The Democratic Candidates

Hi!

Buttigieg is a fucking pro. If he wasn’t gay I would put money on him to win. He is a far superior communicator than any of the others Imo. Am I wrong in thinking his sexuality is going too hurt him?  My main issue is electability right now. I watched the town hall finally last night and was surprised to find out he was a war veteran. 

cincybearcat

Hi! said:

Buttigieg is a fucking pro. If he wasn’t gay I would put money on him to win. He is a far superior communicator than any of the others Imo. Am I wrong in thinking his sexuality is going too hurt him?  My main issue is electability right now. I watched the town hall finally last night and was surprised to find out he was a war veteran. 

My first thought was that being gay would hurt him. But then I thought...how many of the people that it’s s problem for are likely to vote against trump to begin with? 

I dont know the answer 

Hi!

cincybearcat said:

Hi! said:

Buttigieg is a fucking pro. If he wasn’t gay I would put money on him to win. He is a far superior communicator than any of the others Imo. Am I wrong in thinking his sexuality is going too hurt him?  My main issue is electability right now. I watched the town hall finally last night and was surprised to find out he was a war veteran. 

My first thought was that being gay would hurt him. But then I thought...how many of the people that it’s s problem for are likely to vote against trump to begin with? 

I dont know the answer 

That’s kind of what I was thinking. I don’t know if this is a racist thought or not, but I feel like homosexuality is looked down on more in the African American community more so than in others. Again I have no idea and I apologize if I’m wrong in thinking that, but that would hurt him in primary. He would be able to offset that by maybe picking an African American vp in general, but I don’t see him making it that far. It’s a shame really.

Spiritual_Chaos

Hi! said:

cincybearcat said:

Hi! said:

Buttigieg is a fucking pro. If he wasn’t gay I would put money on him to win. He is a far superior communicator than any of the others Imo. Am I wrong in thinking his sexuality is going too hurt him?  My main issue is electability right now. I watched the town hall finally last night and was surprised to find out he was a war veteran. 

My first thought was that being gay would hurt him. But then I thought...how many of the people that it’s s problem for are likely to vote against trump to begin with? 

I dont know the answer 

That’s kind of what I was thinking. I don’t know if this is a racist thought or not, but I feel like homosexuality is looked down on more in the African American community more so than in others. Again I have no idea and I apologize if I’m wrong in thinking that, but that would hurt him in primary. He would be able to offset that by maybe picking an African American in general, but I don’t see him making it that far. It’s a shame really.

I was surprised on how "ok" it was to despise homosexuality in the Hip Hop community at least (which consists of a lor of african americans, and are the ones tuning in to a big degree). Listened to some interviews with hip hopers on that Vlad channel on youtube, and it's baffling how ok it is still to spew bullshit about gay people.

Hi!

Yeah. I had a couple edits in my post. Anyway, I know lots of people that would vote dem, but no way they would vote for a homosexual.

OnWis97

cincybearcat said:

Hi! said:

Buttigieg is a fucking pro. If he wasn’t gay I would put money on him to win. He is a far superior communicator than any of the others Imo. Am I wrong in thinking his sexuality is going too hurt him?  My main issue is electability right now. I watched the town hall finally last night and was surprised to find out he was a war veteran. 

My first thought was that being gay would hurt him. But then I thought...how many of the people that it’s s problem for are likely to vote against trump to begin with? 

I dont know the answer 

I think the impact on the traditional image of the First Lady would be enough to sink him.  While the crazy bigots probably wouldn’t vote Dem either way, my guess is there are a lot of people that are OK with the idea of gay co-workers and neighbors would have a hard time making this leap.

oftenreading

Hi! said:

Yeah. I had a couple edits in my post. Anyway, I know lots of people that would vote dem, but no way they would vote for a homosexual.

Really? Wow. And here I was thinking that he might do well, as he may get a boost in votes from the LGBTQ community, not just because he’s gay, but because he seems to be a good candidate who is gay. I guess I underestimate the amount of prejudice still. 

Hi!

oftenreading said:

Hi! said:

Yeah. I had a couple edits in my post. Anyway, I know lots of people that would vote dem, but no way they would vote for a homosexual.

Really? Wow. And here I was thinking that he might do well, as he may get a boost in votes from the LGBTQ community, not just because he’s gay, but because he seems to be a good candidate who is gay. I guess I underestimate the amount of prejudice still. 

I actually think it’s one of the main reasons Trump is President. Focusing on LGBT issues like gay marriage ect. turned off a lot of rust belt voters or blue collar dems if you will.

