In 2007, people were saying Barrack Obama wasn't Black enough: https://archives.cjr.org/politics/is_obama_black_enough.php
18
It's apalling that the Democrats who finally have a chance to win an election against a patently unfit president are flat out making a mess of things. The media goes along focusing on candidate flaws and ignoring strengths. Too old, too young, not black enough, not gay enough. We will lose in 2020 if this idiotic nitpicking doesn't stop now.
70
The difference between how Democrats and Republicans vet their candidates is astonishing. GW Bush dodged military service, was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, had a very poor grasp of most issues, and had the articulateness of a middle schooler. Yet he won. Donald Trump, my God, Donald Trump, philanderer, liar, committer of sexual assault, dim-witted, uneducated, braggart, serial bankruptcies, racist. And meanwhile Democrats are busy parsing what kind of gay Buttigieg is and what kind of black Kamala Harris is.
47
No question he has that Macron look and appeal about him.
One thing is familiar about his appeal for certain: South Bend mayor and Chicago community organizer have a lot in common--no history.
6
AMEN, Frank!
17
AMEN!
3
Truth!
2
He's gay. Yay. Move on to issues.
16
Does anyone take anything in Slate seriously?
It seems to be written by snarky adolescents. If Democrats are actually looking for some sort of guidance in Slate then we are really in trouble.
29
Well he has no problem eating his own. He has repeatedly trashed the Clinton campaign casting shade on Hillary Clinton, a venerable public servant. No thanks.
6
This is a long overdue piece. I especially agree with this sentence: "And we need to stop making assumptions about how well someone can understand and address what minorities go through based on his or her looks or vocal inflections or anything of the sort. That’s the quintessence of prejudice."
Clarence Thomas is unquestionably African-American. What has he done for blacks or minorities in general - he's undone decades of voting rights progress. FDR was as white and privileged as they come - just look at his Hyde Park estate in upstate N.Y. But FDR has done more for the working class than any other president, period full stop.
Words and vocabulary do matter, but not nearly as much as actions and deeds. If Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was resurrected today, some Democrats would disqualify him for using the word "Negro."
This "right-thinking" and "right-speaking" approach to vetting candidates on the left is sounding more and more like the Cultural Revolution in China and Orwell's 1984. It has got to stop. Republicans, independents and mainstream Democrats are rightly repulsed by the rhetoric. It will undoubtedly impact turnout enough to keep the so-called Blue Wall Red in 2020.
41
For the left, it’s a bit too late to be sorry: this is the wonderful world of “intersectionality”. Different groups are validated as Victims whose value depends on the amount of suffering. Women get points, men get none. White is useless, pigment in the skin is valuable. It’s confusing sometimes; Ocasio-Cortez is considered to be “of color”, but not black - so exactly how much skin pigment do you need to get the points ? Hispanics get points, but if they’re indistinguishable from ordinary plain, unworthy white folks they might not get full credit. Gays get points, but not being flamboyant reduces the take - as discussed in the article. Being half black is good, but if looking too white questions might arise. In this case, marrying a black spouse fixes the problem (see Barack Obama). Marrying a white person is a big problem (see Kamala Harris).
Unsurprisingly, classic liberals, usually over 50, like Mr. Bruni, are starting to feel uncomfortable with this. It starts reminding them of the world of discrimination they thought they left behind many decades ago.
38
"Not gay enough?" Really? This "I'm gay and you're not" mindset, characteristic of some, will destroy the LGBTQ community faster than anything the religious right dreams of in its most sordid fantasies.
18
The very idea of a certain sexual orientation, race or gender being either a prerequisite or disqualification for elected office is medieval thinking at it's finest.
You are not currently engaged in selecting a candidate to be the president of any one special interest group. You need a president who can represent and serve your entire nation.
17
I've already given my husband notice that I'm going to leave him for Mayor Pete if the Mayor ever gets divorced.
Does that make the Mayor gay enough?
152
It is a fallacy to believe that one’s sexual orientation is just one of the many components of one’s personal being and no more important than any other accidental human feature, when in fact being gay is overwhelming in its impact on one’s daily existence and conditions one’s point of view on everything. It is
what I call the gay sensibility. You don’t know it unless you experience it. With regard to Buttigieg, his being gay is his very identity. The fact that he speaks well and dresses in a nice suit is irrelevant. That’s just “passing” or having to prove one’s self which unfortunately is what most gays have to do every day of their lives.
1
Looks like the Democrats are prepared to vet their candidates on every criterion except one: competence.
"Incompetence is the worst form of corruption"
21
I’ve been warning my Progressive friends for months to stop looking for the next candidate who has all the great qualities as President Obama. He was a once in a lifetime candidate who turned out to be the perfect president for the time. We were lucky to have him when we did, but can’t expect lightening to strike again for a very long time.
I may have been wrong.
14
Wait... he’s gay?
