Mayor Pete -- Is the USA ready for it's 2nd or 3rd gay president?

[Jingthing]

When I first heard of Mayor Pete Buttigieg (Indiana Democrat) I thought. Meh. I don't care if he's gay or not, but who he is to think as a young small ciry mayor that he's qualified to be president?

So I didn't even have a look at him.

But now he's emerged as a hot trendy ticket.

At the very least the flavor or the month in this very early phase.

Will he be nominated and then move on to be elected president?

The odds ae not at all with him, but stranger things have happened, much stranger things.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/03/29/beto-who-its-week-pete-buttigieg/

Quote

Buttigieg is leaving Beto in the dust

 

So anyway, Mayor Pete is openly gay and also married. Young or not he has a very impressive resume.

He's clearly massively intelligent -- what a contrast.

 

If elected president he would be --

 

The first president elected from being a mayor

The first openly gay president

The first married to the same sex gay president

The first Maltese-American

The first millennial generation president

 

NOT the first white male president. 

 

Gay presidents in the past.

 

James Buchanan

Pennsylvania Democrat

 

Definitely gay. Not out in the modern sense as that wasn't a thing back then,

Considered by many historians to be the worst president in American history

 

Abraham Lincoln

Illinois Republican

There is strong evidence of gay love affairs at different times in his life, especially as a young frontier man.

Not as clearly gay as Buchanan.

Always considered among the greatest of American presidents.

Edited March 29, 2019 by Jingthing

[Scott]

Buttigieg is an interesting person.   I saw him on TV, I think it was the View.   He is charming, articulate and knowledgeable.   He was asked some challenging questions and was extremely diplomatic and logical in his answers.  

 

He is apparently fairly religious and answered questions regarding sexuality and religion.   I don't recall his exact answer, but it was about the Jesus he knows was one who loved people, not hated them.   He then explained a little further, but obviously was interested in moving on to more interesting topics than his sexuality.

 

The only question he waltzed around was about did he believe in paying reparations to descendants of slaves.   He referenced a committee that is looking into the issue.  

 

I was impressed with his likeability, his quick wit, and his general grasp of issues.   I was also impressed with his handling of his sexuality in such a casual manner and seeing it as unimportant to the issues facing the country.

 

Oh, and I am a Beto Boy, by the way -- no good reason, just like Beto's energy and charisma, so more emotional than rational.   I suspect if I had to decide between the two, I'd have some sort of a psychotic breakdown.

[Puchaiyank]

Here we go again!  Presidents are not elected on their sexual preferences...thank you Buddha...????

[steven2018]

If a TV Reality persona can make it to the White House, what is the issue with a homosexual.

[Ahab]

I am libertarian but normally vote Republican. I have no issue with a candidates sexuality (except for pedophilia or bestiality), and how he/she stands on issues is what matters to me. In this guys case though, anyone who cannot point out how divisive and unworkable the proposal for reparations for slavery would be does not deserve to be anything more than a mayor, ever. Many blacks in America emigrated from Africa or other countries after slavery was ended and were never slaves, or the offspring of slaves, do they get reparations because of the color of their skin? Both of my grandparents emigrated to the USA long after slavery was ended in the USA, would I still have to pay reparations?

 

It is a stupid idea, in the long history of the world many races and groups of people have been victims of some sort of slavery, do we give reparations to all of them also? The correct answer is no. 

[ThaiBunny]

"It is 3rd or 4th gay president" simply doesn't make sense.  It's "its" not "it's"

[Oxx]

Trevor Noah did a segment on him.  Said that his researchers could not find any dirt on him, which is unusual for a politician.

 

https://player.vimeo.com/external/327029148.sd.mp4?s=9c2c0199bfe33301a7aa533d9737b55f3a8e1208

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, ThaiBunny said:

"It is 3rd or 4th gay president" simply doesn't make sense.  It's "its" not "it's"

True dat, sire. 'Twas a mere brain furt.

[ThaiBunny]

Just now, Jingthing said:

True dat, sire. 'Twas a mere brain furt.

He's a Southerner?

[Jingthing]

2 hours ago, steven2018 said:

If a TV Reality persona can make it to the White House, what is the issue with a homosexual.

He's not really running as a gay candidate. He is gay. He's open about it. He is definitely not stressing that. Of course, people will notice. There are bigots that would never vote for a gay presidential candidate but they are mostly from the other party. Any identity thing like that will have pros and cons electorally. 

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

He's a Southerner?

