Watching a few of his answers and the smarmy face he maintains throughout them makes me wonder why anyone in the know thinks this guy has a chance in the primary.
The DNC expects voters to just fall in line, just like they did with Harris… oh wait.
Harris is a great example because she had a lot of institutional support and big money backing in 2020 and flamed out. With alternatives available, he’s toast.
He just can’t compete on emotional appeal with people like AOC or Buttigieg (I don’t trust him, but he can speak well). And some of the other governors could point to political achievements, but his governing highlights have been stopping Democrats from creating law to help people and thinking his own rules didn’t apply to him during the pandemic.
For many reasons, unfortunately Buttigieg is a better candidate than Newsom. That’s kind of sad.
Can you point to any sources about Buttigieg? I have to admit to not paying attention to him until very recently, when he’s been a voice of reason. I don’t know his history
It’s a combination of two things, neither of which is totally disqualifying.
The first is his previous employment at McKinsey. They’re a consultant firm that frequently gets brought in by companies to basically do bad things like fire a ton of people or manipulate prices. Not kidnapping children, but it’s a weird place to work if you’re driven by higher values.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/why-buttigiegs-shadowy-consultant-past-at-mckinsey-matters/
The second is in the 2020 primary he started out with progressive messaging and then pivoted to the role of moderate because Bernie and Warren sucked all the air out of that lane. So it just kind of paints the story that he doesn’t really believe in anything. And with the moderate switch he courted a lot of money from big money fundraisers and spent a lot of time talking about what we can’t do.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/23/us/politics/buttigieg-campaign-moderate.html
I don’t get the impression he’s deeply committed to any ideology. If he saw progressivism as the best way to advance his political career, he’d be progressive, but with the influence of big money and lobbyists, I doubt it’d work out that way. On the optimistic side he’d be an Obama, that talks hope and change and then continually defaults to “practicality” as lobbyists and establishment politicians tell him not to move too fast. On the pessimistic side he’d be a Sinema, who said progressive things in their younger days but then abandoned it all for ruthless centrism.
Thanks
He has a chance if there are enough rich people backing him.
Harris had a lot of the exact same rich people backing her in 2020. Some politicians just don’t have “it” no matter how much money is behind them.
And, coincidentally, Harris never won a primary
Counterexample: Biden’s victory in South Carolina combined with most of his primary opponents dropping out and endorsing him all at once carried him to victory, aided by rich person backing. Newsom can use a similar strategy to win the 2028 nomination.
This just shows that money can boost a candidate but not make them happen if they don’t have the ability. Biden was the default, the refuge after all their other candidates weren’t demonstrating an ability to go the distance. If money alone was enough, they would have just stayed with Harris.
Newsom doesn’t have the history to be that default option. Why choose him when Buttigieg is out there, no longer just a mayor, or Beshear is telling his red state success story, or Kelly is out there as a purple state astronaut? Plenty of moderates to choose from with better stories and better personalities.
You would be right if voters have an unbiased objective view when voting. However, Newsom’s rich backers can get the press to talk up Newsom while making hit pieces on his opponents. Like, if Newsom won South Carolina by only a few percentage points, the NYT could write a piece with the headline “Newsom slams primary opponents by winning South Carolina in a landslide. Buttigieg expected to drop out”.
And don’t forget all the paid infiltrators on social media looking to tip the scales in Newsom’s favor. Reddit will be filled with articles about why Newsom is the one and only viable candidate in the Democrat primary. Facebook will get a ton of Newsom advertising. Dating apps will have bots profiles that say Newsom is the bot’s favored candidate.
And only a handful of people bother to track down primary sources themselves. They will absolutely fall for the social engineering and support Newsom in droves.
Again: If they could have done that to win the primary, they would have stuck with Harris and done it. Or if they were secret Biden stans the whole time they would have managed Iowa and New Hampshire to not be such a failure for their chosen one. They’re reacting and tweaking, and they have more effective and more efficient options.
