Buttigieg Booed At CA Young Democrats Event, Crowd Chants M4A

[Marilyn MonHoe 11,011]

 

[Marilyn MonHoe 11,011]

What's funny is that Buttigieg used to support M4A last year and earlier this year:

 

 

He used to say that M4A was actually a "compromise" "middle ground" "centrist" position between nationalized medicine and fully privatized medicine, while also admitting that it's popular with the majority of Americans:

 

 

 

Maybe it has something to do with the funding he has been receiving from the healthcare industry?

 

Why has Buttigieg flipped from being a putative progressive to being perhaps the most conservative, pro-corporate Democrat remaining in the field? A good place to start would be to follow the money.

Buttigieg has become one of the biggest recipients of contributions from the health care, financial services, and big tech industries. Under the proposals advanced by Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, Buttigieg’s big money donors are the ones who would have to pay higher taxes to support things like free college tuition and universal health care. In Buttigieg, they’ve found a candidate to speak up for their interests.

Buttigieg is the second-largest recipient of contributions from the health care industry, after only Donald Trump. Buttigieg donors include the chief corporate affairs officer at Pfizer, the president of Astex Pharmaceuticals, a state lobbyist for Biogen, a vice president of public policy at Novartis, and the deputy vice president at the nation’s largest pharmaceutical trade association, PhRMA, plus lawyer for AbbVie, Johnson & Johnson, and Merck.

Meanwhile, top executives of the largest tech companies have flocked to contribute to Buttigieg. Among those holding fundraisers for Buttigieg are Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, Nest Lab’s co-founder Matt Rogers, and Uber director of product communications, Chelsea Kohler. Other rich big tech donors include Ron Conway, who has led San Francisco mayors to back tech-friendly policies; Scott Belsky, the chief product officer and executive vice president at Adobe Inc; Tony Xu, CEO of Doordash Inc.; David Marcus, the head of Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency project; and Wendy Schmidt, wife of former Google CEO Eric Schmidt.

https://ourfuture.org/20191122/is-pete-buttigieg-a-shill-for-the-donor-class

 

Among Democratic candidates, he was second to former Vice President Joe Biden in terms of pharmaceutical and health insurance donations.

A Sludge review of Buttigieg’s recent third-quarter campaign finance report shows that as he rails against Medicare for All, executives and other managers in the health sector have kept the money flowing.

https://readsludge.com/2019/10/18/as-he-attacks-medicare-for-all-mayor-pete-gets-campaign-cash-from-health-care-executives/

 

Can't wait for Buttigieg stans to LMAO react this and deflect from the issues. Something y'all are experts at

[ALGAYDO 35,047]

GOOD 

It’s exactly what his ass deserves! 

Politicians should support and reflect what the majority of the people want, not what a few pay them to support 

[Bonkers 30,860]

I don't think it's complicated that Medicare for all who want it is the path way for Medicare For All.  That's what he's been saying since February.  No matter which plan, there is a transition period that begins AFTER (if) it gets passed. 

 

[PartySick 172,385]

Just now, ALGAYDO said:

Politicians should support and reflect what the majority of the people want, not what a few pay them to support 

Disagree

Politicians should represent what they truly believe or think. It's the voters' responsibility to reject or embrace those beliefs and put the right politicians in office.

I'd rather someone whose heart and mind is in it pushes something like M4A, climate change measures, gun control, etc than someone just doing it because it's more popular.

Say Pete got in, how long until he just throws his hands up and says "welp, I tried "? Meanwhile, Sanders and Warren would throw themselves on a train track if it meant people could actually get medical care when they need it.

[Marilyn MonHoe 11,011]

3 minutes ago, Bonkers said:

I don't think it's complicated that Medicare for all who want it is the path way for Medicare For All.  That's what he's been saying since February.  No matter which plan, there is a transition period that begins AFTER (if) it gets passed. 

 

It’s not complicated to see that Pete flip flopped on M4A given the sources that I’ve shown. “M4A who want it” isn’t M4A... it’s a public option. One that would fail and make passing actual M4A infinitely more difficult

[Guest Blue Madonna]

dfjklhsb I messed this up with the thread below and saw 'Pete Buttigieg Booed At AMAs' 

[PoshLife 17,019]

The smartest thing Biden's done so far this election cycle is refusing to put himself in front of the California Democratic Party meetings. Who wants to stand there and be booed for having somewhat reasonable positions, better to spend your finite time in the early voting states.

If I was Pete's campaign manager I'd be sending him to black churches in South Carolina, not the CA Young Dems.

[PartySick 172,385]

2 minutes ago, Marilyn MonHoe said:

It’s not complicated to see that Pete flip flopped on M4A given the sources that I’ve shown. “M4A who want it” isn’t M4A... it’s a public option. One that would fail and make passing actual M4A infinitely more difficult

Besides, the ACA already put us on a path towards M4A. Jumping to an adjacent goal post would be ridiculous.

We're already in the transition period. It's time we take the next step which is something Pete obviously doesn't intend to do.

[Eighteen 5,430]

4 minutes ago, PartySick said:

Besides, the ACA already put us on a path towards M4A. Jumping to an adjacent goal post would be ridiculous.