If you're from Michigan. 

[Jingthing]

3 hours ago, Puchaiyank said:

Here we go again!  Presidents are not elected on their sexual preferences...thank you Buddha...????

Of course not. But at this point, he has already made history. He is the first openly gay presidential candidate to be eligible for the debate stage of a major party. He's not stressing the gay part. His bigger issue as far as his identity is going to be his extreme youth as far as potential presidents go. 

[Jingthing]

2 hours ago, Ahab said:

I am libertarian but normally vote Republican. I have no issue with a candidates sexuality (except for pedophilia or bestiality), and how he/she stands on issues is what matters to me. In this guys case though, anyone who cannot point out how divisive and unworkable the proposal for reparations for slavery would be does not deserve to be anything more than a mayor, ever. Many blacks in America emigrated from Africa or other countries after slavery was ended and were never slaves, or the offspring of slaves, do they get reparations because of the color of their skin? Both of my grandparents emigrated to the USA long after slavery was ended in the USA, would I still have to pay reparations?

 

It is a stupid idea, in the long history of the world many races and groups of people have been victims of some sort of slavery, do we give reparations to all of them also? The correct answer is no. 

Well, it's certainly fine for you to oppose him on policy issues. It's very early to pin candidates down on such issues. He's running now in the democratic party primary where of course the voting base is much more left than for a general election. I don't think there is any candidate that is suggesting all Americans with African background would ever be eligible for literal reparations payments. I also think that the majority of the democratic party base is well aware that African Americans as a generality have paid a price, an economic prices and other prices as well, for decades of institutionalized racism.

 

To add, I wouldn't suggest that gay Americans support him just because he is gay any more than women should support a candidate just because she's a woman.

 

It's early in the race. 

 

Cheers.

Edited March 30, 2019 by Jingthing

[Puchaiyank]

Defense of US borders...defense of the US as a country are important issues for most people with a modicum of commonsense.  I doubt this candidate can present himself as strong on these issues...or has any international experience to shape his worldview...

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, Puchaiyank said:

Defense of US borders...defense of the US as a country are important issues for most people with a modicum of commonsense.  I doubt this candidate can present himself as strong on these issues...or has any international experience to shape his worldview...

No, he isn't a seasoned foreign policy expert. Or really seasoned much in anything. He's young. But Americans will be impressed by his willingness to volunteer for military service in Afghanistan even if they oppose the policy there.

[Jingthing]

A rising star?

This was before Beto entered and Mayor Pete has ALREADY qualified for the debate stage. 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2019 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

So anyway, his name is pronounced Boot-edge-edge.

Hey we could do much worse (and already are) …

 

 

[Jingthing]

Now here's an interesting fantasy. Suppose Mayor Pete isn't nominated as he's not likely to be. But then suppose he's picked for the Vice President spot. So then the gay Indiana mayor gets to debate the notoriously anti-gay Indiana Vice President Pence. Now that would be must see t.v.!

[Jingthing]

Mayor Pete has now officially announced. He's third in Iowa behind Biden and Sanders. Now some are asking is he gay enough to actually represent a historical breakthrough? You know, because he doesn't fit many people's stereotype. Oy vey. I guess this was predictable but its still depressing. 

 

Quote

 

Of course Pete Buttigieg is ‘gay enough’ to make history

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/01/course-pete-buttigieg-is-gay-enough-make-history/

[steven2018]

Saw Mayor Pete on Stephen Colbert show - he mentioned Pence, and Pence's myopic thinking. Also that Pence was Governor of his state during his time as Mayor. He is young - 37, not flamboyant - yet thoughtfully well spoken and composed.

[onthemoon]

What I like about him is the he does not make his being gay a reason to vote for him. He just happens to be gay, and other people just happen to have red hair. No issue.

 

According to this article (https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/nearly-70-percent-americans-ok-gay-presidential-candidate-poll-finds-n990211), 70% of US voters now wouldn't object to a gay president. That is a big cultural change from only ten years ago, the article says. 

 

Good for you, America! Vote for or against a candidate based on his policies and knowledge, not based on his sexual orientation.

[ozmeldo]

On 3/30/2019 at 7:10 AM, Jingthing said:

He's not really running as a gay candidate. He is gay. He's open about it. He is definitely not stressing that. Of course, people will notice. There are bigots that would never vote for a gay presidential candidate but they are mostly from the other party. Any identity thing like that will have pros and cons electorally. 

Recinding this opinion as it was actually posted to homosexual forum.

