The unintended pain inflicted on the LGBTQ+ community when it comes to Pete

[Politicub]

Implicit bias has entered the picture when it comes to criticism of Pete. It’s one thing to hold the opinion that he isn’t someone’s top choice. All of the candidates have pluses and minuses.

But it becomes ugly and hurtful when people start saying the fact that he is gay and has a husband is one of the reasons why he should not be VP.

Gay people have been hearing “wait,” “a gay person can’t possibly do that,” and “sit down, I know what’s best for you,” throughout our lives.

We are a resilient community, and have weathered worse.

Still, we need to call out bias when we see it, explain why a comment may come across in a hurtful way, and ask that people walk a mile in someone else’s shoes and imagine what it’s like to hear such comments over and over again.

Then imagine if you had a son or daughter, niece or nephew, or friends that were hearing that some things are off limits to them by virtue of who they love.

I firmly believe that some people will get it, and things will slowly change for the better. Coming out to our family and friends changed so many minds.

I feel so heartened when our allies speak on our behalf. Everyone can be an ally, and I hope that is what people choose other than saying or implying, “no, you can’t.”

I just ask that people advocate for their preferred candidates in a way that does not bring in or imply implicit bias. You can make a good case without casting sexual orientation or gender identity as a negative factor.

[jmbar2]

1. Agree

Good message.

[yardwork]

2. I don't want to negate anybody's feelings, but...

As a lesbian, I think it's perfectly reasonable for people to bring up strategic pros and cons about the VP pick.

We need to win this election, and the choice of VP needs to be based on strategy.

[Politicub]

7. We all live in the miasma of anti-gay bias

Even those of us in the community.

I had to come to grips with my internalized homophobia. It’s not a knock on anyone. We have all been conditioned to believe that straight is the default position by which other sexual orientations should be measured. I still struggle oftentimes.

Even you can advocate for someone instead of perpetuating the notion that a gay person can’t possibly win.

[yardwork]

11. lol. That's not what I said, at all.

Pete's been a good Transportation Secretary. He's never held office higher than mayor of South Bend, IN. I'm suspicious of McKinsey and all consulting firms, and deeply suspicious of Duke Energy. Finally, while we're on the subject of internalized homophobia, I recall that Pete remained deeply closeted until his thirties, unusual for his generation.

A lot of progressives dislike Pete. They view him as neoliberal. We risk alienating them right when we got them back.

Meanwhile, we have popular governors with proven executive experience from which to choose.

For the record, I don't think we'd lose votes because Pete is gay. I think we'd lose the opportunity to attract voters who would be very happy with some other VP candidates.

I definitely do not think we should push for Pete just because he's gay.

I'm excited and heartened by Kamila Harris's campaign. It's about looking forward. Let's not get pulled back into typical Democratic weaknesses like grievances, virtue signaling, and purity tests. I'm looking at you, pro-Palestinian whiners.

None of this is aimed at you the OP or anybody else in particular. Just my opinion.

[H2O Man]

56. Well said.

There is nothing in his background that would make him a serious consideration gor being a heartbeat away from the presidency. Nor is he foing to strengthen the ticket with potential Harris voters. His sexual identity should not be a reason either for or against him being on the ticket.

[yardwork]

98. Exactly. You stated it well.

[William769]

72. I agree with this

"I definitely do not think we should push for Pete just because he's gay." But to use his sexual orientation as the only reason not to push for him is wrong and quite frankly homophobic. And yes I am directing this at the what is stated in the OP.

[Ms. Toad]

94. You actually just made the OP's point.

There are many reasons to favor (or disfavor) Pete. You've stated, in your first four paragraphs, save one sentence, reasons Pete isn't a good choice that have absolutely nothing to do with being gay.

That's the point the OP was trying to make. Argue for, or against, Pete. But do it based on merit - not who he is married to.