We're already in the transition period. It's time we take the next step which is something Pete obviously doesn't intend to do.

didn't he say at the debate that he wanted a transition stepping stone to m4a? elizabeth warren is taking the same tact, she's not going straight to m4a right off. 

[Ziggy 14,009]

22 minutes ago, Marilyn MonHoe said:

What's funny is that Buttigieg used to support M4A last year and earlier this year:

 

 

He used to say that M4A was actually a "compromise" "middle ground" "centrist" position between nationalized medicine and fully privatized medicine, while also admitting that it's popular with the majority of Americans:

 

 

 

Maybe it has something to do with the funding he has been receiving from the healthcare industry?

 

Why has Buttigieg flipped from being a putative progressive to being perhaps the most conservative, pro-corporate Democrat remaining in the field? A good place to start would be to follow the money.

Buttigieg has become one of the biggest recipients of contributions from the health care, financial services, and big tech industries. Under the proposals advanced by Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, Buttigieg’s big money donors are the ones who would have to pay higher taxes to support things like free college tuition and universal health care. In Buttigieg, they’ve found a candidate to speak up for their interests.

Buttigieg is the second-largest recipient of contributions from the health care industry, after only Donald Drumpf. Buttigieg donors include the chief corporate affairs officer at Pfizer, the president of Astex Pharmaceuticals, a state lobbyist for Biogen, a vice president of public policy at Novartis, and the deputy vice president at the nation’s largest pharmaceutical trade association, PhRMA, plus lawyer for AbbVie, Johnson & Johnson, and Merck.

Meanwhile, top executives of the largest tech companies have flocked to contribute to Buttigieg. Among those holding fundraisers for Buttigieg are Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, Nest Lab’s co-founder Matt Rogers, and Uber director of product communications, Chelsea Kohler. Other rich big tech donors include Ron Conway, who has led San Francisco mayors to back tech-friendly policies; Scott Belsky, the chief product officer and executive vice president at Adobe Inc; Tony Xu, CEO of Doordash Inc.; David Marcus, the head of Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency project; and Wendy Schmidt, wife of former Google CEO Eric Schmidt.

https://ourfuture.org/20191122/is-pete-buttigieg-a-shill-for-the-donor-class

 

Among Democratic candidates, he was second to former Vice President Joe Biden in terms of pharmaceutical and health insurance donations.

A Sludge review of Buttigieg’s recent third-quarter campaign finance report shows that as he rails against Medicare for All, executives and other managers in the health sector have kept the money flowing.

https://readsludge.com/2019/10/18/as-he-attacks-medicare-for-all-mayor-pete-gets-campaign-cash-from-health-care-executives/

 

Can't wait for Buttigieg stans to LMAO react this and deflect from the issues. Something y'all are experts at

I'm curious what the ratio combo of pharma ties and a desire to more firmly position one's self in the primary field is. Like, it's clear he is now positioning as slightly more left than Biden, but when he came in he was much more left in rhetoric. Yes, I'm sure the donors played a part, but I'm also curious if some of the drift is not because he wanted to stake out a firm place in the race.

[ALGAYDO 35,047]

16 minutes ago, PartySick said:

Disagree

Politicians should represent what they truly believe or think. It's the voters' responsibility to reject or embrace those beliefs and put the right politicians in office.

I'd rather someone whose heart and mind is in it pushes something like M4A, climate change measures, gun control, etc than someone just doing it because it's more popular.

Say Pete got in, how long until he just throws his hands up and says "welp, I tried "? Meanwhile, Sanders and Warren would throw themselves on a train track if it meant people could actually get medical care when they need it.

You made some great points and I totally see what you mean, and I especially like the bolded parts   I really appreciate your POV because it made me rethink my stance for a minute, even tho I still stand by what I said 

[ltlmnstr 2,771]

Oooh yikes

[Marilyn MonHoe 11,011]

31 minutes ago, PoshLife said:

The smartest thing Biden's done so far this election cycle is refusing to put himself in front of the California Democratic Party meetings. Who wants to stand there and be booed for having somewhat reasonable positions, better to spend your finite time in the early voting states.

If I was Pete's campaign manager I'd be sending him to black churches in South Carolina, not the CA Young Dems.

Neglecting the vote of younger college students would be a huge mistake. College voter turnout doubled in 2018 and has been surging since. It’s possible that they could determine the next nominee/president, given the thin margins that got Trump into the White House in 2016.

But for Pete specifically yes, he needs to focus on the black and Latino vote. Without them there is no way that he will be able to win the nomination.

[PartySick 172,385]

6 minutes ago, Eighteen said:

didn't he say at the debate that he wanted a transition stepping stone to m4a? elizabeth warren is taking the same tact, she's not going straight to m4a right off. 

I haven't seen the last debate yet

If he did then ignore me. Going off my previous assumptions though, their immediate/short term plans might be similar but I have more faith in Warren or Sanders when it comes to the long term goal of M4A.

I'm starting to realize I've become my grandparents and put my faith in leaders as the priority

So he literally said M4A is his end goal? If so, great. He's back up to 3rd choice

Either way, I'm just chiming in, effectively sitting on a vote for whichever dem wins