Spiritual_Chaos

OnWis97 said:

cincybearcat said:

Hi! said:

Buttigieg is a fucking pro. If he wasn’t gay I would put money on him to win. He is a far superior communicator than any of the others Imo. Am I wrong in thinking his sexuality is going too hurt him?  My main issue is electability right now. I watched the town hall finally last night and was surprised to find out he was a war veteran. 

My first thought was that being gay would hurt him. But then I thought...how many of the people that it’s s problem for are likely to vote against trump to begin with? 

I dont know the answer 

I think the impact on the traditional image of the First Lady would be enough to sink him.  While the crazy bigots probably wouldn’t vote Dem either way, my guess is there are a lot of people that are OK with the idea of gay co-workers and neighbors would have a hard time making this leap.

Yeah, I bet that would be a big leap for some.

Hi!

OnWis97 said:

cincybearcat said:

Hi! said:

Buttigieg is a fucking pro. If he wasn’t gay I would put money on him to win. He is a far superior communicator than any of the others Imo. Am I wrong in thinking his sexuality is going too hurt him?  My main issue is electability right now. I watched the town hall finally last night and was surprised to find out he was a war veteran. 

My first thought was that being gay would hurt him. But then I thought...how many of the people that it’s s problem for are likely to vote against trump to begin with? 

I dont know the answer 

I think the impact on the traditional image of the First Lady would be enough to sink him.  While the crazy bigots probably wouldn’t vote Dem either way, my guess is there are a lot of people that are OK with the idea of gay co-workers and neighbors would have a hard time making this leap.

That’s a very interesting point as well. He’s married. If he was single or whatever it might not be as big of a deal, but the image of a married homosexual couple in the White House would make the deplorables heads explode.

Hi!

Although, I bet his thoughts on UBI would make a lot of peoples heads explode as well, lol. Who knows? I actually think he has a shot because he’s that good. I’m rolling with Buttigieg 2020 today.

oftenreading

Hi! said:

oftenreading said:

Hi! said:

Yeah. I had a couple edits in my post. Anyway, I know lots of people that would vote dem, but no way they would vote for a homosexual.

Really? Wow. And here I was thinking that he might do well, as he may get a boost in votes from the LGBTQ community, not just because he’s gay, but because he seems to be a good candidate who is gay. I guess I underestimate the amount of prejudice still. 

I actually think it’s one of the main reasons Trump is President. Focusing on LGBT issues like gay marriage ect. turned off a lot of rust belt voters or blue collar dems if you will.

Well, if the suggestion is that Dems not focus on issues of equality and fairness under the law just to get elected, then the country is in worse shape than I had imagined. 

Hi!

oftenreading said:

Hi! said:

oftenreading said:

Hi! said:

Yeah. I had a couple edits in my post. Anyway, I know lots of people that would vote dem, but no way they would vote for a homosexual.

Really? Wow. And here I was thinking that he might do well, as he may get a boost in votes from the LGBTQ community, not just because he’s gay, but because he seems to be a good candidate who is gay. I guess I underestimate the amount of prejudice still. 

I actually think it’s one of the main reasons Trump is President. Focusing on LGBT issues like gay marriage ect. turned off a lot of rust belt voters or blue collar dems if you will.

Well, if the suggestion is that Dems not focus on issues of equality and fairness under the law just to get elected, then the country is in worse shape than I had imagined. 

When it comes to this particular issue it’s possible. The issues surrounding LGBT rights were huge issues during Obama’s years. Especially as it relates to trans  issues. I’m just saying, it turned a lot of voters off that might otherwise consider voting dem. I also don’t think any dem candidate isnt or should not focus on these things just to be clear.

Meltdown99

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1107391923432640514

It will never make sense why in the US they feel the need to campaign 2 years before the actual election, and what a waste of money donating to a political campaign...

mickeyrat

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Why wouldn't Booker have a chance?

He lacks the genuine charm of Obama or Beto. Doesn't come off as honest. Just angry.

Are you sure you're on the right person? I think he comes off as genuinely pleasant.  He's a good dude

I'm a pro at reading people. 

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/01/thirteen-democrats-just-stopped-bernie-sanders-ame.html

that doesnt make booker beholden to pharma insomuch as beholden to workers in his state that work in pharma.....

Lerxst1992

Hi! said:

oftenreading said:

Hi! said:

oftenreading said:

Hi! said:

Yeah. I had a couple edits in my post. Anyway, I know lots of people that would vote dem, but no way they would vote for a homosexual.

