"Pete Buttigieg is a Lying MF"

[PoshLife 17,019]

2 hours ago, OG Gaga Stan said:

Progressives: “Here are specific reasons why we object to Buttigieg rooted in the deficiencies in his record and his policy proposals.”

White mainstream democrats on GGD: “Pointing out his record is an unfair attack and I’m going to pretend that all of that doesn’t exist! Any ignorant comment he’s made in the past has been taken out of context, and no, I won’t listen to you when you explain how it wasn’t!”

Pointing out his record is fair. Misquoting him, intentionally, because of your personal bias is not.

I mentioned earlier the importance of amplifying POC voices. Let me clarify: that does NOT mean anyone is obligated to genuflect to you even when you're wrong.

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

2 hours ago, SKANK said:

 

 

Examples of Kamala Harris implying it is a lack of role models which holds minorities back from sucess, and not just larger systemic issues - one of those examples being virtually identical to the argument Pete was making. Perhaps The Root can do an on going series, about how all the candidates in 2020 are "lying mother ****ers."

 

Let's not get it twisted. Positive role models and representation ARE a positive influence on the outcomes of people across the board, that is not being disputed.

But a specific lack of role models on its own is not the reason for lower levels of education, outcomes, success, etc. It isn't what holds people back - systemic racism is. 

And, white people, especially white male Democrats, have a long history of saying "ah we just need more role models in the class room for black kids to look up to, it helps them see what the potential of education is" without any of them ever actually addressing that systemic racism, discrimination, etc. are the causes. Furthermore, its also kind of coded language that implies things about family values, etc. that leads to the perptetuation of a stereotype about black people not being good parents, being lazy, etc. A lack of role models is a symptom of systemic racism, discrimination, etc. in the education system. No one doubts Kamala Harris knows this because she is black and has said it explicitly many times. Pete, not so much. Yes, if you are a white person running for office and trying to appeal to black voters, you should  be able to actually understand what Racism is and how it works and not be afraid to call it for what it is -  not just peddle antiquated jargon about it.

And thus, Pete has fallen into the trap that many many white men fall into of trying to attack a symptom, instead of the root cause. Racism. If Pete wanted to update his answer, he should call it for what it is - racism. 

If the question is then " How do we solve systemic racism" then its more complicated, but it certainly at least requires a multifaceted approach. Doing things like funding HBCUs, investing in teachers to be able to teach in different cultural situations without being poor or underfunded, and breaking down racial discrimination policies in schools are a bare minimum, not the end all be all.

Also... does the semantics of an "honest lie" versus a falsehood  really bother you that much? Yes "Mother****er" is inflammatory, so what? Did Pete say something that was false? Yes. He did. The author of the article (he restates this in the follow up) believes that Pete is smart enough to know that things like "black kids just need more role models" are False, so he believes he is actively lying. Thus, "lying mother****er"

Your perspective is that its ignorance -  Pete is not intentionally spreading falsehoods. That wouldn't be much better tbh, even if it would make the title less accurate. Regardless, he thinks hes lying, so he called him out. It's a fair title from the writer's perspective.

[Eighteen 5,430]

people are so ridiculous. if you've grown up in a poor neighborhood you'd see nothing wrong with what he said. he's 100 percent right. does he capture the entirety of the issue? uh, no, how can you in a paragraph. but he definitely captures a part of it. if you're around people who graduated from college, you're probably more likely to graduate yourself. 

[SKANK 14,288]

23 minutes ago, mauvais said:

Theres a stark difference between “black people don’t have role models” and “lets strength representation and mentorship programs.” Everyone who is fine with Petes comment is basically arguing “he said the first part, logically he meant the second part.” Pete is not only characterizing the black community as uneducated, a major misconception as @OG Gaga Stan pointed out, but a community with he wrong priorities. Kamala is raising the profiles of POC mentorship programs, whereas Pete’s words suggest he doesn’t think these programs exist. The Op-Ed is great, imo, because it shows exactly how black communities value education and champion kids. 

 

There is also a stark difference between, "black people don't have role models," and what what Mayor Pete said.

