What? lol
England had issues from Thatcher, and the Soros thing at the very worst made the financial sector people, and not average citizen, shit their pants.
I donāt know, i would have expected Biden to have more, tbh.
As for tax policy, itās weird, since Pete has repeatedly said he was in favor of some kind of wealth tax, as well as rolling back Trumpās idiotic tax changes. This is a good, meaty interview on the subject (and others)
Pete Buttigieg: I think we certainly need to consider a higher marginal tax rate for top income earners. Maybe it doesnāt 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. I think it makes sense. I think one of the things thatās appealing about it is itās not very distortionary compared to an income tax, and thatās important.
The least distortionary tax probably is the estate tax, because youāre dead. We should think about turning to a more equitable use of the estate tax, especially for the biggest and wealthiest estates. Iām interested also ā if we could find the right way to implement it and the devilās in the details ā in a financial transactions tax. Because you see preposterous levels of wealth sometimes being created around these millisecond differences in financial transactions that nobody can explain to us whether it adds any actual real value to the economy.
I mean, I would have expected the top 3 to be Biden, Harris, Booker and theyāre three of the top 5. Biden is lower than I would have thought, too, but heās right up there and itās still early in the cycle. Itās possible more was going to Harris and Booker to keep their candidacies afloat early on when they were struggling.
See this is my problem with Pete. Heās allergic to detail and seems to think policy doesnāt matter. Iāve heard him voice vague support for basically every policy that has gotten any traction at all in the primary. This is an accurate read on the state of politics in 2000-2016, but I sincerely hope that vague style dies with Trump (who took promising vague stuff to the point where itās basically satire).
My issue with Pete is that heās raising money in a conventional way, and is just the updated version of a standard establishment Democrat. Heās gay, and I guess thatās different, but itās 2019 and that just isnāt a very big deal. I just donāt think a politicians sexual orientation is important in any way.
How is Pete different than Biden/other misc white dudes on the debate stage or Harris? I donāt think he really is besides his ageā¦ and I sincerely dislike the establishment of both parties.
How do you watch Warren, and then Pete and pick Pete? Thatās my biggest question I guess.
3 Likes
We should consider is a huge tell
3 Likes
Yeah I donāt find that to be a compelling answer. His point seems to be that he felt a responsibility to serve because of his privilege. On its face, I donāt believe him. He is a Rhodes scholar who had political ambitions, and is a gay man. Joining the military is a very smart move to bolster any political ambitions.
With that said, if you give him the benefit of the doubt that he is being truthful, I still canāt support it. It was what, like 2009? What goals did he think he was serving by joining the military? What did he feel it was his responsibility to do?
Like, I understand that people have various motivations to serve, and some of them may not make a ton of sense or might not be fully fleshed out, and others might be borne out of circumstance. But weāre all on the same page that the military has done basically zero good things in the last 20 years right? And that we want the president to aggressively cut defense funding? Itās not that itās IMPOSSIBLE to have an ex- military president who will have good foreign policy and downsize the military, but itās clearly a negative in my opinion.
Youāre right, I skimmed the wiki too fast and misread a stat as an amount of money lost. Still evil for tres commas.
I donātā¦ My current top three in order are Warren, Buttigieg, Sanders.
But I think the criticism that he doesnāt have detailed policy is unfair, and I think he brings something unique to the primary. His branding of the party as fighting for freedom and liberty, being the party of family values and Christian values, and being patriotic, is sorely needed. His passion for and commitment to democracy reform is critical, as well.
1 Like
Yeah if weāre judging people by their actions instead of their words (which I think we should) Pete doing stints at McKinsey and the military doesnāt make him a better candidate. Trusting a McKinsey trained consultant to take on corporate power in Washington seems dumb. Trusting a military officer to downsize the military also seems dumb. Since those are two of the top 4-5 things that need to get done in the next presidential termā¦ Yeah no.
Iām against Biden and Harris for similar reasons. I canāt really trust people who thrived in those environments.
Agree about Warren being clear #1 option. Really dislike your next two unfortunately.