15
That the author of the Slate article believes a gay man can "move through life without his sexuality attending every interaction" suggests a total misapprehension of what it is to be a gay man, closeted or otherwise. Perhaps the democratic conversation would be better served by more focus on what added perspective a candidate's minority status provides, rather than what it is.
8
Unfortunately, Democrats enjoy eating their own, the circular firing squad, refusing gifts on silver platters. So don’t be surprised when the 15plus candidates are shot down by DEMS themselves and not Repubs. Republicans don’t expect their candidates to be perfect; they reserve that for the Democratic candidates which they tear apart and eviscerate with the help of Democrats. We don’t go after the Republican candidates until it’s too late because we were spending too much time destroying our own. And we never learn.
29
Right on, Frank Bruni!
Identity politics are becoming the be-all and end-all for democrats, thanks to disproportionate coverage of ultra-lefties and their special interests by the mainstream news media. If the dems want to recapture the White House, a leader must step forward who expresses less hate for productive and successful Americans and cares more about our country as a whole.
25
That Slate article is one of the most offensive things I've read in ages. "A gay man who conforms to a critical mass of gendered expectations can move through life without his sexuality attending every interaction, even after he comes out." And what? That makes his gayness somehow irrelevant and inconsequential in his life? So, unless you're a nelly queen, it's all just background noise? No, darling, that's not how it works. Let me tell you, it's not irrelevant when you go to put your husband's picture on your desk at work. It's not irrelevant when you're buying joint car insurance. It's not irrelevant when you give him a kiss goodbye in the morning on the subway platform. It's not irrelevant when you check into your hotel room on vacation. It's not irrelevant when you're shopping together at the supermarket in upstate New York. It's not irrelevant when you go to buy your wedding cake. And it certainly is not irrelevant when you go to Iraq to fight for your country (while don't ask don't tell is still in effect, by the way) or when you run for mayor in a deeply red state like Indiana. Give. Me. A. Break.
59
Can we please, for once, select our candidates based on issues?! Gay, straight, black, white, brown, striped, checkered. Who cares? None of these things have anything to do with how well a person can or can't perform the job of governing in a complex society. But they sure do get eyeballs on the TV and clicks on the computer. How has this been working out for us so far?
28
Bruni — One article in Slate, written in a certain high lefty style, does not a backlash movement make. I agree though that some Democrats have a purity thing that cannot be satisfied. I recently become fascinated with Mayor Pete. I am not the only one because he recently raised 7 million dollars. In my fascination I sat down one evening and watched interview after interview on YouTube. I wanted to hear more about what he had to say after seeing him on a late night show.
The Slate people are picking up on something, but don’t know what to make of it. My take is that he has the same Obama thing of just powering over the top of obstacles in his desire to govern and represent the people, all the people. Obama was black and knew it, but it was just part of his larger identity as a patriotic American. Buttigieg is the same way. He has won me over in a field of stellar candidates.
16
This reinforces that my decision to abandon the Dem Party and go independent was the right one.
9
As a woman of color, if I had a dollar for every time I was told by a white person that I was not "like them" (meaning other blacks).
The sad thing is that these people thought they were giving me a complement, thinking that because I did not meet their stereotype of a black person (and one who grew up in the South Bronx in a single parent home no less), I could not be possibly be like the rest of my race. It took me years to figure out how to respond, and finally, I came up with a reply: "I am them." That pretty much shut *them* up.
21
Frank - what a ridiculous comment for Dems, don’t eat your own - when you do just that as it suits your opinions.
It is a fair comment from the Slate article that many people lazily backstop into tired stereotypes based on an aspect of one’s identity.
Pete is a moderate Democrat - which speaks to a platform built more on the principles of Democratic capitalism vs Socialism. I have never thought that being gay predisposes your politics, like the Log Cabin Republicans for example, and Pete is entitled to his political opinions as much as anyone obviously. This goes for any “minority” group. Is it right? There is a commonality if experience to being in a marginalized position, based on race, gender, gender identification, age, religion, sexual orientation, etc. That is to say, bring a minority should enable you to identify with any marginalized group, for any reason, and seek solutions to improve their situation.
What IS insidious, for a candidate, is to try to leverage these stereotypes as a way to mask your true political ideology. The last most famous example was Trumpy.
Please don’t silence the criticism - you have a national voice that should encourage it.
5
Look, we know that we can be open and honest, that we can recognize and forgive slips and foibles without casting someone out of the party.
But we also know for certain that during a campaign Republicans will show no understanding or kindness toward human error, while they continue to harbor their Liar-in-Chief and turn a blind eye. They will lie and build up false accusations until Election Day with absolutely no shame. And Trump will be the loudest and crudest.
2
I have a close friend who is very smart and very politically active. He also happens to be black and gay. He posts on facebook multiple times a day (he has about 5,000 friends) about this or that candidate, dissecting their histories and deeply interrogating every angle of their positions from the perspective of a very specific under-served population. So, like, I do give his opinions weight.
