Only in America: Mayor Pete got 8,515 votes in his last election

Give me a break wrote:

(1) Start a partisan thread that YOU KNOW will rile people on both sides. Which it does.

I don't see how this is a partisan thread.

It's a discussion about one politician and the original post din't try to pit him against anyone else on either side.

He simply was stating how a person from a low level could get so far, so fast.

He could get from getting over 8,000 voted to getting over 60 million votes.

It's like a Division III 800 m runner going on to win a Silver medal in the World Championships

Hey wejo. Imagine if one of your mods deleted this thread just because it was "political" and includes posts that refer to Donald Trump outside of the "official" Donald Trump thread? Wouldn't that be really annoying?

L L wrote:

Give me a break wrote:

(1) Start a partisan thread that YOU KNOW will rile people on both sides. Which it does.

I don't see how this is a partisan thread.

It's a discussion about one politician and the original post din't try to pit him against anyone else on either side.

He simply was stating how a person from a low level could get so far, so fast.

He could get from getting over 8,000 voted to getting over 60 million votes.

It's like a Division III 800 m runner going on to win a Silver medal in the World Championships

There's no reason for Wejo to start a thread like this other than for him to feel good that there were a bunch of responses and thus to stroke this own ego

Ego Stroker 3000 wrote:

There's no reason for Wejo to start a thread like this other than for him to feel good that there were a bunch of responses and thus to stroke this own ego

That sounds more like a rojo move.

But if you don't like someone starting a thread just to get responses, then you really shouldn't respond.

doctorj wrote:

wejo wrote:

I'll never forget being in Kenya and talking with some runners about politics and saying "it seems that people vote on tribal allegiances here."

So you don't think that voting on a 2 party system like the one we got here isn't "tribal"? Either you are in the GOP tribe or in the DEM tribe, can't get anymore tribal than that.

May I ask ...Do you live in some sort of a bubble?

Very tribal but different type of tribe.

The discussion in Kenya was on a bunch of points, one also being on whether it would be a fair election in Kenya. And he asked if the system was fair here and noted the presidency was about to switch back to the Clinton "tribe" if you will . He thought America was too racist to elect President Obama. I told him he was wrong.

It's crazy the presidency here almost traded back and forth between 2 families for 28 years despite being an open system.

This is a RUNNING message board wrote:

Hey wejo. Imagine if one of your mods deleted this thread just because it was "political" and includes posts that refer to Donald Trump outside of the "official" Donald Trump thread? Wouldn't that be really annoying?

I've had my own threads deleted on here. Yes it's annoying but we can't leave up every non political thread. We easily could have 20 Trump threads a day.

Was your story a joke btw? When was the last time a party other than the Democrats or Republicans get voted in? The US (and the UK to an extent) has a two party system. It’s not freedom of choice really at all! I’d bet you have more voting options in Kenya.

I like this thread, but it 100% would have been delete if it wasn't created by wejo.

Ya...like he said , " I will send American troops to Mexico to fight the drug cartels ". I can't wait .

Of all the candidates , I think only Yang and Gabbard wouldn't be trigger happy and get us all blown up.

What do you think , any others ?

wejo wrote:

He thought America was too racist to elect President Obama. I told him he was wrong.

The US elections are always about the same two tribes, the working class, and the rich greedy a--holes.

wejo wrote:

we can't leave up every non political thread. We easily could have 20 Trump threads a day.

Trump threads are non political?

noow wrote:

I like this thread, but it 100% would have been delete if it wasn't created by wejo.

This!

The smooth talker assessment is pretty spot on. (He’s a smooth talker. He speaks the kind of fluent Ivy League-technocrat-consultancy lingo that makes a certain kind of highly educated white liberal’s heart melt, especially when combined with an appealing sense of reasonableness and youthful, forward-thinking optimism.)

Apart from that, he suffers from a poor track record and a distinct lack of real world experience. Not much more than a more sanguine version of Beto, really

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pete-buttigieg-failure/

Keep in mind that Trump got exactly zero votes in all of his pre-presidential political races. That said, your point is well taken. I always like an underdog.

Two tribes wrote:

wejo wrote:

He thought America was too racist to elect President Obama. I told him he was wrong.

The US elections are always about the same two tribes, the working class, and the rich greedy a--holes.

It really hasn't been that way for decades. The Democrats abandoned labor during the Reagan administration when they let Reagan fire the air traffic controllers. Reagan was even able to win over the Teamsters union in 1984 because the Democrats had gone so completely soft on their support for labor.

The two tribes that emerged were a strange alliance between rural communities, Evangelical Christains and the business entrepreneurial class on one side and the professional managerial class, big corporate/finance and socially liberal urban dwellers on the other side. Basically, the two party system went from being largely defined by geographic regions (Dems, South and North East, Republicans Midwest and West) with a fair amount of room for ideological overlap and compromise to a purely ideological two party system where conservative and liberal are identities that transcend political parties and define people socially.

Mayor Pete is getting lots of attention because he fits a fantasy that you can still find common ground between right and left in the US if you just find the right kind of leader. In many ways he is comparable to Jimmy Carter. Carter was seen as an antidote to the division of the late 60s and early 70s. He was sufficiently liberal on social issues while also being a devote Christian and willing to look at deregulation. But a Carter figure would never get elected today because we have all declared which tribe we belong to and elections are really just about which tribe gets their folks to vote and wins new members. There is no longer a significant pool of voters who look past party affiliation when voting. Trump figured that out and used that strategy to squeak out an electoral college win.

The only Dem I would never vote for is Bernie.

Cannot stand him or his supporters.

Nope......... wrote:

Unemployment's at record lows. DOW's record highs. Household incomes are record highs. Trump's doing so well, that Obama keeps trying to piggyback off his accomplishments.

You're on the side that says a man is intantly a woman whenever he wants.

It's true that a strong economy makes the incumbent nearly bulletproof.

Only Trump could manage to screw something like that up.

Any other president in this position would be 90/10 to get re-elected right now, trump is under 50%.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

If Pete gets the dem nod, I’ll vote for him. If he doesn’t, I’ll probably go third party or not vote at all.

Me too.

We need more than 2 parties. Might as well start voting for them now