 

9 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Let's not get it twisted. Positive role models and representation ARE a positive influence on the outcomes of people across the board, that is not being disputed.

But a specific lack of role models on its own is not the reason for lower levels of education, outcomes, success, etc. It isn't what holds people back - systemic racism is. 

And, white people, especially white male Democrats, have a long history of saying "ah we just need more role models in the class room for black kids to look up to, it helps them see what the potential of education is" without any of them ever actually addressing that systemic racism, discrimination, etc. are the causes. A lack of role models is a symptom of systemic racism, discrimination, etc. in the education system. No one doubts Kamala Harris knows this because she is black and has said it explicitly many times. Pete, not so much. Yes, if you are a white person running for office and trying to appeal to black voters, you should  be able to actually understand what Racism is and how it works and not be afraid to call it for what it is -  not just peddle antiquated jargon about it.

And thus, Pete has fallen into the trap that many many white men fall into of trying to attack a symptom, instead of the root cause. Racism. If Pete wanted to update his answer, he should call it for what it is - racism. 

If the question is then " How do we solve systemic racism" then its more complicated, but it certainly at least requires a multifaceted approach. Doing things like funding HBCUs, investing in teachers to be able to teach in different cultural situations without being poor or underfunded, and breaking down racial discrimination policies in schools are a bare minimum, not the end all be all.

Also... does the semantics of an "honest lie" versus a falsehood  really bother you that much? Yes "Mother****er" is inflammatory, so what? Did Pete say something that was false? Yes. He did. The author of the article (he restates this in the follow up) believes that Pete is smart enough to know that things like "black kids just need more role models" are False, so he believes he is actively lying. Thus, "lying mother****er"

Your perspective is that its ignorance -  Pete is not intentionally spreading falsehoods. That wouldn't be much better tbh, even if it would make the title less accurate. Regardless, he thinks hes lying, so he called him out. It's a fair title from the writer's perspective.

 

I don't disagree with anything you said in this post, except that the intention of what a person is trying to say is irrelevant.

The charge of lying negatively speaks to a person's character in a way that ignorance simply does not, which of course the author of this piece understands.

 

 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

25 minutes ago, SKANK said:

I don't disagree with anything you said in this post, except that the intention of what a person is trying to say is irrelevant.

The charge of lying negatively speaks to a person's character in a way that ignorance simply does not, which of course the author of this piece understands.

 

1) It's irrelevant in any way that materially matters. It matters especially when a presidential candidate says things like this, especially if they don't correct themselves.

(I'd argue he didn't really in the follow up, and I gave examples of how his recent, 2019 rhetoric hasnt evolved much from this either in an early comment,.) 

2) The author called Pete a liar because he perceives his comments as a lie.

"We have to disabuse ourselves from the notion that the problem with educational inequality is because of an esoteric lack of support,” I explained. “That’s a lie.

And a man as educated as yourself knows it’s a lie. And to regurgitate that narrative publicly is not just dangerous, it is malpractice.” (emphasis added)

  

If it hurts Pete's character, that's an appropriate side effect. We shouldn't applaud people for not being as racist as they could have been when there are literally people that just flat out aren't being racist at all... Let's say its not a malicious lie, and it is Ignorance. Ignorance about racial issues is not what black people want,  and will not persuade black people to vote for him or support him any more than flat out racism will.

Generally, black people expect ignorance from white people on issues like this, so it can temper reactions on an individual level, but it doesn't do much else.

Pete has a problem with black and brown voters in his messaging. He should learn from this and fix it if he is smart. That's it. This bad press is deserved. 

[SKANK 14,288]

7 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

1) It's irrelevant in any way that materially matters. It matters especially when a presidential candidate says things like this, especially if they don't correct themselves.

(I'd argue he didn't really in the follow up, and I gave examples of how his recent, 2019 rhetoric hasnt evolved much from this either in an early comment,.) 

2) The author called Pete a liar because he perceives his comments as a lie.