However, the flip side of this is, I am honestly not sure that anybody benefits from a daily dissection of every candidate's history and perspective from such a narrow perspective, this many months before the primary. My friend evidently grew to like Buttigieg but after putting him through the rock tumbler and deciding that THIS quote he gave to the Indianapolis Star six years ago demonstrates he doesn't REALLY care about black people, he has started aggressively criticizing everything Buttigieg does.
The only conclusion I can draw from this is that our media environment (including social media) is completely poisonous to political discourse. I know my friend doesn't represent every potential voter, but I certainly credit him and people like him with turning off huge numbers of people from participating in the electoral process. Not everybody wants to nurse grudges and stew in bitterness for hours every day, and that's a lot what politics looks like through our modern lens.
12
By my count, there are 16 declared candidates for the 2020 Democratic nomination. In the end, it matters less how voters end the candidacy of 15 of those than it does how they support the remaining one. I implore Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters to remember that the differences among all these candidates are trivial compared to the difference between any of them and Trump. We must not get shell-shocked again.
10
We must remain vigilant these days about the fact that we are living in times where a few words, written or spoken, can go viral within minutes, usually giving them much more credence that they deserve. Social media and mass media promote this insanity as they monetize reactive clicks. Those with nefarious political motives (Russians, homegrown political operatives) also seek to promote advantage by sowing discontent. Don't pass on suspicious content that only seeks to inflame and divide. In quaint parlance: don't make a mountain out of a molehill for the molehill might be untrue to begin with.
8
"...to turn the Democratic primary into a nonstop apology tour when the nominee will be going up against a president never expected to apologize for anything is a risky strategy. It obsesses over the flaws in candidates who have many strengths, defining them in terms of what they seek forgiveness for. It blurs the line between job interview and inquisition. Taken too far, it rips contenders to shreds before Trump even takes out his scissors".
Yes, thank you for putting this out there so succinctly! Democrats must stop tearing apart their most promising candidates (and remain respectfully neutral on the others unless a Trump-type figure emerges on the Left) and stay on message against Trump. They must show the same type of consistency and rigor that the Republicans maintain with their 24/7 playbook. Republicans will exploit the fissures in the Democratic party and, in the resulting chaos, we will end up Trump again if they don't pull it together and stop eating their own.
9
"Democrats need to show some proportion, realism and reason as they assess and react to candidates." I wouldn't bet on it. So far it looks like this is going to be the tiptoeing nomination. Whoever has the smallest number of microaggressions (ie, the people who don't say things) will win.
10
The "self-cannibalization" problem arises because Democrats tend to be binary on even the most minor issues, much less significant ones. You're either 100% guilty and therefore 100% disqualified, or you're pure as the driven snow.
End that foolishness, and the cannibalization problem goes away. Weigh each negative and each positive, evaluate the combination, and decide whether that combination is better than that evaluation for competing candidates. The difficulty is in ascertaining the truth of the negatives and positives. Every voter will make whatever decision suits them, but it has to be based on truth if we want government to work. The biggest problem with the 2016 election is millions voted, or didn't vote, based on the biggest collective set of untruth during a campaign season that I've ever seen in my 65 years on this planet.
For a long time "that's just politics" has excused a growing collective set of untruth to exist. Can we reverse that trend, finally? Can we reverse another trend and evaluate faults with perspective, instead of requiring perfection unless we love a candidate?
Reminds me of Dr. Doom in Marvel's Fantastic Four comics. At least in the original stories, Doom was said to have come to hate Reed Richards and turn to complete evil because Richards "caused" a lab accident that led to a tiny scar on Doom's face - the genesis of the grim mask he always wore, since donning the mask before it cooled from forging is what truly disfigured his face. Hmmm.
3
When it comes to Biden, Franken, and so many others, "presentism" explains why the Democrats eat some of their own. I'd never heard the word until recently, but it is a perfect descriptor for the cannibalization the author describes. We all need to understand that judging past actions by the values and norms of a more evolved present can only lead to unjustified demonization, which does not embrace the "human messiness" of life.
7
Great piece! I’m not a Dem party loyalist by any means, but your arguments highlight beautifully the real threat of another four years with Trumpolini.
Dems have to practice tolerance... I was so turned off by some of the comments on Bernie’s Instagram page when he expressed sorrow for the loss of Senator McCain. It’s hard for me to identify with those folks and makes me wary.
May Trump finish last.
9
This article should be required reading for all candidates. An unrealistically perfect sprint to a perceived finish line on the left does not equate to electoral success on November 3, 2020. The "victorious," albeit battered and bruised last-Democratic-standing, who has been weakened by his/her own party, must then face a monster that is indignant, emboldened, and undamaged by his absentee party.
As long as Dems bully each other or tolerate their bullying by others, the biggest bully on this playground - who is unapologetic for his many, many transgressions - has the luxury of watching the hyper-polite kids destroy each other.