[yardwork]

99. Great! Terrific

[pinkstarburst]

14. So are you posting all over the forum saying that a black woman can't possibly win

at the top of the ticket and Kamala Harris has no chance in November? If you're not doing that because it's racist and inappropriate, then don't post about how Pete shouldn't be VP because he's gay because that's homophobic and inappropriate too.

[Demsrule86]

17. That is uncalled for. The poster didn't say that. My daughter is a Lesbian. So I would love to see more acceptance than

there currently is in society. But this isn't about being gay. Pete is very smart but has little relevant experience and won't help us win a state. He is also more to the right than I am which I think would be an issue with some progressives

[Politicub]

21. It does not matter that your daughter is a lesbian

The same idea applies. Stop using sexual orientation as a cudgel.

Is it so hard to advocate for someone based on their merit?

My post isn’t really about Pete being the best choice. It’s about people who are belligerent with how they are using sexual orientation as something negative.

[yardwork]

28. The belligerence seems to be on one side only in this thread.

Grievances and purity politics are out of style.

[Harker]

3. +33.

That's an outstanding post, and a very important one.

"She can't pick another woman."

"A woman and a gay man is too much too soon."

"They (from a reliably Democratic state) don't bring anything."

I don't want to hear about cynical calculations about who's ready for what. I want her to pick the best person for the job.

[Zeitghost]

9. The job at this point

Is winning an election and defeating Trump.

[Harker]

10. Certainly.

That's why we need our two best candidates on the ticket.

[Harker]

12. To clarify...

When I said, "who's ready for what" I meant the potential readiness of the voting public to accept the personal details of the eventual running mate, not the readiness of the prospective running mate to fulfill the requirements of the job.

She has a wealth of great possibilities.

[Politicub]

24. What personal details?

Just curious.

[Harker]

36. I think it's wrong to base a VP pick on sexuality, ethnicity, religion...

gender, disability, skin color, age, place of origin, height, supposed good looks, etc.

I want her to pick whomever she thinks would be the best person to work with her in an administration and to back her up, as Joe Biden chose her.

I think it best we boldly embrace the qualities with which we conduct ourselves in daily life.

I'm looking forward to hearing her decision, and getting behind the ticket wholeheartedly.

[Bettie]

30. Just curious

why +33 specifically?

I tend to agree with you with regard to not picking another woman/someone who is gay/black, etc. simply because of that one attribute.

But the 33 made me smile and I wondered why that particular number.

[Harker]

40. When I was a wee lad I had a cheap plastic roulette wheel, and I was inexplicably attracted to 33.

Whenever I was allowed to select a uniform number, I chose 33. When someone says, "pick a number between one and ten", I say, "33".

+33 is my personal take on the more customary +1, and reflects my heartiest endorsement.

No one has ever asked about that at DU...

[Bettie]

49. Thanks for telling me

I am always curious about random things like that and it's' fun to hear the why of them!

[Harker]

55. We're alike in that.

Sometimes, though, I lose sight of the whole while staring at the minutiae.

[Celerity]

76. 33 is atomic number of arsenic. 33 is, according to the Newton scale, the temperature at which water boils. A normal

human spine has, on average, 33 vertebrae when the bones that form the coccyx are counted individually.

33 is the number of years that it takes for the Lunar phase to return to its original position in relation to the Solar calendar.

The number of deities in the Vedic Religion is 33.

The second level of heaven in Buddhism is named Trāyastriṃśa, meaning "of the 33 (gods)."

The number of incarnations the bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara is said to embody is 33.

Jesus' traditional age when he was crucified and resurrected is 33.

Islamic prayer beads are generally arranged in sets of 33, corresponding to the widespread use of this number in dhikr rituals. Such beads may number 33 in total or three distinct sets of 33 for a total of 99, corresponding to the names of God.

33 is a master number in New Age numerology, along with 11 and 22.

There are 33 degrees in Scottish Rite Freemasonry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_(number)

[Harker]

80. 33 thanks!

You've supplied a good reason to take a swan dive into the inky depths of my 60+ years long affinity.