Really? Wow. And here I was thinking that he might do well, as he may get a boost in votes from the LGBTQ community, not just because he’s gay, but because he seems to be a good candidate who is gay. I guess I underestimate the amount of prejudice still. 

I actually think it’s one of the main reasons Trump is President. Focusing on LGBT issues like gay marriage ect. turned off a lot of rust belt voters or blue collar dems if you will.

Well, if the suggestion is that Dems not focus on issues of equality and fairness under the law just to get elected, then the country is in worse shape than I had imagined. 

When it comes to this particular issue it’s possible. The issues surrounding LGBT rights were huge issues during Obama’s years. Especially as it relates to trans  issues. I’m just saying, it turned a lot of voters off that might otherwise consider voting dem. I also don’t think any dem candidate isnt or should not focus on these things just to be clear.

If that's true, then they should have voted dem, because Obama had nothing to do with gay marriage becoming legal nationwide. The swing vote was a republican SCOTUS judge.

mickeyrat

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Or, if you are not weirdly ignorant. You would understand that things (like a society) change with time, and you might have to update, change or clarify it in the future and the things you cover might not be everything that will come up in the next couple of centuries. Like for example, if a President can be president for two terms or if he can be elected for two terms.

Just a thought. 

We don't re-write our Constitution and form new governments ever 30 years like most of the rest of the world.  Our document has stood the test of time.  So you'll have to excuse the weirdly ignorant Founding Fathers in favor of the geniuses that can't write a Constitution that survives a half century.  It was structured in such a way that they understood times would change, only setting down concrete principles.  The rest would be left to the branches of gov't.  This is what Cincy tried to explain to you, which you somehow think is counter-argued by a a conversation with Guy 1 and Guy 2.  If only Jefferson were as smart as you... 

We don't re-write our "fundamental laws" that often either, but we adjust and add to them when we feel it is needed. So that questions don't need to be up in the air or things written for a different time needs to be forced into being applied to a modern world. It is not done "on a whim" though.

The "form new governments"-thing I don't understand what you mean by. 

If your constitution with these "concrete principles" are instead of concrete - diffuse, and there are these branches deciding how to interpret the text and set precedent - then Obama should stress-test that part to figure out those concrete/diffuse principles. Haha. I just think that is one fundamental thing that should have been clarified sometime during all this time -- the same with if a president can be arrested for a crime. Write some god damn amendments people.

OBAMA TWENTYTWENTY

the difficulty in amending the constitution is by design. can you imagine what kind of bullshit could added otherwise?

yes, some things imo should change or be tweaked. others would disagree with hat I had in mind.

thats the frustratingly beautiful thing about this particular experiment in self-governing we have here.

mrussel1

Meltdown99 said:

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1107391923432640514

It will never make sense why in the US they feel the need to campaign 2 years before the actual election, and what a waste of money donating to a political campaign...

It's for the same psychological reason why Black Friday now starts a week before Thanksgiving..  or that Halloween decorations are up at Lowes right at Labor Day.  

mrussel1

mickeyrat said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Why wouldn't Booker have a chance?

He lacks the genuine charm of Obama or Beto. Doesn't come off as honest. Just angry.

Are you sure you're on the right person? I think he comes off as genuinely pleasant.  He's a good dude

I'm a pro at reading people. 

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/01/thirteen-democrats-just-stopped-bernie-sanders-ame.html

that doesnt make booker beholden to pharma insomuch as beholden to workers in his state that work in pharma.....

Any writer that sees fit to cut Democrats into two wings..progressives and "neoliberals" isn't worth reading in my book.  

cincybearcat

OnWis97 said:

cincybearcat said:

Hi! said:

Buttigieg is a fucking pro. If he wasn’t gay I would put money on him to win. He is a far superior communicator than any of the others Imo. Am I wrong in thinking his sexuality is going too hurt him?  My main issue is electability right now. I watched the town hall finally last night and was surprised to find out he was a war veteran. 

My first thought was that being gay would hurt him. But then I thought...how many of the people that it’s s problem for are likely to vote against trump to begin with? 

I dont know the answer 

I think the impact on the traditional image of the First Lady would be enough to sink him.  While the crazy bigots probably wouldn’t vote Dem either way, my guess is there are a lot of people that are OK with the idea of gay co-workers and neighbors would have a hard time making this leap.

Perhaps. I don’t disagree just don’t know.  I hate that thought though. Really wish we could get past this as a country.