 

  

If it hurts Pete's character, that's an appropriate side effect. We shouldn't applaud people for not being as racist as they could have been when there are literally people that just flat out aren't being racist at all... Let's say its not a malicious lie, and it is Ignorance. Ignorance about racial issues is not what black people want,  and will not persuade black people to vote for him or support him any more than flat out racism will.

Generally, black people expect ignorance from white people on issues like this, so it can temper reactions on an individual level, but it doesn't do much else.

Pete has a problem with black and brown voters in his messaging. He should learn from this and fix it if he is smart. That's it. This bad press is deserved. 

 

Agree to disagree. 

[TheQueenLG 2,469]

7 minutes ago, SKANK said:

 

Agree to disagree. 

In other words, you have no remaining argument. 

[SKANK 14,288]

46 minutes ago, TheQueenLG said:

In other words, you have no remaining argument. 

 

When you disagree with someone on a fundamental level about something, in this instance the importance of intent, there probably won’t be a productive outcome in continuing the conversation. 

Not every conversation is a competition. It’s about exchanging ideas, not winning. 

I respect their opinion, acknowledge where I agree and disagree, and that’s that. 

 

Edit: Only took a moment for someone to give a sarcastic reaction to a post about having respectful disagreements. Never change GGD. 

[ltlmnstr 2,771]

2 hours ago, PoshLife said:

This is deflection on your part

And I don’t care

If you can’t find the thread on gdd then google it. You have technology. Use it.

Other than that, don’t attack me by calling me far-left. I’m not your friend and pissing me off is gonna help you either.

 

[MJHolland 12,725]

Jesus Christ, people are so ready to freak out at anything 

[Marilyn MonHoe 11,011]

1 hour ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Let's not get it twisted. Positive role models and representation ARE a positive influence on the outcomes of people across the board, that is not being disputed.

But a specific lack of role models on its own is not the reason for lower levels of education, outcomes, success, etc. It isn't what holds people back - systemic racism is. 

And, white people, especially white male Democrats, have a long history of saying "ah we just need more role models in the class room for black kids to look up to, it helps them see what the potential of education is" without any of them ever actually addressing that systemic racism, discrimination, etc. are the causes. Furthermore, its also kind of coded language that implies things about family values, etc. that leads to the perptetuation of a stereotype about black people not being good parents, being lazy, etc. A lack of role models is a symptom of systemic racism, discrimination, etc. in the education system. No one doubts Kamala Harris knows this because she is black and has said it explicitly many times. Pete, not so much. Yes, if you are a white person running for office and trying to appeal to black voters, you should  be able to actually understand what Racism is and how it works and not be afraid to call it for what it is -  not just peddle antiquated jargon about it.

And thus, Pete has fallen into the trap that many many white men fall into of trying to attack a symptom, instead of the root cause. Racism. If Pete wanted to update his answer, he should call it for what it is - racism. 

If the question is then " How do we solve systemic racism" then its more complicated, but it certainly at least requires a multifaceted approach. Doing things like funding HBCUs, investing in teachers to be able to teach in different cultural situations without being poor or underfunded, and breaking down racial discrimination policies in schools are a bare minimum, not the end all be all.

Also... does the semantics of an "honest lie" versus a falsehood  really bother you that much? Yes "Mother****er" is inflammatory, so what? Did Pete say something that was false? Yes. He did. The author of the article (he restates this in the follow up) believes that Pete is smart enough to know that things like "black kids just need more role models" are False, so he believes he is actively lying. Thus, "lying mother****er"

Your perspective is that its ignorance -  Pete is not intentionally spreading falsehoods. That wouldn't be much better tbh, even if it would make the title less accurate. Regardless, he thinks hes lying, so he called him out. It's a fair title from the writer's perspective.

 

53 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

1) It's irrelevant in any way that materially matters. It matters especially when a presidential candidate says things like this, especially if they don't correct themselves.

(I'd argue he didn't really in the follow up, and I gave examples of how his recent, 2019 rhetoric hasnt evolved much from this either in an early comment,.) 

2) The author called Pete a liar because he perceives his comments as a lie.