How horribly convenient to his re-election goal.
If Slate proclaims Buttigieg not-gay-enough, or Harris is portrayed as not-really-black, every Dem should be actively offended by those statements. If Biden apologizes for being out of touch with physical norms, every Dem should actively recognize that this is movement in the right direction.
Biden apologized for misreading how to show his support to women fighting to make a difference in their communities. Could his apology been more perfectly expressed or timed? Possibly yes. Perfect is a touch standard.
I've not picked my favorite candidate in this race, and for a myriad of reasons it's likely not Biden. The minute I see someone rise above this absurd display, I will know who wins my support. If you feel similarly, recommend this post. If you disagree, I would love to hear your perspective.
10
@GMOinSLO... OK, that was a Freudian typo! I meant "tough standard" not "touch standard" but I'm kind of laughing at the error!
3
This kind of identity-test absurdity is one reason the Democrats could squander their chances in 2020. This isn't the time to get picky; priority number one should be to vote Trump out of office. Which means: Find someone who appeals to the largest chunk of the electorate possible. And don't obsess about far-left details that the vast middle couldn't care less about.
10
Lets be very clear. The Democratic party is not demanding a degree of purity that nobody attains. It's the clueless progressives in the party who are causing all the drama. Look what they are trying to do to Joe Biden. The left wing of the Democratic party can't stand the fact that Biden is running because he doesn't check any of the right boxes. He's white, he's old, and he's male. Lets set aside the blatant, racism, sexism and ageism they are engaging in for a moment. What really bothers them is he's an unapologetic moderate who can beat Trump. The hate the idea that Biden is going to suck up all the oxygen in the room forcing Harris, Warren, Booker and other progressive favs to withdraw. They would rather lose with Kamala Harris at the top of the ticket than win with Biden. They would rather reign in a Progressive Hell than serve in a moderate heaven. They may get their wish. Progressives are their own worst enemy. They alienate voters with their insistence on ideological purity, their inability to compromise, and their insufferable arrogance. If Democrats nominate a progressive candidate then all is lost.There is no progressive majority in America & never will be. The numbers are simply not there. And there certainly is no progressive Electoral College coalition in America that could get to the needed 270 votes. In general election match-ups when Trump was matched up against Biden, where Biden beats Trump 55% to 45%." We can't govern if we don't win.
25
@Bill Brown
So well said. Thank you!
6
We need an Afro-Hispanic trans lesbian Jewish atheist Spartacist in a wheelchair.
24
@Richard Schumacher There can be no doubt the Spartacists have been sorely underrepresented.
6
@Richard Schumacher
Good comment! Keep looking!
3
@Richard Schumacher
Give the DNC Politburo and our Sovietized mass-media time--they'll find one.
1
Thank you, on point, Mr. Bruni. I donated to Pete (before the CNN town hall), several times.
Buttigieg is a gift. I like what he says. He resonates, broadly, and clicks in a piece of the puzzle to defeat Trump. I also like another 10 Dem candidates. Just don't like Biden (not a big Beto fan either). There are disgusting right wing videos/podcasts attacking Buttigieg for his homosexuality. And Dems don't think Pete's gay enough? We [anti-Trump] should have Pete's back and not quibble over identity purity. To paraphrase Mayor Pete, let our identity and uniqueness serve to celebrate diversity not to divide.
In 2016, the Dems constrained Bernie (i.e. rigged primaries and delegate votes in favor of Hilary) because Hilary was supposed "inevitable". For 2020 will unimaginative Dems repeat history crowning Biden the annoited one beforehand? Let Biden earn it with policies and principles, and his ground game. Which of course he can't because his record is questionable, not progressive. Too much baggage and honestly too old. I like Stacy Abrams but can Biden stand on his own two feet?
- I'm independent, Asian, soon-to-retire, female in rural Pennsylvania, hoping Dems don't screw up.
13
Black enough... Gay enough... Female enough? (and why not?)... That paves the way for Joe Biden's candidacy: stupid enough? -- yes (I plan to vote for someone else though).
1
really poor sub-headline.
I'm 75 but don't give a damn about his gayness - it's got nothing to do with the job except he'd be less inclined to be an idiot on gayness and myriad other issues.
I have concern about the lack of national experience and of being on the big playing field, but so what. It's not up to me who gets nominated given where we live but my druthers will be over early.
If he wins the nomination, I'll vote for him in a second. I can say this without denigrating any of the candidates, I'll vote for anyone but Trump. Pete is showing some class.
What concerns me is the trivialization of campaigns and the itch to follow the Trump itch while they slack off on important things - like Chuck Todd suggests that we stick to the old fashioned way before getting to the flaws of the electoral college, Mitch's diddling the rules AGAIN, that we not react to the Supreme Court Packing by the Republicans.
