this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2024
125 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4542 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (6 children)

I hated Buttigieg because he went back on his progressive roots and disappointed his socialist father BUT I wish she would pick him.

My money though is on Kelly or Shapiro because they need AZ and PA.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I hated Buttigieg because he went back on his progressive roots and disappointed his socialist father

Buttigieg was always a technocratic cypher. He relied mostly on his access to elite schools, and background as a "McKenssyite" to get access to the stage. His primary credentials were being a one time mayor of a college town, and his elitist access that being a McKensie fellow afforded. When it seemed inconvenient to be a progressive, he was no longer a progressive. My central issue with him as a candidate was simply that he had not run-in and won a state or federal election. Its a soft-requirement I've had for a while is that you at least need to show me you can win elections. Him going on to spoiling the progressive tickets when and where necessary and being rewarded for that with his position as Transportation Secretary, was just insult to injury.

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, him being rewarded for stopping a Bernie Sanders presidency was infuriating.

For context about his father...

Pete Buttigieg Just Dealt a Blow to His Father's Legacy

https://jacobin.com/2020/03/pete-buttigieg-joseph-father-legacy-antonio-gramsci-bernie-sanders

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Fascinating read. It actually makes me want to buy Buittigieg's fathers book.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 12 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I love Buttigieg and his VP debate versus Vance would be fun to witness, but is the US ready for a black female presidential candidate with an openly gay VP? I seem to have been wrong about how much racism and sexism would hinder Kamala so maybe it's not an issue? I still fear it would be too much

I don't like all Kelly's positions, but helping potentially win AZ would be important and for undecideds and simple minded people the astronaut factor is not to be underestimated. He seems like a very "safe" and sensible pick.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 months ago

Yes, we need to stop proactively enforcing a bigoted worldview because you think there's a secret well of untapped bigots ready to be set off by any choice that isn't straight white or male. "I'm not bigoted, but we need to acquiesce to bigoted sensibilities" leads to the same result as just being bigoted.

The people who would be so incensed by a non-straight VP already know who their candidate is, and if the reaction to Harris is to be believed, they won't be able to keep in the slobbering homophobia that will turn off people who may have had a mild prejudice but still balk at the ugly open bigotry of the Republican base.

[–] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Dude I thought America would never elect anyone but old white men but they elected Barack Obama. I'm pretty sure Pete's being gay is less of a problem for the right than a smart black man as the literal president.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

is the US ready for a black female presidential candidate with an openly gay VP

Only if they're Republicans.

[–] BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

I'm maybe biased towards Beshear, but I feel like it's between him and Kelly.

Kelly seems like an incredibly sensible pick for appeal to 'undecideds'.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

My worry about Buttigieg is that his past in South Bend runs the risk of reinforcing or even lending legitimacy to the "she's a cop" narrative.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 months ago

I guess, but like Harris to Biden, the top of the ticket has a much worse story on that front (Crime Bill > AG misdeeds > poor oversight of a PD). Buttigieg's story just wasn't that important, it was only made important because when your one qualification is being mayor, you better have been the most perfect mayor there ever was. I suppose there's potentially a reinforcement effect, but if "cop" was a major concern on Harris we'd be seeing a lot more active and organized protest.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

BUT I wish she would pick him.

Not enough McKinsey consultants in the White House.

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de -3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The smear campaign against Shapiro has been intense the past few days. It's impressive.

[–] joeynotjoe@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Is it really a smear campaign, or is it just people stating the facts about his positions and policies?

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 months ago

As I see it, they are attacking him while simultaneously ignoring other contenders' similar stances, even when pointed out by others.

Feels like smear to me.