I haven't found his discussions of sexuality obsessive or "harping on it." He is constantly being asked about the issue, and he answers questions. His answers get news coverage. That process ramps up peoples' impression of how much he talks about it.

quote:

Originally posted by Bernard:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel:
What problem did he articulate in your words please?

1) That identity politics can tear the party apart from within and we need to guard against that. 2) That the right is using identity politics to tear the nation apart.

We didn't hear it the same way. I heard him say there is a crisis of belongimg. Then I heard no details, no specifics, and nothing about policy to address a problem he himself defined.

quote:

Originally posted by Piano*Dad:
I haven't found his discussions of sexuality obsessive or "harping on it." He is constantly being asked about the issue, and he answers questions. His answers get news coverage. That process ramps up peoples' impression of how much he talks about it.

I'm referring to speeches, not interviews. I haven't seen him talking about it in interviews.

"Pete Buttigieg, Cute Gay Moments"

https://youtu.be/XIznSbky-Aw

I think a lot of the way he deals with the issue of being an openly gay man running for president relates to the fact he's 37.

When you're black, it is visible. Obama didn't have to say anything.

He was criticized for not talking about it more. And had he done so, he would have been accused of wearing it on his sleeve.

Obama and Buttiege can't win no matter what you do.

Holy sh1t.

Removing public honors from Thomas Jefferson?

Does anyone really think that’s our path to 270 electoral votes?


https://nypost.com/2019/05/18/...d-buildings-renamed/

He has a compelling bio and a good temperament, but it might be time to write him off.

quote:

Originally posted by jon-nyc:
Holy sh1t.

Removing public honors from Thomas Jefferson?

Does anyone really think that’s our path to 270 electoral votes?


https://nypost.com/2019/05/18/...d-buildings-renamed/

He has a compelling bio and a good temperament, but it might be time to write him off.

The source. Fox, Breitbart, NYPost, they're all running wild with what he actually said. Mayor Pete was talking specifically about "JJ" dinners.

quote:

Speaking on a nationally syndicated radio show, Mr Buttigieg was asked whether the Democrats’ Jefferson-Jackson dinners be renamed across the US because both were holders of slaves.

“Yeah, we’re doing that in Indiana. I think it’s the right thing to do,” Mr Buttigieg told The Hugh Hewitt Show, referring to his home state.

quote:

Democratic party organisers in several states, including Georgia, Connecticut and Missouri, have removed the names of Jefferson and Jackson from their annual fundraising dinners – informally known as “JJs” – in recent years.

https://www.independent.co.uk/...ocrats-a8920616.html

quote:

Originally posted by Cindysphinx:
When you're black, it is visible. Obama didn't have to say anything.

He was criticized for not talking about it more. And had he done so, he would have been accused of wearing it on his sleeve.

Obama and Buttiege can't win no matter what you do.

I think Obama did that piece of it just right. I was very excited to have a first black president and it's one of the reasons I knocked on doors for him. Had he kept pointing out that he's black, it would have made it sound like black people are his primary constituency, and that turns off everyone who isn't black. Buttigieg is starting to sound like lbqt constituents mean more to him than others, and no matter how much I support civil rights for everyone, that doesn't fly with me.

The ny post is not my idea of a reliable source. Thanks for correcting the record, bernard.

He describes himself as a millennial.

Ok with me but what happened to generations x, y, and z being in the lexicon?

I’d love to be wrong, but I’m not sure how he can support removing his name from a fundraising dinner but not buildings and streets. I’m not sure what principle distinguishes the two cases.

More context from Buttrigieg's full response:

“There’s a lot of course to admire in his thinking and his philosophy,” said Mr Buttigieg. “Then again if you plunge into his writings, especially the Notes on the State of Virginia, you know that he knew slavery was wrong – and yet he did it.”

The South Bend mayor insisted the renaming of events was not about “blotting him out of the history books or deleting him from being [one of] the founding fathers”, but was a question of which things you decided to honour.

“The real reason I think there is a lot of pressure on this is the relationship between the past and present that we’re finding in a million different ways that racism isn’t some curiosity out of the past that we’re embarrassed about but moved on from,” the Democrat added.

“It’s alive, it’s well, it’s hurting people and it’s one of the main reasons to be in politics today is to try to change or reverse the harms that went along with that. We better look for ways to live out and honour that principle.”

Yeah read that. How would that principle apply to a dinner and not to a street or building?

Maybe because the dinner is a private fund raiser and they can do whatever they want?

Mayor Pete has started listing some policy statements on his web site... https://peteforamerica.com/issues/