While CNN reportedo n the plan to subpoena Trump's tax records and the objections of Mueller's team to the PR job that Barr is doing for His Imperial Orange of the Species.
Instead, let's talk about Biden and whatever weird Bernie is doing and let's go back to those glory days of email scandals that weren't.
Cliche driven cable news is wearing. Fox tries to do here what he inflicted on the UK and Australia.
Campaign trail, drilling down, on the ground - The mindless cliches of the parties and the smears. it's cheap entertainment that is very profitable. But most of it doesn't help.
7
So our first gay President should be...Rupaul in full drag?
7
This is precisely the reason why you do not make identity politics a big part of your campaign, as Buttigieg has wisely done. Every other liberal or Democrat voter seems to have corrupted the what a representative should be; someone who outwardly or literally represents you instead of someone who represents your values and what you stand for. There is a more pressing matter at hand, and that is to ensure Trump does not get a second term and drag our country further down the drain. While others are bickering about asinine and/or trivial nonsense, Trump is going to grab all the unspeakables and take them all the way to the bank, right under their noses.
Look, I understand that representation matters to people who feel marginalized or edged out. But this is not a beauty (or gayness) contest, this is a fight for the soul of our democracy. We don't have the luxury of nitpicking or being choosy on every single aspect of the person whom we want to be our President. Too many Trumpists have drunk too much of the Kool-Aid to snap out of it, so it's up to the folks who still have their heads screwed on right to fix this mess.
3
This is a cogent and frustrating article, Mr. Bruni and you're 100% on target. Mr. Buttigieg is being hedged 'round by the same double standards of judgment that have been dished out to women politicians for years. If a woman is frilly and stereotypically 'feminine' (by straight male standards) she is judged as weak; if she exhibits forthright strength and tough-mindedness, she is censured for being too caustic and butch. Damned if she is; damned if she isn't.
It seems the only politicians who are exempt from gender-sterotypical "perp. walks" are straight, white, male candidates. Can we all please grow up and drop the
"walks like a duck / talks like a duck / must be a duck" nonsense?
7
Unfortunately, Buttigieg supports, like other AIPAC owned Democrats supports the Israeli government in the genocide against the Palestinian people. I guess in the NYTimes, mentioning that is far less important than telling us over and over again that he is gay.
1
We're talking South Bend? LGBT is a sandwich.
2
Hi Frank -
At first I didn't want to read your piece simply because of the title. Happily your subtitle, and the piece itself nailed it.
Pete's CNN Town Hall was a knockout. So were his two appearance on the View where the two Republicans on the panel have been singing his praises ever since.
His morning Joe appearance was another. The following day the cohosts talked about the spectacular impression he made.
Mayor Pete is someone who manages to be both brilliant and humble, sensitive yet forceful. He is the most articulate candidate in the pack (and he's among some very worthy competitors).
His authenticity can bring you to tears.
He is unique.
The contest is going to be ugly. Trump will cheat and play as dirty as he can. Dark money and Russia will be there to provide covert support.
I believe that despite that, Pete will always be ahead of it, will never get sucked into the Trump vortex, and run circles around him.
Trump, and the other traitors that make up the GOP in Congress will end up paying the price for the damage they have done to us as well as the damage done to our standing in the world.
2021:
Big-hearted, mammoth-brained Pete Buttigieg in the WH,
Small handed, orange faced Donald Trump in prison, and
the disgraced GOP in the rubbish heap of history where they belong.
Ask me how I really feel.
7
Frank Bruni keep it up. You will have to write a variation of this column many times over the next two years. Why? Because, unfortunately, the Democrats do eat their own or try to. For some opinionated Democrats (lots of them) their purity tests of the candidates poison everything associated with the Democratic Party and voters run away from such a judgmental and politically correct bunch. I fully expect the TV talking heads and the pundits to keep this up for the entire duration of this campaign, analysis of the problems Americans face and policy positions be damned. It will be an ongoing personality analysis and commentary. And unfortunately, negative sells. I know some of my Democratic brethren.
5
Campaigns seasons run too long. We're all worried that tribalism and attack modes will bury our democracy. Well why fuel all of this with constant campaigning? I know the mainstream media won't jump into this fight as they're making too much money on it. The sad irony is that Congress is gridlocked and trapped in endless investigations. Promises, promises. Constant attacks. Biden about to be Al Frankened. Shorten the season. Take dark money out of the equation. Actually care about foreign interference and take constructive action to prevent it. Democracy is a dam that holds back the inexorable tides of tyranny.
Looking forward to the debates, hoping the conversation will change to policy. Respect for individuality is what we all need, not shades of how gay, how poor, how educated, how black, white, etc. SO crazy. RE: Biden - some of the reaction is aggravated by folks feeling he is just too old for this job and reveals he's out of step when he says in his non-apology - "Social mores are changing." Well, I'm not young and am here to tell him that women (and children - the other group that gets pawed) have never appreciated this behavior, have always felt invaded and disturbed by it. A lot of men (my husband, for example) "get" this. Biden should have said, "I did not see this, I have been acting insensitively to others, I am sorry." Instead, he was defensive and kept trying to justify his behavior as a relic that used to be acceptable. It was not.
