138
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
138 points (93.7% liked)
politics
19144 readers
2861 users here now
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 politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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 a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Brit here, coming in peace: why was Pete Butt-something not closer in the fight for the running mate slot?
He seems to be fairly sensible, youthful, a bit of charisma about him, and seems like he would represent the country well to outsiders.
Just guessing but:
#1. It's optics and bullshit but it's true.
Thanks for taking the time to get back to me, it's appreciated from across the pond.
As for point 1, I thought that would be a strength. I don't think anyone from backwardsville would vote Democrat anyway so his sexuality wouldn't be an issue, but I'd have thought a different viewpoint would have been appreciated little more amongst the blue electorate.
As for the second and third points, I guess that's a valid concern. I'm hoping that the pivot away from ancient politicians taking top roles will make more of an impact and allow those with a shorter track record to shine - very much like the Trudeaus, Attals, or Marins elsewhere in the world.
Thanks all the same!
As someone else from the US I think your analysis on point 1 is correct. Anyone so dedicated to bigotry to be turned off by a really charismatic and vanilla gay man was already voting for Trump. Democrats way too often jump at shadows of secret bigots in their mind and end up enforcing bigotry in the process. Even right now the idea that the VP must be a white man is ridiculous.
I'm not saying all the various forms of bigotry are solved, but if you're voting based on minority traits of a VP, you already knew who your candidate was with or without them.
Excellent question. I think the answer is that the people who choose such things are thinking more about election strategy than job performance. And while I think this is not an issue with anybody who would vote for Harris in the first place, the people making the choice might think that Buttigieg's sexuality hurts election chances? Or maybe because he has young kids at home that he might want to be there for? Idk, I thought he didn't have enough experience when he ran for president, but Biden fucking nailed it by making him Secretary of Transportation. He's killing it and developing much-needed political capital and federal experience to the point that I think he's ready now. He'll have his turn very soon, I'm pretty sure. Potential presidential nominee in 32.
Brilliant answer, thank you for your time and effort. We seem to be in the same page - he seems to be a young and idealistic politician where he hasn't really put a foot wrong yet.
Looking at the alternatives with an outsider's perspective, there just doesn't seem to be anybody on Pete's level but I guess that's a very subjective opinion.
Thanks all the same!