Pete Buttigieg has everything except positions on major issues

[Bradshaw3]

From the LA Times:
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-buttigieg-campaign-trump-20190417-story.html

Many things to like about Mayor Pete, not the least of which is his authenticty, which I think will be important in the general. But I happen to think detailed knowledge of the issues and ways to adress the many problems we face are much, much more important when it comes to beating rump and fixing the mess he will leave.

The fact that Pete is surging in the polls without providing any positions or specific policy proposals on major issues is troubling, to say the least, for several reasons. And saying "he'll be coming up with those later" doesn't make it less troubling.

[Renew Deal]

1. People are not looking to bored to tears by candidates in depth policy recitation

They want leaders they can trust.

[Bradshaw3]

4. So voters want candidates who entertain but don't have policies?

Candidates can have in-depth policy proposals and reach out to voters in ways they can understand. The two are not mutually exclusive. The problem is if a candidate is entertaining or insipring but doesn't have in depth understanding of national issues, or ways to fix them.

[cilla4progress]

33. As he said, it's about

"sequencing."

I feel like I know the outlines of his positions.

I like that he is starting out with themes, narrative, values. It's attention-getting and strategic.

[Politicub]

46. Yes, this.

He’s giving some time for his message to breathe before he drops his policy proposals. I feel like I have the gist of his positions, too.

I can’t wait to see the details from this thoughtful Rhodes scholar.

[elleng]

2. 'Thanks,' Doyle McManus.

'But he’s already defied the odds. He’s proven himself to be a man to watch.'

[Bradshaw3]

18. I agree, he is someone to watch

And impressive. As I wrote in the OP, there are many things to like about him.

[jezebel321]

3. he has not said "he'll be coming up with those later" nt

[Bradshaw3]

5. I was assuming he would

But maybe not. So you think he has no plans to put forth policy proposals or specific solutions to our problems?

[True Blue American]

36. The times I have listened to Pete

He seemed to have a great deal of positions and what he would like to do.

Every program that has him on keeps him for a half hour or longer. He never once had a problem answering questions.

[ChiTownDenny]

47. +1

[Blue_true]

60. I have not heard him say that either.

He is constantly painting the outline of what his policies will be, one example is addressing the impact of automation on workers, another is addressing all forms of discrimination. From outlines come the minute details of policy.

I don't see how you can seriously say that Mayor Pete has not talked policy and Bernie has, they basically are doing the same thing, laying out outlines of what their priorities will be.

[mahina]

6. I'm for Warren too but I don't think poking at others helps us.

[Bradshaw3]

8. How is it poking at others to point out facts about a campaign?

Check out his website. There are no discussions of specific issues or policy proposals. The article just amplifies that.

[SFnomad]

21. Pointing out facts and poking at people are not mutually exclusive events

And feigning not knowing the difference is disingenuous at best.

[Bradshaw3]

41. Ridiculous

We are not picking American Idol. We are choosing a candidate in the most important election save for 1860. I was not "poking" at him in any way. I like and am very impressed by him. To say that asking a legtimate question about where a candidate stands on the issues is one of the most obvious things we would want to know from them. To pretend it isn't in order to take shots is worse than disingenous.

[True Blue American]

38. You need to listen to Pete

On the many programs he has been on. I find him full of plans about what needs to be done.

I have not chosen any one person yet, so I listen with an open mind. There are too many to choose at this time.much too early.

[Bradshaw3]

42. I have listened to him, many times

Again, for the umpteenth time he is impressive in many ways. There are a lot of general talking points he makes, almost all of which I agree with. I would just like to know what specifically he would do if he became president. Doesn't seem like an unreasonable request for a presidential candidate.

[True Blue American]

44. That is not what I heard

Pete was very specific in many ways, but it is early yet. That is why I am open to all.

[elleng]

11. Thanks

[mahina]

12. 🤙🏼

[crazytown]

7. What positions would you like? How about Tax?

Interview with CNBC
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/12/2020-candidate-pete-buttigieg-on-taxing-the-rich-future-of-us-capitalism.html


* Repeal Trump Tax Cuts ‘a trillion dollars robbed from the Treasury’
* Higher marginal tax rates on the wealthy
* A Wealth Tax
* A Financial transactions tax
* More progressive Estate Duties.

If we want to do more — if we want to have better infrastructure, which we absolutely need; if we want to deal with climate change, which is no longer optional; if we want to actually deliver on health care; if we want to continue to grow as the kind of country that can actually lead the world — then you don’t get something for nothing.

[Bradshaw3]

13. Those are intelligent opinions but not proposals, or even firm stances in some cases

For example:
"I think we certainly need to consider a higher marginal tax rate for top income earners. Maybe it doesn’t have to be as high as it was historically, but we should at least admit that when it was higher, the American economy was growing pretty well. We should consider a wealth tax."
He doesn't commit to anything there. Much of the itnerview is like that. He shows an obvious understanding of a lot of tax issues but what are his positions on the many other issues we face. As on his website, the interviews give general talking points but not positions on issues. All I'm asking is, wnhere are those and shouldn't they be a consideration when considering a candidate?