2
Mr. Bidan has actually run and lost in 3 presidential primary, not 2. They were 1984, 1988 and 2008.
1
Oh for Pete’s sakes, Democrats!! No purity tests— no perfection tests— no litmus tests...
Let’s nominate a smart, optimistic. and decent human being, who can intelligently, respectfully, and fearlessly take on Trump, and go toe to toe with him during the grueling campaign. Mimicking Trump’s tactics is not a winning strategy.
Rather than shooting ourselves in the foot, let us not be distracted from the #1 goal— put a Democrat in the White House in 2020. That means all Democrats, Independents, and moderate Republicans MUST UNITE behind the Democratic nominee— no matter who he/ she is. That means no flirting with 3rd party candidates. That means we might not get our own favorite Dem candidate. That means we might get a real, live, flawed, imperfect Democratic candidate. That means we might not fall in love with the anointed Dem nominee...
But trust that the Dem candidate, no matter what human failings he/ she might have, the Dem will not drive us off the cliff like a second term Trump presidency will.
Vote for Dems in 2020!
9
Unfortunately there are a sizable number of folks in this country who will simply not vote for Pete because he is gay. Much like there are those who will not vote for a woman... You know, women just aren't as capable, and they're too emotional. Homophobia, misogyny, whatever you choose. It is still an old white man's world (I am one). But I like the diversity and colors on the left side of the new house. Not sure who I'll vote for at this stage, but i say Go Pete!
2
And there are many who would vote for him precisely because he is gay and otherwise inoffensive, qualities which might put him in the running for VP. But forget the top of the ticket. He’s just not ready.
3
@Steve
Agree. I'm still stunned that after HRC's loss hardly anybody acknowledged that misogyny was a huge factor. They still don't.
2
Yes, Mayor Pete is plenty gay. Just like I am plenty African American. Yet throughout my life my "membership" has been questioned by whites and blacks alike. Told by white folks that I don't "talk black", "sound black" or "look black", told by African Americans that I am an "oreo" (white on the inside, black on the outside). (And it wasn't the white kids who tried to beat me up in middle school, either...) As if certain qualities -- articulateness, education, decorum, middle/upper class status -- are reserved solely for white (straight) folk and that if you present any of said qualities your membership as a minority or underserved group comes into question. And yet the irony is that if Mayor Pete showed up in a feather boa and a sparkly pantsuit, he would never be considered seriously by the general population. The very qualities that make him a serious contender, and able to appeal to all people of all stripes, are the very qualities that certain people will punish him for.
12
Absolutism, in any and all forms, rings the death knell of attempts to move forward.
Is this person gay enough, climate sensitive enough, possessing of perfect interpersonal skills. black enough are all questions that will undermine the Democratic Party's effort to find the 'perfect' candidate.
The human foibles possessed by us all are the very things that connect most of the human race to one another.
The one truth Don the Con has perfected is this: hate in all it's forms can be a great motivator. Hate left to fester, while the opposition makes up it's mind about the 'purity' of it's messenger, will be mistaken for certainty and sadly triumph.
3
“I’m worried because there was an actual mini-debate on the left recently over whether Pete Buttigieg is gay enough.”
No one cares if Buttigieg is “gay enough” or not.
He disqualified himself from seeking the Democrat party nomination as soon as he took job at McKinsey after her finished his Rhodes Scholar studies.
Mr. Butigieg had a choice of many careers or other courses of study, and he chose a destructive (very Bain Capitalesque) one.
Rachel Maddow, also gay, also a Rhodes Scholar, who completed a PhD at Oxford, chose to work as a landscaper in Massachusetts.
1
“Not gay enough”. “Not black enough”. “Not whatever enough”. If you want to understand the risk of people not feeling free to be who they are, consider where “Not man enough” has gotten us.
6
I hope Buttigieg is a great governor, then a great senator, and then a great president, using all his accumulated wisdom and experience.
3
This ridiculous debate echoes the dumb twaddle we heard in 2008 about whether Barack Obama was "black enough" to draw the African-American vote. It's an inane conversation and I lose respect for those engaged in it.
Actually useful, pertinent criticisms of "Mayor Pete," stemming from his own words and policy positions, are abundant if you only bother to look: see for example Nathan Robinson's extremely detailed misgivings, published recently in Current Affairs magazine.
2
I like Buttigieg, and gay enough or not, my ultimate concern is whether he would prove powerful enough, tough enough, and shrewd enough to defeat a psychopath who could persuade a whole lot of voting citizens to beat him to dust. We saw what this 'president' did to his co-candidate Republicans, and to Hillary -- can you imagine his attacks on a gay mayor with smarts and integrity? Democrats suffer from kindness and empathy -- that merely leads to carnivore salivation for Trumpists.