 

  

If it hurts Pete's character, that's an appropriate side effect. We shouldn't applaud people for not being as racist as they could have been when there are literally people that just flat out aren't being racist at all... Let's say its not a malicious lie, and it is Ignorance. Ignorance about racial issues is not what black people want,  and will not persuade black people to vote for him or support him any more than flat out racism will.

Generally, black people expect ignorance from white people on issues like this, so it can temper reactions on an individual level, but it doesn't do much else.

Pete has a problem with black and brown voters in his messaging. He should learn from this and fix it if he is smart. That's it. This bad press is deserved. 

Not only does Pete deserve to continuously be called out for his ignorance regarding the issues of black people, he should also be dogged for lying about his “endorsements” from black politicians in South Carolina.

But of course corporate media didn’t call him out in the last debate. Imagine if Sanders did the same thing... it would be all over every mainstream media channel until the end of his 2020 run.

[Whispering 18,865]

4 hours ago, PoshLife said:

This is deflection on your part, but even so I just scrolled down the entire first page of the World News forum which goes back four days and didn't see anything about this. 

Like I said before, I'm not a Pete stan. He's, like, my eighth choice in this primary. But the far-left has a habit of cutting off their nose to spite their face and when they're gonna get PARTICULARLY petty about it (see: OG Stan Gaga's refusal to acknowledge that they are inaccurately portraying what Pete said), then I see it as my duty to point that out.

I commented in that thread, brought over the information I could find. No one replied to the provided information. So, that person is wrong.

[Shaney 5,515]

6 hours ago, PoshLife said:

There's... a lot wrong with this tiny paragraph.

To start, there's no single, unified "Washington" conglomerate. Keep in mind half of Washington is Republican and most of them hate gay people. You think they're propping up a gay dude they've never heard of before? I could see arguing that Washington likes Biden (even far-right Republicans like Lindsey Graham have praised him), but Buttigieg? No.

Second, Buttigieg had the third-highest amount of speaking time at the debate, which is pretty reasonable for someone who's polling fourth place in the polls. Booker had a WAY outsized role in the debate, and Sanders wasn't given enough time vis-a-vis his polling. Source: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-fifth-democratic-debate-in-6-charts/

Third, it's not accurate to say "no political institution" is holding him back - as we know, the well-funded Justice Democrats are activated against him, and while they aren't an insider group they are definitely a thought leader for a large part of the Dem electorate. Like I said before, there is certainly a well-coordinated effort to kill Buttigieg's momentum; just because you LIKE that group doesn't mean that's not what they're doing.

In response to your first paragraph, sorry to be unclear. I was speaking about Democrats, not including Republicans, since we’re in the primary right now. For the most part, I disagree that there is no established conglomerate in Washington. Fossil fuels, big agriculture/pharma, the military industrial complex, and other lobbyist groups fund many Republican and Democrat politicians. This leads us to many of the same policies being produced by both parties, like how Obama passed a Republican healthcare plan and Hillary fueled so many wars. We see many Democrats like John Hickenlooper, Amy Klobuchar, and Joe Biden who might as well be Republicans. Also, we can see that Pete has gotten millions of dollars from the health care industry which explains his not-so-great stance on how to reform the American health care system. This similarity between the two parties is what constitutes the conglomerate.

second paragraph, you clocked me.

third paragraph, it depends on your definition of “holding back”. My definition of “holding back” is the powerful establishment Democrats and Republicans spreading smears and lies about candidates in order to control mass media. For example, Hillary Clinton, who has massive political control, and her minions coming for Tulsi Gabbard with ignorant smears in order to downplay her aggressive anti-war stances. Now Hillary is facing a potential lawsuit and has been hiding since. By my definition, the Justice Democrats are pointing out Pete’s lack of substantial policy and non-existent relationship with black voters, not really holding him back, just putting out the fact that he won’t bring the substantial changes America needs. 

[littlepotter 76,617]

yea this is stupid

[ltlmnstr 2,771]

5 hours ago, Whispering said:

I commented in that thread, brought over the information I could find. No one replied to the provided information. So, that person is wrong.

“Clean Coal” says it all.

See I used to like you on here but not anymore.