[Happy Hoosier]

4. Love Pete, but please don't assume that everyone who favors another candidate...

.... does so primarily because they fear the impact of an openly gay candidate.

That is surely a consideration. Demographics always are. But it isn't the primary consider for me.

For me, I would just like to see him get a little more national electoral experience. I think he'd make a fine VP, and he's a good campaigner, but his resume is still a bit thin on the national stage, IMO.

[Politicub]

8. Those are all good reasons why he isn't your pick

I don’t assume everyone has bias who doesn’t have Pete at the top of their list. I am sorry if my post came across that way.

It was about the people who bring in sexual orientation as *the* primary factor. That’s all.

I have learned a lot about Beshear, Shapiro and Kelly from posts that talk about why they make good candidates. The ones that just attack aren’t as helpful.

[Funtatlaguy]

5. Pete's sexuality is the only "negative" the GOP has.

He’s handsome, brilliant, well spoken, a string leader.
But, you know they would call him everything in the book and make his sexuality and having a husband the MAIN thing they would push.
Would that work? Who knows?
Is America really ready for an openly gay VP.
A mixed race female POTUS?
Interesting times we live in, indeed.

[Politicub]

26. It's a form of progress that the possibility is before us.

Which is one of the many reasons I am a dem.

[madaboutharry]

6. Remember this episode of Mad Men....

It was an episode that touched on the civil rights and voting rights movement. Bert, the senior partner at Sterling Cooper was an old school misogynist and racist. One day he is standing in the hall and people were talking about, if I recall correctly, the March on Washington. Bert, with true conviction, says "What is their rush?"
The delivery was intended to induce cringe because it is the same thing that has been said about every other group of people who sought to achieve their rights and entry into the spaces that they are qualified to occupy.

[mucholderthandirt]

13. I'd have no problem with him on the ticket.

I'm straight, but not narrow, as the older kids used to say.

How is he to get more experience if no one thinks he should run for anything? He's been a mayor, what's next a governor? Senator? Will people vote for him then? Or will it be the "world isn't ready for gay people" thing, forever?

At some point the Democrats are just going to have to go there. We've started, with Obama, Hillary running, now VP Harris going for the top spot. Progress, for sure, more than I though I'd live to see (though if I'd been old enough, Shirley Chisholm would have gotten my vote, way back then). But we have to keep moving forward.

[pinkstarburst]

15. Well said.

Biden did the right thing by putting Kamala Harris on the ticket in 2020 as his VP. She was the best one for the job. If America wasn't ready for the idea of a black female VP, well, he pretty much told them it was time to get ready. America wasn't ready to end slavery. America wasn't ready for Civil Rights. America hasn't been ready for a lot of things.

If Pete is the best person for the job, then he should be on the ticket. Young people are going CRAZY for Pete Buttigieg right now all over social media. This is where our future is. We need to capture this momentum. We need to worry less about the bigot vote (who aren't going to be voting for us anyway with a black woman at the top of the ticket, so why do we care if they also don't like a gay man on the ticket?) and think more about encouraging and mobilizing the vote IN OUR PARTY. Let's get all those young people fired up and out there and ready to vote like they were in 2008 for Obama.

[FlyingPiggy]

16. To disregard Pete's sexuality and gay marriage to a country

Where there is a LOT of biasness is folly. No one wants or accepts the ageism that was front and center w Biden. But they made it front and center. They will do the same with Pete’s sexuality. Like it or not, that is what we are dealing with.

[OneGrassRoot]

19. They will try to destroy every candidate...

in some way, even with blatant lies.

I would love to see us forge ahead as though their views don’t matter. We react to the racist, bigoted contingent way too much.

[FlyingPiggy]

22. Yes, they will try. But we don't need to help them, either.

I wish I could be more confident w Pete on the ticket. I just don’t think we are there yet as a country. I also think there are a lot of seemingly normal people out there that harbor a lot of biasness towards lgbtq but are moderates and independents. They are not rabid on other issues but they are socially. I don’t know why.