I donāt really think this is a fair assessment. I think you should look to see how many candidates a particular billionaire is donating to vs. how many billionaires donate to a candidate. Iād be surprised if their thinking is āthis guyās going to cut my taxes, Iām voting for himā. If thatās their thinking, theyāre going to vote Trump (the only two legit reasons to vote for Trump are if youāre rich and/or a racist). I think theyāre more likely getting behind the candidate they feel is most in line with their views AND is most likely to win.
If a billionaire is donating to Biden, Sanders, Warren, and Pete, Iād be very suspect about their motives. If a billionaire donates to Pete, Harris, and Warren, or just one or two of them Iām less suspect of that. Warren is the defacto establishment pick, but theyād prefer one of the other āestablishmentā (Harris, Pete, Booker) picks first. The establishment really does not want Biden, thatās very clear by how they propped Booker after the last debate (completely ignoring Castro who crushed that debate).
Weāre getting very close to a guillotine moment in this country (Fargo season 3 a couple years back had a great take on that fyi), and I think itās in the best interest of the billionaires to find a person who will be a calming influence to avoid that. Peteās for sure that guy, and I think you should at least have the āguillotineā as a factor in why billionaires may be supporting him. Almost everyone else will be going after the billionaires. Some billionaires (maybe Yang) are probably fine with that, but most probably arenāt.
1 Like
did you watch the video i linked earlier? He joined because when he was in Iowa campaigning for Obama, he saw all these lower income kids who were about to ship off and he thought it was a huge class inequality. How it used to be the upper class/educated class would join, and now, none of them did.
Believe it or not, there ARE people in the world who do good things just to do good things. Who want to dedicate their lives to service. Like, leaving a 6-figure job at a consulting firm to go home and try to make your hometown better by running for mayor and spending all your savings on it.
How do you like Warren and dislike Sanders?
1 Like
Because heās the only one talking about the things I think are most important, in the manner that I think is the most effective manner.
As a former military officer, I can tell you that there is no better person to understand how and why and where the military needs cutting. When you see inefficiency and bad management every day at work, you come up with tons of ideas on how to fix it.
I see that my being a veteran is a negative on this board, so before I get flat out called a babykiller, iāll just stop talking about that bit of my life.
To those who are very skeptical of Peteās resume, keep in mind that choosing to run back home in Indiana was putting a pretty big cap on his career as a Democratic politician, leaving him with nothing viable in between mayor and president. He could have pretty easily stayed near DC or NYC where he had worked, and run for office in either Virginia, Maryland, New York, New Jersey or Connecticut after a couple years taking up residence in whichever city/district he wanted.
1 Like
Sanders is an inflexible old man who has never that I can tell ever changed his mind. Being fact resistant is disqualifying in any decision making role much less one as impactful as POTUS. Heās also got no practical plan for how to get anything done, which explains why heās been ārightā (I would argue heās been wrong a lot too, but since none of his ideas ever get done we donāt have to talk about when he was disastrously wrong because he didnāt manage to do any damage) about a lot of stuff over the years and yet not managed to move the needle. Heās a gadfly who would be a trash president.
Warren on the other hand has changed her mind plenty and seems to be very good at getting stuff done. Policy is only one part of what makes a good POTUS. I dislike Pete because I think heās going to protect the status quo a bit too much and I dislike Sanders because heās bad at getting stuff done.
This next presidential term is going to be very very impactful with crazily high stakes. We need someone who knows what needs to be done AND can get it done. Neither is optional.
I have zero issues with Bernie in his current role as a Senator and general voice crying out in the wilderness. He should keep doing that.
nah, they donāt care. Pete has some evil hidden agenda, donāt you know? No one can actually be a good person with good motives anymore. /s
Thereās nothing wrong with being a veteran, and it should be considered a positive as a default although obviously some people enlist for the wrong reasons. This forum does a pretty good job avoiding turning everything into hero/military worship that we see a lot in the mainstream media, but usually goes too far the other way. Itās possible to be appropriately respectful of the risk and sacrifice and grateful for it, without going to the extent of being unable to criticize our country for getting into far too many military conflicts or worshiping the military as infallible.
I wish this community did a better job of finding that balance.
Thanks for your service, skydiver!
2 Likes
That didnāt really answer the question.
What specific policies/attributes/etc make you want to pick Pete over Warren?
1 Like