I did not realize that dems have tougher races than R’s do overall for the house till just now.
Twitter is losing their shit because Van Drew (NJ-2, R’s appear to be gaining in that state) and Peterson (MN7, which is clearly Trumplandistan) are either NO’s are definitely NO’s.
Peterson can get thrown a bone here, he’s been in the house since 1990 and is gonna be in a very tough race where if he loses that seat is red for probably at least the next thirty years.
Several others have tough decisions to make. Don’t envy them, but hope they do realize that it’s pretty much didn’t matter anyway.
Mr. Buttigieg spent more time in Afghanistan. While Iraq had a fairly well-educated populace, a modern road system and large oil revenues, Afghanistan was far less developed. But the mission was similar: identify small and medium-size businesses to nurture so that they could employ Afghans, providing an attractive alternative to joining the Taliban while fueling economic growth.
Citing his nondisclosure agreement, Mr. Buttigieg declined to specify in the interview what he had worked on, though he mentioned having looked at opportunities in the agricultural industry — onions, tomatoes, olive oil — as well as paint manufacturing.
Only question left is was it drugs or guns he was running for the CIA?
In various interviews, he has said working at McKinsey taught him about the power of big data, that it taught him “street smarts,” and that it convinced him to enter public service.
He has not offered the kind of details necessary to take the measure of that account.
Instead, in some more recent interviews, Mr. Buttigieg has sought to play down his McKinsey years, telling one reporter, “It’s not something that I think is essential in my story.”
But that is inconsistent with the manner in which Mr. Buttigieg has chosen to present himself to voters, as a candidate with roots in the private sector. Those three years at McKinsey represent Mr. Buttigieg’s only substantial claim on such experience.
Did you make that? Such a perfect mashup of current events/meme. Makes me think of the Yes/Yes/No segments of the Reply All podcast where two people try to explain a multi layered tweet or meme to a third person who is unfamiliar with any of the individual parts.
I’m still not sure what he said was good? Like i get his point that if neither party is going to worry about the debt it’ll keep going. But basically what he’s suggesting is that Dems should worry about it even though its clear the gop will just go ham when they are in power anyways and run it up. Meanwhile Pete will be fretting over not being able to pay for the programs we want like M4A and republicans will be laughing and asking how will you pay for it?
He just shouldn’t be saying this shit period. He admitted that the Dems already are the ones that actually reduce it, so seems like thats paying plenty enough attention as it is and even then I’m not sure we should be.
