politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Can you point to any sources about Buttigieg? I have to admit to not paying attention to him until very recently, when he’s been a voice of reason. I don’t know his history
It's a combination of two things, neither of which is totally disqualifying.
The first is his previous employment at McKinsey. They're a consultant firm that frequently gets brought in by companies to basically do bad things like fire a ton of people or manipulate prices. Not kidnapping children, but it's a weird place to work if you're driven by higher values.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/why-buttigiegs-shadowy-consultant-past-at-mckinsey-matters/
The second is in the 2020 primary he started out with progressive messaging and then pivoted to the role of moderate because Bernie and Warren sucked all the air out of that lane. So it just kind of paints the story that he doesn't really believe in anything. And with the moderate switch he courted a lot of money from big money fundraisers and spent a lot of time talking about what we can't do.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/23/us/politics/buttigieg-campaign-moderate.html
I don't get the impression he's deeply committed to any ideology. If he saw progressivism as the best way to advance his political career, he'd be progressive, but with the influence of big money and lobbyists, I doubt it'd work out that way. On the optimistic side he'd be an Obama, that talks hope and change and then continually defaults to "practicality" as lobbyists and establishment politicians tell him not to move too fast. On the pessimistic side he'd be a Sinema, who said progressive things in their younger days but then abandoned it all for ruthless centrism.
Thanks