[Harker]

45. +33.

We'll choose our own candidates.

Anyone can see who they pick, and they're repulsive.

[Politicub]

20. Yes, but you don't need to do that.

The fact that Pete is gay is covered, and many people can’t seem to help themselves from using that as a way to exclude him.

[FlyingPiggy]

25. Being gay is not acceptable to a large portion of Americans whether we like it or not.

Whether we like it or not, biasness towards LGBTQ is out there in spades. Elections, especially this one, is about winning. For many, myself included, it’s not about feeling good about something. It’s about winning and defeating fascism. I believe Pete is a force to be reckoned with and maybe in the next election when this maga shitshow is neutered, I would love to see him on the ticket. But not this time.

[beaglelover]

29. Got any proof that being gay is not acceptable to a LARGE portion of Americans?

The latest polling states otherwise.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1651/gay-lesbian-rights.aspx

[FlyingPiggy]

32. According to this article w poll numbers from gallup:

The latest Gallup survey found that acceptance of same-sex relations fell this year to 64 percent, from a high of 71 percent in 2022. The decline among Republicans was 15 points to 41 percent, the lowest share in Gallup’s polling since 2014. A Pew survey in the fall found 55 percent of Republicans viewed same-sex marriage being legal as bad for society. The change in attitudes and the comments from Republicans have prompted concern among LGBTQ+ advocates
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/06/30/republicans-pride-month-lgbtq/

[pinkstarburst]

33. Guess what else is not acceptable? Being black. And a woman in power.

Newsflash: We are not going to win the bigot vote. We are not going to win the bigot vote whether we have Mark Kelly or Josh Shapiro or Any Beshear on the ticket.

Putting any of those white straight men on the ticket as VP isn't going to make a damn difference to the bigot vote because they don't want a black woman as president anyway.

So since we're not going to win the bigot vote ANYWAY with Kamala Harris at the top of the ticket, it doesn't matter if we put Pete on there. We aren't going after the bigot vote because we're not winning those voters NO MATTER WHAT WE DO. We need to focus on going after OUR voters, on getting them energized and engaged and right now young people on social media are going crazy for Pete Buttigieg. Young people care about LGBTQIA+ issues. This is huge for them. Putting Pete on the ticket would be HUGE for those voters.

[FlyingPiggy]

34. I get that. But I think it is just too much to ask all AT ONCE: black, woman, AND gay

[Harker]

46. I don't think it is really a matter of suddenness, so I'm inclined to discount that.

There have almost certainly been black people, women, and gay people for about as long as there have been people.

Acceptance and understanding have been woefully behind reality.

I don't think we need to ask for it so much as expect it.

[FlyingPiggy]

48. I don't disagree w what you say. But when democracy is on the line, I am not inclined to take that chance.

But I will defer to Harris’s team to make the ultimate decision, of course. If they go w Pete, I will be behind them 1,000%.

[Harker]

54. I understand you. It's not hyperbole to say that our way of life is on the line..

I'll be proud to join you in awaiting, then supporting our candidates!

[phoenix_rising]

62. Yet those same people vote for Lindsey Graham?

Go figure.

[FlyingPiggy]

63. But Lindsey is not open about it. They can hide in ignorance when they vote for him.

[phoenix_rising]

65. I guess it's honesty and authenticity that's the deal breaker?

Most rational people see those qualities as an asset.

[FlyingPiggy]

68. People voting for Lindsey don't strike me as valuing integrity and character.

They want what they want at all cost. There is no right or wrong. It’s just win. That’s hard for us to accept bc we are not wired that way. But I am learning to accept the cognitive dissonance in these cultists and I hope other democrats will too. We need to win and preserve democracy for another day. And my hope is when we remove this maga/neonazi/heritage foundation bullshit from society, we can go back to discussing ideas, policies, equality and inclusivity again.

