors out of the hundreds in the country.  I don’t think being the best mayor is necessarily indicative of who would be the best President.  Nor do I think the re-election prospects in South Bend are a very good metric.  Only three current mayors actually ran for President so I’m not sure the value in comparing Buttigieg to people that aren’t even trying to be elected.

I prefer Elizabeth Warren but to me Buttigieg is in the upper half of the remaining Democratic candidates.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
I only know about maybe five mayors out of the hundreds in the country.  I don’t think being the best mayor is necessarily indicative of who would be the best President.  Nor do I think the re-election prospects in South Bend are a very good metric.  Only three current mayors actually ran for President so I’m not sure the value in comparing Buttigieg to people that aren’t even trying to be elected.

I prefer Elizabeth Warren but to me Buttigieg is in the upper half of the remaining Democratic candidates.
Click to expand...
Please tell me what Pete is running on in 6 grade terms, like wall, immigrants j/k but in general.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Some people don't understand the difference between, on the one hand, how Obama will be seen, and on the other hand, how people will view him.
Click to expand...
I had to read this 3 times because I am slow but well put together point.  I loved the big O and had a lot pinned to him, his results long term in history will not be favorable in my opinion.  What the public views, who never looks into the results of what was accomplished will definitely be opposite of mine.  I thought he was a game changer, he wasn't, imo.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IC FBGCav said:
I had to read this 3 times because I am slow but well but together point.  I loved the big O and had a lot pinned to him, his results long term in history will not be favorable in my opinion.  What the public view who never looks into the results of what was accomplished will definitely be opposite of mine.  I thought he was a game changer, he wasn't, imo.
Click to expand...
I was born during the Nixon Administration. I'm fairly confident in my belief that, all things considered, Obama was the best President in my lifetime. (Reagan is probably next, but while neither was close to perfect, I think Reagan had a few more imperfections.)

You're right that Obama wasn't a game-changer. More of a steady hand.

I would not underestimate the value of a steady hand. We're talking about the leader of the free world ... low risk is far more important than high upside, IMO.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
I was born during the Nixon Administration. I'm fairly confident in my belief that, all things considered, Obama was the best President in my lifetime. (Reagan is probably next, but while neither was close to perfect, I think Reagan had a few more imperfections.)

You're right that Obama wasn't a game-changer. More of a steady hand.

I would not underestimate the value of a steady hand. We're talking about the leader of the free world ... low risk is far more important than high upside, IMO.
Click to expand...
It depends on what you value.  Does the middle and poorest people in this country agree?  How many congressmen kids were killed during these never ending wars? How many poor kids?  All for what?

 
I can't remember anything Bush sr did so I will go with Regan because ending the cold war but I highly disagree with his trickle down economic policy.  With further thought I might change.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
I was born during the Nixon Administration. I'm fairly confident in my belief that, all things considered, Obama was the best President in my lifetime. (Reagan is probably next, but while neither was close to perfect, I think Reagan had a few more imperfections.)

You're right that Obama wasn't a game-changer. More of a steady hand.

I would not underestimate the value of a steady hand. We're talking about the leader of the free world ... low risk is far more important than high upside, IMO.
Click to expand...
Reagan, Obama, Bush I

Clinton*, Nixon*

Carter, Johnson, Bush II, Trump

 
@teddyschleifer

NEWS: Pete Buttigieg is having an absolutely star-studded fundraiser in Palo Alto on Monday.

Hosts include people from the families of Sergey Brin, Eric Schmidt and Sheryl Sandberg.

Plus, Reed Hastings himself.

The Schmidt, Hastings, Sandberg and Brin families are worth a total of $80 billion.

Obviously not all of their family members are neccessarily backing Pete Buttigieg. But it's a vivid reminder of how appealing Buttigieg is to the nation's wealthiest.

Here are some photos of the Buttigieg fundraiser in Napa -- with the famous wine cave and the chandelier with 1,500 Swarovski crystals -- that @BrianSlodysko wrote about.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

(HULK)
Dave Berry's Year in Review
Replies
2
Views
782
Joe Summer
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 9 (members: 0, guests: 9)
Top