[crazytown]

30. You could say then Elizabeth does not have a 'position' on health.

She sponsored Sanders Medicare for all, but is open to a Medicaid public option, and generally the most cost effective path for universal coverage.

One firm policy both Elizabeth and Pete do agree on is abolition of the Electoral College.

[radical noodle]

56. Here's something

that gives the basics on issues that are the main concern of voters:

https://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/a26985815/pete-buttigieg-presidential-election-2020-issues/

He's said repeatedly that he wants people to get to know him first before throwing out detailed policy at them. He plans to roll out issues and policies sequentially.

[left-of-center2012]

9. "major issues" ?

Must be why Warren is leading in all the polls.

[Bradshaw3]

14. Snark doesn't really answer the question

[left-of-center2012]

19. The question being ...

Why Warren is doing so poorly,
while 'Mayor Pete' is soaring to the top.

[Bradshaw3]

28. Horserace politics is what the MSM does

I would hope DUers would be better than that. And if the question can't be answered going to deflection makes it look worse.

[True Blue American]

45. Snark at any Democrat

Is not needed at this time, but I do have questions that I hope will be answered in the future.

[mr_lebowski]

10. I already know enough about the guy to be happy to vote for him vs. IQ45

I understand what you're saying, but there's plenty of time to flesh these questions out before the primaries.

Look at the last two Democrats that won POTUS, and if you're really honest you know that in the end they didn't really do so via compelling/vocal policy proposals, they mostly did so by being sharp, charismatic, likable, etc.

I know all of US wonkish types want to hear the deets as soon as possible, but it's way too early for the general public at large to care all that much, perhaps unfortunately.

Anyways, bottom-line, I don't find it troubling myself. At this point for someone in Pete's shoes it's about getting name recognition, and NOT giving anyone any particular reason to not like you/consider you viable.

The fact you can tell he's sharp as a tack, along with being a Democrat ... that's enough for me to be excited for his candidacy ... but that's just for NOW. I DO want to know more later about where he really stands on various issues and what his proposals are for things like health care, combating AGC, reducing the influence of $$$ in politics, assuring the right to vote, handling our broken immigration system, etc.

[Bradshaw3]

15. You bring up two different questions

I am not talking about selling a candidate. I agree, detailed policy papers are not going to carrry voters. But I would at least like to know that a delcared candidate has some. Perhaps you are right that they will be forthcoming but some have already at least implied here that they are not important. I disagree.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

32. Pete is sharp as a tack as you say. And I really want to like him.

Heck, I’m gay and never had marriage on my radar. A gay President would be another thing I never thought I would see.

What bothers me is his apparent technocratic approach to government.

Fining poor people out of their homes and property in order to tear down houses and “right size” the town doesn’t give me a lot of confidence.

Laying off streets and sanitation people and replacing them with automatic trucks in order to “right size” the department doesn’t give me a lot of confidence.

Referring to people at Harvard protesting meager janitor wages as “social justice warriors” and a curiosity while he is on his way to hang out with elites doesn’t give me a lot of confidence.

Being a former consultant from the infamous Mckinsey doesn’t give me a lot of confidence. Google that outfit - they are up to their eyeballs in controversy.

Now I get a city government has to run closer to a business than a national government. I just hope he doesn’t think a national government that prints its own currency has to be run like a business. If he does, he wouldn’t be the first politician, even from our side, that thinks like that.

Saying “I go where the numbers lead me” sounds technocratic and smells like austerity. And austerity right now is a very bad idea.

[shanny]

37. + a million

[True Blue American]

39. You have to balance a budget as Mayor!

That is a must.

[mr_lebowski]

50. Valid points ... I definitely want to know more about where he stands

on various important issues, but I don't need to know ... yet ... is all I'm sayin'.

[marylandblue]

57. I followed up on a few of those things, and they are incorrect or incomplete.

Last edited Thu Apr 18, 2019, 07:49 PM - Edit history (1)

He did not fine anyone out of their own homes. They were empty homes owned by an absentee landlord. A lot problems occur when such homes are left to rot beyond repair.

He switched to automated trucks like many cities are doing. Nobody was laid off, they all were offered other city jobs or retired and not replace.

couldn't find anything on street workers, do you know for sure anyone was laid off?

"I go where the numbers lead me" and sounds like it could be anything, so your just making an assumption. I suppose he could be like Trump and make the numbers up.

What did he do at McKinsey? Sounds like he was a junior staffer and didn't stay all that long. Guilt by association?

Technocrat? Yeah maybe, but he doesn't talk like one.

[artislife]

59. This is a good exchange

I am glad the questions were brought up and I am glad you did a deep dive to get context.


This is how we do it, people!

[Kurt V.]

16. i have reservations about buttigieg atm. his time at mckinsey particularly.

i need more info and hopefully it's a nothing burger.

[Bradshaw3]

22. Exactly. More info

Everything I've seen and heard about him is really impressive, as I've stated before. Perhaps he will blow us away with his specific ideas about issues. That wouldn't surprise me at all based on what Ive seen of him in interviews.