[phoenix_rising]

70. Clearly there are also Dem politicians that are blatantly closeted, but I didn't want to call them out by name n/t

[Greybnk48]

74. Fact. We have no shortage of bigoted assholes in the USA,

and a TV network, along with a handful of low IQ, loud mouthed politicians that will whip the knuckle draggers into an anti-LGBTQ+ frenzy!

Look what they've done with pronouns, school bathrooms, wokeness, and YA inclusive novels.

[FlyingPiggy]

75. I hate that they have done this. SO so much needless division.

[Ms. Toad]

96. There is a difference between ageism,

And making an assessment of the current/near future capabilities of an individual who happens to be older. My spouse hasn't had substantive employment since her mid-50s, because that is when cognitive issue hit her. My father, at 92, is in better cognitive shape than she was then. Age is inevitable - none of us live forever. It is not ageism to recognize when, on an individual basis, cognitive diminishments start to creep in. (It should go without saying that Trump crossed that line years ago . . . but I'll say it anyway.)

And, since being gay - unlike the individual impact of aging - isn't something that impacts our job performance - we ought to reject it as a basis for disqualification for the job of president.

That doesn't mean I favor Pete for VP. He is articulate, and I'd love to see him take on Vance in a debate. But he doesn't have the legislative experience or state-wide executive experience that would be a good supplement for Harris.

[OneGrassRoot]

18. Well said. Huge K & R. n/t

[Politicub]

23. Thank you. Right back atcha.

[phoenix_rising]

27. +♾️ So beautifully said it brought me tears n/t

[Politicub]

31. ..

Thank you. That means a lot, and now I am in tears.

[phoenix_rising]

44. hugs back

I didn’t mean to get you started!
I share your hurt and have been genuinely shocked to see so much of this behavior, especially in what I thought was a progressive, safe space. It really needed to be called out. Each instance felt like a knife to the heart, and I can't thank you enough for addressing it, particularly in the way you did. Every beautiful word you wrote resonated deeply within me and touched my heart. No one could have expressed it better.

[gay texan]

35. I'll point out something else

Pete is not afraid. If his last 4 years have taught us anything, he can take the wind out of any bullshit argument the GOP mouth breathers can come up with.

It's the same excuses repackaged: marriage equality, LGBTQ in the military, and Gay rights.

The bottom line is that Pete is really fucking smart and he's Steve McQueen cool under fire.

[Politicub]

39. His way with words is something to behold.

Can you imagine his take down of Vance? He won’t even know what happened until he watches back the tape.

[gay texan]

42. Like getting insulted by Spock n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

51. ...

That seriously made me laugh out loud! I laughed even more because I could picture it in my mind and the confusion the recipient of the insult not realizing they were insulted; the best kind of insult.

[phoenix_rising]

91. You inspired me to change my avatar image n/t

Thanks for the inspo! 😆

[phoenix_rising]

47. He would eviscerate Vance!

I think a lot of us saw how he decimated JD Vance on Bill Maher! It was legendary! 🔥 I’d love for him to have the opportunity to bring it to Vance in person, especially after Vance called Pete out during his unhinged, childless cat lady diatribe. I would love to see Pete dismantle his vile, sexist, and homophobic rant, exposing his ignorance by mentioning that he and Chasten have two beautiful children. It would be epic!

[Politicub]

69. I had to look that up!

I had no idea he went on Bill Maher’s show on Friday. What a treat to see him take down Vance — and do it on such a polite way.

That’s our Pete.

[phoenix_rising]

71. Love his style! 🥰

Last edited Thu Jul 25, 2024, 04:41 PM - Edit history (1)

Edited to add that even Bill Maher, who gave Pete grief at the beginning, eventually shut up, listened, and laughed. Not a small feat! Pete won Bill Maher over so much, that Maher added, at the end, that he wished Pete was running!

And so do I!!! Pete belongs on the ticket!!!