3
All in all, the widening dialogue about Mayor Buttigieg is a positive thing. Hopefully he will become more of a culturally dominant figure in the next decade while simultaneously becoming a likelier candidate for the presidency. As for Bruni's developing an entire New York Times column around a tempest in a teacup, he probably had to come up with something to write about ahead of a deadline and this was the best he could do.
1
I just read the appalling article that Bruni refers to. It is worth pointing out that there is not one comment on the Slate site about that article that thinks the Slate article is good or insightful. In other words, I appreciate Bruni's essay, but I am not convinced that many think like like the lesbian writer of the Slate article. She is totally beyond the pale and more interested in identity politics than actual politics. Politicians like Buttigieg will succeed or fail based on many things, but the question posed "is he gay enough" is irrelevant in 2019.
10
You tell it, Frank. While the left-most Democrats dissect which candidates' behavior and aspect are blameless enough, the Republicans will unite behind an incompetent, malevolent fraud.
4
Mr. Bruni is right about one thing here: you can't run successfully for President by apologizing for what or who you are, or are not. The impulse to do so is absolutely pathetic in the context of campaigning to be a national level leader, and I would certainly never vote for somebody who did so. This is not a race to be the coach of a therapy group. If you don't believe in yourself and where you came from, after all, why should anybody else?
4
Let's face it: We're going to blow it in 2020 and we're going to have four more years of Trump because Democrats are the new Puritans; a cynical, sniping group of paranoid navel-gazers who spend their time judging and criticizing even the most well-meant of intentions. I've never been more disappointed in the left.
6
Take away gay, white, and cute, and what do you have left? A small town mayor without a shred of national experience. He is absolutely unelectable at the top of the ticket but I think he really is running for Vice President, where he might add some balance.
2
Thank you Mr Bruni... thoughtful and timely and urgent message.
Yes, yes, yes. Absolutely agree with everything in this article. Additionally, I would point out, we have a real problem when SLATE has become the resource people go to, so much so that Frank Bruni has to cite their nonsense in his article because they have credence in the general public. The tone of the cited article alone should have relegated them to the yellow journalism pile (or the virtual bird cage lining pile), but they are not, which makes me all the lore pleased that Mr. Bruni calls them out on this trash.
3
Not gay enough. Jeez Louise. If you ask me, Donald Trump could have benefited from being more gay, but I think Mayor Pete is fine just the way he is.
2
Those who care about anyone's sexual orientation should question their own.
6
Has anyone used the word "intersectional" yet? We definitely need a discussion of intersectionality, historically contextualized in the gender dialectic.
/sarcasm
3
Personally, I feel the less said about the issue , the better, as I was perfectly happy before I knew Boot-edge-edge was gay: now, Frank Bruni has spoiled the very newness of this strange sounding name for me.
Not gay enough, not black enough, not brown enough not diverse enough etc, ALL deny the horrible discrimination suffered by gay men who were able to, and thus had to, tide who they were. You had to watch what you wore, watch the timber of your voice, retrain your manner of speech, invent fake girlfriends, use fake names in encounters and listen to Jesse Helms say that the AIDS came about as God's punishment for society having allowed gay life at its extreme fringes. It is, by degree, a sort saying that ex-slaves did not suffer since the end of slavery in the 1860. It is the gay equivalent of racism, though this time it is coming from the right
Young gay men do not sufficiently honor those who stepped out of the closet in those days nor recognize how many are still in it.
As Jesse Helms said to his speech writer, Armisted Maupin, who wrote Tales of the City, upon hearing that Maupin, in an interview of a politician was told that his opponent was actually "Gay", "There is nothing worse than being called that." In my experience it as the only thing that Helms ever said with which I agreed.
2
By the way, while Mr. Bruni is very concerned about the 100% made-up phenomenon of people accusing Buttigieg of not being gay enough, I'm sure he was terribly concerned about Dems eating their own when the entire DNC closed ranks to attack Sanders on every single medium available in 2016, and he was telling them that they had "better not eat their own," right? He did that, didn't he? Let me just go check his history on this topic....
Aaaaaah, I see.
2
There's something *wrong* with white males. That's basically what the far left is saying, and it's a perfect recipe for 4 more years of Trump.
Apparently they want us to believe there's some extra special virtue in being female or dark-skinned. "Black Girl Magic," they like to say on Twitter. Although I've certainly known plenty of women and people of color who are not especially virtuous.
Conversely I've known plenty of white men who are amazing people, my husband included. And from what I've seen so far, Pete Buttigieg falls in that same group.
Personally I could care less about electing a woman or a racial minority, and I'm sure as heck not going to ignore a perfectly good candidate because he has white skin and boy parts. Ridiculous.
3
Limbaugh hates him; reason enough to support him.