[Celerity]

52. do you have 'concerns' about Chelsea Clinton's time at McKinsey too?

What about Susan Rice, Obama's NSA and also UN Ambassador?
Peter Orsag, Obama's OMB director designate, and former CBO director?


smdh

[Kurt V.]

53. yes

[Celerity]

54. good for you, thanks for the concern

[Kurt V.]

55. It's my duty. It's everyone's duty.

[leftofcool]

17. Here we go.............

[Funtatlaguy]

20. Let's face it....most of our candidates will share policy

positions on most of the major issues.
Income equality, climate change, abortion, foreign entanglements, health care, etc.
There will be some degree of difference on emphasis and on ways to fund projects with different forms of taxation and spending cuts such as wasteful bloated outdated military equipment.

I’m sure Pete will put out his policy positions and most everyone, especially the media, will yawn and ask him how he and his husband plan to have children.

Most people only care about your policies and taxes until you give them.
After that, they barely look at them unless there is something very unusual.

[SFnomad]

24. +1 n/t

[left-of-center2012]

23. It's the same folks who failed to take down Biden

Now the target is 'Mayor Pete'.

[Bradshaw3]

26. Nope. It's a simple question

And important one. It's weird to me that some don't find it important to know what a candidate would specifically do upon taking office but maybe that's where we are at as a country.

[marylandblue]

25. He actually did say that he wants to avoid being flavor of the month, and

he said the way to do that is to roll out big themes first, then come up with policy positions after. This is a deliberate strategy, not an accident. So far it's working pretty well.

I do expect him to start producing policies before the first debate, and after Biden announces to avoid his initial policy statements being drowned out.

[Bradshaw3]

27. That makes sense

If so, it is a smart strategy for the reasons you listed. I look forward to seeing them.

[defacto7]

31. This!

That's the point I wanted to make but you did a better job than I would have.

[CharleyDog]

29. I think Elizabeth Warren is the most qualified.

Pete is smart and engaging. He's "new." He is smart, so I am sure he will have policies.

[shanny]

34. I agree. Show me the money.

Show me the specific ideas, policies.

[loyalsister]

35. That was a mistake Obama made in '08

His 2008 campaign healthcare promise was too detailed. When he wasn't able to get everything in it, people felt betrayed. A lot also had to do with the lack of understanding of the three branches and the fact that congress writes the bills.

Obama also built a campaign based on broad themes and it was what made him an inspiring candidate. Pete seems to be following that lead. I'm skeptical of rock star candidacy in general, but mobilizing voters is key and charismatic candidates have a way of generating the kind of enthusiasm that is drives voter mobilization.

[WeekiWater]

40. There is a difference between inspiring, leading, and being a policy wonk.

The whole picture needs to be looked at. It's why I ignore pieces like this.

I could honestly get behind an inspirational leader who only had very general outlines or direction on policy. That is if I was confident in how they would handle foreign policy. Inspirational leaders can do great things. We have great policy wonks in congress to get caught up in the minutia of legislation. We can handle a Presidential salesperson.

A policy wonk alone will not win. A policy wonk will need to show some inspiration and leadership qualities.

This thought that our candidates must have very in-depth policy proposals is a flawed thought process. It's why I have not ruled out Beto or Mayor Pete. Both need to let me in on their thoughts about foreign policy a lot more. Other than that, I think both can work well with congress on policy.

If just being a policy wonk was inspirational the US would be a completely different place as the great John Kerry would have been President.

[bearsfootball516]

49. This sums it up perfectly.

2008 was a great example. In terms of pure policy, Clinton ran circles around her opponents, including Obama. So how did he win? He was incredibly charismatic, gave hope to people who felt hopeless, and ran on general themes, which allowed the common person who doesn't understand policy super well, to still get fired up about him.

I have no doubt Warren can probably spin policy around every single Democrat who is running in the 2020 primary. She's an absolute wizard. But it takes a LOT more than being good in policy to win these elections, which is why she's struggling and he's picking up steam. Nine of out ten times, people will vote with someone with great charisma over someone with great policy.

[Docreed2003]

43. The only candidate that has put out detailed policy proposals

Is Warren.

Go check out the sites for the major candidates, not a lot of "details". This is the time of the primary season where these candidates are introducing themselves to large swaths of the population and I think that's why you see more of broad messaging rather than specifics.

[rzemanfl]

48. Look, we should be able to run a 35 year-old, native born trained seal for

President and beat Drumpf handily. Yet we worry about a second term for that asshat. We need a charismatic candidate who will get people out to vote. My eighteen year-old self would be dismayed that the 71 year-old me is supporting a gay candidate. The preeminent issue we face is getting rid of the compromised fuckers currently in the Senate and White House. If a building is full of rat shit the first thing to do is get rid of the rats, not sweep the turds and hope for the best.

[Celerity]

51. he talks a lot about policies in many of these videos

https://hearpetespeak.com/

[Blue_Tires]

58. Sanders has everything except a plan to court the black vote

(which is a discussion for another thread)