In light of the recent news of the DNC report, which of those options is willing to call what’s happening in Gaza a genocide? Buttigieg is a great communicator, but it won’t matter if the message is Republican light.
I don’t think any of the moderates have the ability to put the threat of fascism behind us, but I think Buttigieg could definitely talk his way through the issue and maybe triangulate a position to say just enough without ruffling donors’ feathers. Or maybe he’ll just be a progressive in the next run. I think he’s a chameleon and went moderate simply because the progressive channel was full up.
Though really, I think Harris probably could have done that too. People really wanted to like her and not have to deal with that “genocide” cognitive dissonance. Her and Biden’s failure on that front really was an extraordinary level of political obstinance.
She had the wealthy backing her in 2020 because they assumed that the public was going to support a DNC token.
If by “it” you mean running to the right and supporting an incredibly unpopular genocide then sure.
If it’s a competition of getting rich people then you’re guaranteed to loose.
I think Newsom is the one who could take notes on what’s culturally normal.
It’ll never cease to amaze (read: infuriate) me how conservatives and establishment dems continuously say that trans issues are getting a “disproportionate amount of time” when we weren’t ever going to get jack shit from Biden or Harris outside of a mention here or there.
It of course goes without saying that these issues don’t detract from other ones and time can and should be spent on them all. It also of course goes without saying that Newsom can eat a dick.
- Vire (vi/vim
Well now I’m just gonna be weird EVEN HARDER.
Stop being hypercapitalist swine
Define normal pissant. I’m sure my Inland Imperial cultural norms would rub a shitstain like Newsome in all the wrong ways, least of all my absolute contempt for authority.
I can’t hear what you’re saying with all that shoe pollish in your mouth.
Divide-the-left effort going hard here.
You can tell because they have no alternative, only offering demotivation/departicipation
Not like they’re putting a gun to Gavin’s head and forcing him to repeatedly be a transphobic shithead (like, he has been this way for years in multiple interviews with multiple outlets now)
If we don’t want the left getting demotivated we should get leaders who don’t attack us all the time
I mean we get these dick heads because of how even ranked choice voting works.
It doesn’t matter if 1/3 of lefties vote for a true leftie, if we don’t beat the Dems, then our votes go Dem…unless your not putting any rank vote on a Dem. Witch (it hurts to say it) is irresponsible
Well, that approach got you Trump and Stephen Miller. How’s that going?
You mean be more like Kamala…
Ok, so if we want to win we should do the opposite thing then.
I’ll never vote for a democrat again it Newsom gets the nomination, for any office, of any power. There needs to be consequences for a party that’s supposed to be an opposition party. And before you loser “vote blue no matter who” people run your jaws: I will never vote for a republican either and never have. Stand for something for once in your miserable lives instead of proving that you would support trump/vance if their party affiliation was Democrat.
In general, most voters have no backbone to vote their conscience. They’re only willing to vote for who other people have told them is electable.
Like Eugene Debs said, “I’d rather vote for something I want and not get it than vote for something I don’t want, and get it.”
Yes, JD Vance will be better.
You’d vote for him if he was a democrat. You stand for NOTHING.
Show me where Newsom endorsed something like Unhumans.
It’s one thing not to be all that wild about Newsom’s rather middling take on trans (specifically, transwomen in women’s sports, IIRC), but it’s quite another to act like there is no difference here.
People aren’t just randomly Democrats or Republicans - each group’s “fleet” is headed toward different general destinations. Which is why “i recognize significant differences between parties and the moral alignment of each” is a reasonable thing to stand for, and which can lead your choice.
Also, like you know me, what a laugh.
Removed by mod
You gonna take a bite of that turds sandwich?
Gavin Israel First Newsom
Removed by mod
If he’s trying to say we should stop falling into the framing given to us by the unhinged right that talks way more about trans than trans probably do (Donvict just drops random phrases into his rambling monologues now: “transgender for everybody” and “men in women’s sports”), he’s not wrong about that.
I heard a far more nuanced take on this kind of thing on Pod Save America, by the way.
