Author Topic: Pete Buttigieg 2020 (Read 5350 times)

gatoveintisiete · « **on:** February 09, 2020, 05:59:03 PM »

This is the thread for non homophobes to gather and support Pete for the Democrat nomination, Lets GO!!

CHONGS · « **Reply #1 on:** February 09, 2020, 06:03:28 PM »

What are Tubesock's thoughts on Pete?

gatoveintisiete · « **Reply #2 on:** February 09, 2020, 06:27:52 PM »

The word I got was that he was banned by a hyper sensitive moderator

gatoveintisiete · « **Reply #3 on:** February 09, 2020, 06:30:06 PM »

Don't muck up the Pete thread homophobes

gatoveintisiete · « **Reply #4 on:** February 11, 2020, 02:11:39 PM »

Every nominee from either party ever has taken 1st or 2nd in the N H primary.

gatoveintisiete · « **Reply #5 on:** February 11, 2020, 05:42:03 PM »

This is a nice warm cozy thread for people that found out today that Bloomy is unacceptable to them.

Institutional Control · « **Reply #6 on:** October 12, 2020, 06:26:45 AM »

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cire · « **Reply #7 on:** October 12, 2020, 09:27:22 AM »

Stud Answer

HHS Sec

MakeItRain · « **Reply #8 on:** October 12, 2020, 10:56:06 AM »

Cire · « **Reply #9 on:** October 13, 2020, 05:41:11 AM »

SLAYER Pete!

https://twitter.com/bulldoghill/status/1315946073421094914?s=21

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

michigancat · « **Reply #10 on:** October 13, 2020, 09:21:12 AM »

I like this Pete a lot more than candidate Pete

cfbandyman · « **Reply #11 on:** October 13, 2020, 09:26:19 AM »

He's always been like this

But glad you all actually get to hear him. I guess it's less policy, and more being literally smarter than everyone he meets so he can just demolish them at whatever they talk about.

michigancat · « **Reply #12 on:** October 13, 2020, 09:36:36 AM »

Quote from: cfbandyman on October 13, 2020, 09:26:19 AM

He's always been like this

But glad you all actually get to hear him. I guess it's less policy, and more being literally smarter than everyone he meets so he can just demolish them at whatever they talk about.

No candidate Pete seemed a lot more calculated and sterile. Might have been because we saw so much more of him but this Pete seems to be talking off the cuff more and being meaner (and it's probably actually really intentional and based on research that said he was too calculated and sterile as a candidate)

catastrophe · « **Reply #13 on:** October 13, 2020, 10:02:53 AM »

It’s the same guy. You probably just like him more without the Bernie goggles.

cfbandyman · « **Reply #14 on:** October 13, 2020, 10:03:38 AM »

Quote from: catastrophe on October 13, 2020, 10:02:53 AM

It’s the same guy. You probably just like him more without the Bernie goggles.

This (to me at least)

michigancat · « **Reply #15 on:** October 13, 2020, 10:17:40 AM »

YOU'RE ALL WRONG

DQ12 · « **Reply #16 on:** October 13, 2020, 10:22:34 AM »

Quote from: Institutional Control on October 12, 2020, 06:26:45 AM

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Isn't this pretty much the standard pro-choice position? I've seen this in a couple of spots and I'm not sure what's novel or compelling about it.

michigancat · « **Reply #17 on:** October 13, 2020, 10:25:45 AM »

Quote from: DQ12 on October 13, 2020, 10:22:34 AM

Quote from: Institutional Control on October 12, 2020, 06:26:45 AM

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Isn't this pretty much the standard pro-choice position? I've seen this in a couple of spots and I'm not sure what's novel or compelling about it.

My impression (WHICH SOME TAKE ISSUE WITH) is that a lot of (most?) pro-choice politicians run from the question even if they agree with Pete's stance while he took it head on and said "yes there should be late term abortions and here's why". I could be wrong though, most pro-choice politicians' abortion takes don't make the news

_33 · « **Reply #18 on:** October 13, 2020, 10:51:35 AM »

Quote from: Institutional Control on October 12, 2020, 06:26:45 AM

The answer is complete and utter bullshit and completely ignores all of the empirical data we have on the subject but sure. Of course tragic outliers of a fetal anomaly exist but even studies done by pro-choice institutes admit it is a very small percentage. In fact the reasons given for late-term abortions don't differ much at all for reasons given earlier in pregnancy. (Financial burden, disrupt partner relationship, interfere with work/education, etc.). His answer simply pushes the debunked (yet still hugely popular) 'medical necessity' narrative that has no basis in fact. The fact that he says "these hypotheticals are usually set up to provoke a strong emotional reaction" and then sets up a hypothetical to provoke a strong emotional reaction is especially strange.

catastrophe · « **Reply #19 on:** October 13, 2020, 10:54:36 AM »

Other than obviously articulating it well, I agree the most unique aspect is addressing it head on, which is what I’ve always liked about Pete.

Very few pro-choice politicians are willing to say they think the woman has the right to choose between her health and the baby’s. He’s acknowledging that and basically saying he thinks the choice is less likely to be abused in the hands of the mother.

I don’t really agree with it, but I appreciate the clarity.

michigancat · « **Reply #20 on:** October 13, 2020, 10:58:43 AM »

Quote from: _33 on October 13, 2020, 10:51:35 AM

Quote from: Institutional Control on October 12, 2020, 06:26:45 AM

The answer is complete and utter bullshit and completely ignores all of the empirical data we have on the subject but sure. Of course tragic outliers of a fetal anomaly exist but even studies done by pro-choice institutes admit it is a very small percentage. In fact the reasons given for late-term abortions don't differ much at all for reasons given earlier in pregnancy. (Financial burden, disrupt partner relationship, interfere with work/education, etc.). His answer simply pushes the debunked (yet still hugely popular) 'medical necessity' narrative that has no basis in fact. The fact that he says "these hypotheticals are usually set up to provoke a strong emotional reaction" and then sets up a hypothetical to provoke a strong emotional reaction is especially strange.

whoa calm down mister politics man

_33 · « **Reply #21 on:** October 13, 2020, 11:05:24 AM »

Damn, I knew you were going to get me on that.

kim carnes · « **Reply #22 on:** October 13, 2020, 11:29:56 AM »

Quote from: catastrophe on October 13, 2020, 10:54:36 AM

Other than obviously articulating it well, I agree the most unique aspect is addressing it head on, which is what I’ve always liked about Pete.

Very few pro-choice politicians are willing to say they think the woman has the right to choose between her health and the baby’s. He’s acknowledging that and basically saying he thinks the choice is less likely to be abused in the hands of the mother.

I don’t really agree with it, but I appreciate the clarity.

I think the big question is: is what he’s saying actually true? Or is it some bullshit being made up to make people feel better.

BIG APPLE CAT · « **Reply #23 on:** October 13, 2020, 12:19:04 PM »

his middle name is Paul which means we (america) missed out on the opportunity to have a President P.P. Butt

i hope you'll all take a minute to think about your life choices.

8manpick · « **Reply #24 on:** October 13, 2020, 12:20:27 PM »

Hopefully his VP in 2032 is Mary!