[elocs]

37. Although it is painful Pete is smart enough to know that this is not the time to put a gay male on the ticket.

He is not naive enough to think that this is going to be a blow-out election for Harris that would allow her to do whatever she wants to do. He knows that she is looking for a running mate that will bring her some electoral votes and the gay community is just too dispersed across the nation to do that.
I think that Pete also knows that if Harris were to lose a close election with him as her running mate that his being gay would be the reason that even some of those who voted for Harris will blame for the loss and it would then be 20 years or more until any gay would even be considered as a running mate and his name would always be remembered, even wrongly, for losing an election.

But this is not just any old election and getting a female elected, one of color, is a big task by itself and if Harris wins that win would help set the table for a gay VP. If she loses, don't look for that to happen anytime soon.
Reality sucks, but it is what it is.

[Politicub]

38. You don't have knowledge of the operation of Pete's mind

It took me a while to get the idea of what implicit bias means. Once you know, you won’t be able to stop seeing it.

I hope you give it some thought. My post is more about that concept than someone’s opinion of Pete.

[brooklynite]

41. Politics ain't Beanbag...

I know Pete personally and I supported him when he ran in 2020.

That said, he doesn’t get to be the VP choice because Gays have waited long enough. He gets to be the VP choice because Kamala Harris thinks he adds something that will get them both elected.

[phoenix_rising]

43. I'm sooo jealous that you know him personally! n/t

[brooklynite]

57. He came to NYU for symposium on urban issues in 2018...

…when I was teaching there. I took him out to dinner afterwards.

[phoenix_rising]

64. WOW!!

Experience of a LIFETIME!!!! Even at two degrees of separation (chatting with someone who had dinner with him) I’m fangirling out!!!!

[Behind the Aegis]

50. Identity politics.

Thank you for what you said, it is EXACTLY why I wrote what I did in the LGBT group. I have yet to see ONE* poster indicate the REASON Pete should be chosen is BECAUSE he is gay. I have seen a number of posts that claim it would be nice, fantastic, and thrilling to have a gay man as VP, but none specifically claiming Harris should chose him because he is gay. However, I have seen MULTIPLE posts saying he should NOT be chosen BECAUSE he is gay, BECAUSE it is "too soon", BECAUSE having Black/Asian Woman at the top of the ticket and a gay man as VP would hurt our chances. THAT is identity politics at work!

Let's flesh it out, those claiming the bullshit reason that it would "hurt" the ticket, well, gee, do we honestly think Repugs are going to swarm to Harris? I don't. So, to me, it indicates there are DEMOCRATS who would support Harris, but NOT a gay man! That is fucking disgusting and bigoted!

Maybe Pete should follow the "advice" of bigot, Dave Chappelle, and put on some "Booty Shorts" and that would get people, democrats, to support his being a vice-presidential candidate.

*I have not read EVERY post in regard to Pete, but I have read more than a few hundred over the past week, so it is always possible there has been someone or a handful of people who are demanding a gay man be the VP pick.

ETA: THANK YOU for your post!!!

[Politicub]

60. Your post drives everything home!

[liberalmuse]

52. I'm an old.

And we are ready for a gay VP or President. Also, Pete’s credentials speak for themselves without bringing his sexuality into the conversation as is the case of most LGBTQ+ and the CIS/ Heterosexual population. Now is the time!

[JustAnotherGen]

53. Amen

True story - before Biden jumped into the race - Pete was one of the candidates I gave $500 too. I wanted my name in open secrets and in the cloud forever - in support of him as a candidate.

If it turns out that he's the one that gets left leaning Indies excited -we should go with him. He's very quick on his feet and shoves dumb ass reporters back verbally with insane skill.

[bluewater]

58. Thank you for your thoughtful post.

If not now then when?

That remains such a powerful civil rights message.

We are Democrats. It's our responsibility to move society forward -- now.