 

Edited April 2, 2019 by ozmeldo

[Jingthing]

5 hours ago, ozmeldo said:

Recinding this opinion as it was actually posted to homosexual forum.

 

No idea what you're trying to say but people that say homosexual instead of gay are usually telegraphing an anti-gay bias.

 

Cheers

[steven2018]

I am 'gay' but don't prefer the term gay since it was in use nearly 100-years ago attached to a different situational meaning. I do prefer homosexual -- sans the anti-gay bias. Just as there is the term heterosexual used without any bias.

 

However I understand how each person will vary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jingthing]

11 minutes ago, steven2018 said:

I am 'gay' but don't prefer the term gay since it was in use nearly 100-years ago attached to a different situational meaning. I do prefer homosexual -- sans the anti-gay bias. Just as there is the term heterosexual used without any bias.

 

However I understand how each person will vary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's fine but if you're being honest, you also realize that many anti-gay people that aren't gay often use homosexual instead to express their hostility. 

No need to hijack this topic about that though.

Back to Mayor Pete please.

[ozmeldo]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

That's fine but if you're being honest, you also realize that many anti-gay people that aren't gay often use homosexual instead to express their hostility. 

No need to hijack this topic about that though.

Back to Mayor Pete please.

This thread came up at the bottom of the page. Id commented on it and then noticed it was in the HAPPY forum which I respect as being a place where you people can go have a chat amongst yourselves. So I deleted my comment.

 

The correct term in proper English is homosexual denoting relations between those of the same gender.

 

Gay is code, a euphemism. Purely slang.

 

I deleted my comment directed at you JT actually. Because it's getting tiresome seeing your personal agenda being pressed everywhere on this forum. Everyone that doesn't agree with your opinion gets the report button. Identity politics amok.

[Jingthing]

18 minutes ago, ozmeldo said:

This thread came up at the bottom of the page. Id commented on it and then noticed it was in the HAPPY forum which I respect as being a place where you people can go have a chat amongst yourselves. So I deleted my comment.

 

The correct term in proper English is homosexual denoting relations between those of the same gender.

 

Gay is code, a euphemism. Purely slang.

 

I deleted my comment directed at you JT actually. Because it's getting tiresome seeing your personal agenda being pressed everywhere on this forum. Everyone that doesn't agree with your opinion gets the report button. Identity politics amok.

Replies --

 

This subforum is not restricted. However, posts that are explicitly disrespectful to LGBT people are not welcome here.

 

Gay is way beyond slang. 

 

To wit --

 

Quote

 

Usage

Gay meaning ‘homosexual’ became established in the 1960s as the term preferred by homosexual men to describe themselves. It is now the standard accepted term throughout the English-speaking world. As a result, the centuries-old other senses of gay meaning either ‘carefree’ or ‘bright and showy’ have more or less dropped out of natural use.

 

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/gay

 

If you don't like reading my posts, you are welcome to ignore them.

It is totally false information and indeed a disgusting FLAME to suggest disagreeing with my opinions means posts are reported.

If you expect your POV to have any credibility at all or to deserve any respect at all, I suggest you stop posting such absurd, clearly false personal attack lies about other members, myself or otherwise.

 

 

 

Edited April 3, 2019 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

As far as Mayor Pete, I am not yet committed to any democratic party hopeful. I had initially supported Amy Klobuchar but I've put her on hold not really about her little staff scandals, but the feeling that maybe she is too moderate. But i'm still open to her and a number of other possibilities. Including Mayor Pete.

 

I would never support a candidate only based on identity. There are many bigots though that will reject candidates based on identity alone -- race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. That is quite unfortunate.

 

Like many millions of Americans I started noticing Mayor Pete based on both his resume and his performance in town halls and interviews. He's clearly brilliant. I'm not fully clear on his policy positions yet but his calm temperament is very appealing in contrast to the current presidential drama queen. 

 

So Mayor Pete is on my radar now, among a number of others. If he does succeed, yes of course it would be historic for a openly gay married man to become a U.S. president. That's just a fact.

[VocalNeal]

On 3/30/2019 at 1:13 AM, Jingthing said:

The first Maltese-American

 

A Joke from my long gone grandfather.

 

How do you make a Maltese Cross.

 

 

[Thainesss]

On 3/31/2019 at 3:27 PM, Jingthing said:

the notoriously anti-gay Indiana Vice President Pence

 

LOL Mike Pence isnt "notoriously" anti-gay. Why do you say that?