[BlueTsunami2018]

59. I don't think it means he shouldn't be be Vice President.

He’s certainly capable and super intelligent. He absolutely can do the job. It’s just that the country is still very homophobic and those people won’t give him the job. There are a lot of Democrats who won’t vote for him for that reason. It sucks and it’s stupid but that’s the way it is unfortunately. For now.

He’s young, he’ll have his chance.

[pwb]

61. If you are looking for Pukes to stop saying things like that

good luck. Pete is one of the 15 most powerful people running our country, He represents just fine. Most people are very proud of Pete, words have not kept him down. We like the guy no matter what.

My mom always told me , sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me.

[phoenix_rising]

66. We are ready!

I am shocked to see so many promulgating outdated notions that are simply no longer relevant. Millennials and GenZ are mobilized like never before, and they are the most LGBTQ2SIA+ friendly generations in history! The world has changed, and young people are CRAZY for Pete!

We are ready for an openly gay VP if WE say we are! We have to move and make it happen or it never will! People have said, "I don't know if America is ready for a Black woman to be President." To this, Rev Al Sharpton responds, "America wasn't ready for us to be off the plantation. It’s not about what the country is ready for, it’s about what WE are ready for!”

Pete is by far the best candidate, and we are ready! He would ignite energy and enthusiasm to new heights, mobilize the youth vote, and set the ticket on fire! 🔥

Mic drop

[SocialDemocrat61]

67. It's not about making a point

It’s about winning an election.

[LostOne4Ever]

73. Said it before and I will say it again

The people who would NOT vote for a ticket with a gay man on it are people who will NEVER VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!!!

We lose nothing with Pete! He is amazing!

I really have no preference for Buttigeig, Kelly, or Shapiro as I think they all bring great things to the ticket! But the BS excuse against Pete need to die.

[Traurigkeit]

85. First good statement on the reality of voting Democrat I've heard

[Scrivener7]

77. I think it is naive to say that, if we want our Presidential candidate, a woman

of color, to win, we can afford to disregard the fact that some people will be freaked out by the fact that she is a woman of color.

I think we are ready to elect a woman of color. I also think we are ready to elect a gay man. I don't think America is ready to elect both at the same time. A ticket with both will lose us votes. And we need all we can get.

[Politicub]

81. I do disregard the people who will "freak out" in this day and age

Going after them is a fool’s errand. Do you honestly believe there is some diversity meter we dare not exceed?

Don’t support Pete because of McKinsey or whatever. Don’t support Pete because he’s from Indiana, if you think that’s a problem.

But we should be better than saying, don’t support Pete because that’s just way too much diversity at the moment.

[Behind the Aegis]

83. "Do you honestly believe there is some diversity meter we dare not exceed?"

BAM!

THERE IT IS!

[Scrivener7]

88. Do you remember 2016? We have made progress since then.

But it was only 8 years ago that we lost thousands of Democratic votes because Hillary is a woman. At this point in our history, it is a fool who DOESN'T take those lessons into account. I want to be someone living in a country with a president who is a woman of color. I don't want to be someone who is so much "better" that I ignored the reality of America and of our own party and is consequently dealing with the fallout of Project 2025.

And I certainly don't need you to tell me what opinions will make me "better."

[kacekwl]

78. This man will be president

in the near future if he wants it. He's my 1st choice but just as President Biden had to step aside for the good of the country so he to may have to wait this time around.

[Hekate]

79. Why this? Why now? So why are we getting this pot stirring now? Why this obsession on having a gay VP candidate without

…even discussing his qualifications? If that’s not “identity politics,” what is?

Mayor Pete is an engaging fellow with an IQ off the charts. I’d love to have the beverage of his choice with him & Chasten sometime.

But what, exactly, qualifies him to be POTUS if Kamala should gods forbid die? Can you articulate that?

Oh, and one final point — Pete Buttegieg HAS been vetted for the job. He was not, as has been stated, refused a hearing. But you know what? There can be only one, so there will be a whole bunch of other people who won’t get the job. Do you want all of their supporters to carry a grievance — or do you want to win the war that the fascists are waging against every one of us?

ETA, if necessary: I am addressing not just the OP but all of the OP’s numerous responses in this thread.

[Politicub]

82. Because we see posts where people are saying that he should

not be VP *because* he is gay. Because apparently, that’s enough to disqualify him for some folks on DU.

You present some good arguments for why he may not be the best choice. But you can make those arguments by not starting with “he’s gay.” You didn’t say that but this thread is filled with people who have.

The gay community is seeing these posts where gay is some kind of pejorative. That’s what I’m on about. If we don’t speak out when we see implicit bias happening, when is the right time?

On edit: I’m sorry if it sounds like I was saying you’re doing this. I edited my post to reflect that.

[Scrivener7]

90. No one is saying he shouldn't be VP because he is gay.

I'd love to see him at the top of a ticket in the next few years. People ARE saying we have a black woman candidate and that's going to be hard for some on our fringe to accept. And, given what is at stake, we need those votes, so we should give them someone to be comfortable with. I don't agree with them, but I'm not so careless as to say we can thumb our noses at their numbers.

You have been clear that you disagree with that, and have gone so far as to suggest you are "better" because you reject that position.

But you're not better, and some - like me - simply think a different strategy will be the successful one. And it will usher in more opportunities for diversity more quickly.

[Politicub]

93. You put me in my place.

I am not better than anyone else. I have not said that.

I’ll sit down.

[phoenix_rising]

102. Never sit down, politicub!

Your voice is so vitally important!

And you absolutely never stated or implied that you were better than anyone else. SMH

[Scrivener7]

89. This. Thank you.

[pinkstarburst]

95. Because if the argument is

that Pete needs more experience, then people need to be saying "he's not my first choice because I think he needs more experience."

THAT is a reasonable argument. Just like it is a reasonable argument to say "I like Mark Kelly but I worry about putting a senate seat in jeopardy in Arizona."

What I am seeing all over DU is people saying sh*t like "we can't have a gay man on the ticket as VP" or "a gay man and a black woman on the ticket is a bridge too far."

If it is not okay for me to make a post on DU saying "Kamala Harris shouldn't be the nominee because she's a black woman and that's a bridge too far--we should switch her out for a white man right now" then it should be okay for posters to be posting homophobic messages about Buttigieg all over DU.

Why can't we post based on the qualifications of the candidates, rather than making racists and bigoted statements? Shouldn't DU be better than that?

[Scrivener7]

97. It has nothing to do with whether DU is "better" or not.

It has only to do with getting the numbers we need to avoid another trump term and the end of our democracy.

[phoenix_rising]

100. So well-said, pinkstarburst!

You’re so right. DU should be a ton better than this. It's been so profoundly disappointing and hurtful to witness so much of this in what is supposed to be a progressive, safe space. And even after all of this has been pointed out and thoroughly explained by articulate individuals like yourself, it's heartbreaking to STILL see so much pushback.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

84. How about we trust Kamala Harris

to make the decision of who she chooses for her VP, support her choice, and enjoy the new enthusiasm for the upcoming election, instead of taking HER CHOICE so personally?

[Politicub]

86. This is not about that. It has nothing to do with Kamala.

I will eagerly support her choice.

But I will not stand idly by where some posters are saying that sexual orientation should be a criteria for exclusion. Nope. Not going to happen.

[phoenix_rising]

87. Exactly right! n/t

[JI7]

92. The fact that her campaign is vetting him shows she is open to him as VP

She may not end up picking him becsuse she sees someone else as better a better choice . But the fact they are looking at him shows they are open to someone that is openly gay.

[DaBronx]

101. Thank you

Thank you for this very thoughtful post. It should be an Op Ed in a respectful newspaper.
I agree with everything you so eloquently wrote.

[phoenix_rising]

103. +♾️ Yes it should be published! n/t

[wendyb-NC]

104. Yes, thank you for saying it so well