3
Honestly the Democrats will shoot themselves in the foot come 2020, Trump will definitely be reelected if they don't get off their crazy high horse and get a candidate who can fight and win an election! this whole purity test , pandering to every last minority or fringe group is a loosing battle...Run on things like the economy, how to improve standards of living and healthcare for people and not how Gay or Black or Woke or whatever someone should be. Democrats don't even seem to know what they want anymore....Those of us in Africa and other parts of the world are shaking our head in exasperation!!!!
1
I am a San Francisco Democrat.
I will vote third party before I vote for a Democrat who is not a lesbian-identified bisexual pre-operative transgender woman of color who is not legally married to a non-operative transgender-identified person of any chromosomal pairing.
And what will I get?
Four more years of President Trump!
But who cares? "The Bachelor" is on tonight. And the Dow is up today.
Good grief! Is it always the lot of Democrats to eat their own???
1
Thanks for writing this article. It's an excellent rebuttal. I'm glad to see an almost universal negative reaction to her article.
1
I was okay with Warren...until she started her Identity Politics tour. She is literally promoting the Culture of Victimhood crusade that so many today are jumping on.
Mayor Pete is now near the top of my favorites list.
I will say flat out, from among the current candidate pool there is only 1 that I will have to hold my nose to vote for and that is Bernie.
Utterly red-herring, inflated concerns inculcating a specious ad hominem false consciousness about DEM candidates. The issue is their positions on the various socio-political initiatives developing and circulating in our society. Indeed, nobody is concerned about Trump's sexual orientation, his race, etc., only his stand on questions of nationalism and trade with China and Canada; our border with Mexico; Obamacare, Soc Sec, Medicare etc. Nobody is concerned about Access Hollywood bus or Stormy Daniels.
1
Does anyone other than a few fringe media figures think this is remotely relevant? Nobody cares. Candidates' gender, race, orientation, age are not important; ntelligence, character and experience are. Virtue and ability are not attached to any particular "intersection" of identifiers. Leave victimhood behind, and let's operate from a strengths based approach to evaluating the candidates.
1
I seem to have missed the day we could sign up for the "Gay Enough" Committee. Who established it, who are its members, what are the standards, and what does that even mean? In addition to the incredulity of this eat-your-young compartmentalization and bigotry, what's missing here is the acknowledgement that we have a married, openly gay mayor of a socially conservative industrial Midwest/Rust Belt state who is exploring his interest in running for President of the United States and will declare his intention to do so on April 14. As someone who was around for the Stonewall Rebellion, endured the incalculable suffering and loss of the HIV/AIDS epidemic of the 1980s (while the Reagan administration stood by in stone cold silence), was working near San Francisco when Harvey Milk was assassinated in his office at City Hall, and watched my news feed explode with messages about the Supreme Court decision regarding same-sex marriage on June 26, 2015, I'd like to say that these things take time -- and couldn't we all just step back, take a breath, celebrate and appreciate how far we've come, regardless of whether or not Pete Buttigieg is our candidate of choice. (He is mine.) Not gay enough? Madness. In the America in which we now live, where since November, 2016 hate crimes have risen and bigotry and violence is overtly and covertly encouraged and enabled from the highest echelons of government, how about courageous enough? Pete and his husband, Chasten, re-define the term.
9
Funny that Mr. Bruni didn't mention Kirsten Gillibrand. She has been burnishing her reputation as a feminist's feminist, and the question no one seems to be asking about her is "Does she like men?" I don't see any reason to believe she does. And that's not good enough for anyone presuming to be president.
2
@Robert B. - No one in NY would vote for her.
2
We need to get over all this parsing!! Mayor Pete is an amazing candidate. As is Kamala, and Bernie, and Beto, and on. Let’s get behind them! Get behind Democrats caring about and discussing the issues before the American people. We have the most unqualified person ever in the White House! That’s where the comparisons should be focused.
3
I sure am glad let the Democrats have found new ways to make sure that they lose so they're corporate supporters can continue to get their way.
Thank you Frank. As a gay man of the same age I say “right on!”
2
Well said, Mr. Bruni. While we can always hope, it is pretty likely that we Democrats will, once again, shoot ourselves in the foot. We will denigrate all of the candidates (I hear it daily). Couple our tendency to hold our candidates to impossible standards with the Republicans mastery of the dark political arts, Throw in today’s technology and we pretty much know how this ends. Come November 2020 and a significant portion of Independents as well as those on the Left will be heard to say, “I hate Trump but I simply can’t vote for (fill in the blank). That person is horrible.” Trump wins with a weak plurality and all the folks that stayed home can then complain about Trump for another four years and there will be 7-2 Republican SCOTUS for the next 35 years. But, hey, these non-voters will have maintained their ideological purity, and, remember, “those politicians are all just the same.”
Well said Mr. Bruni. I would also add that Mayor Pete served in the military during the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" period. I think it's fair to say that Mayor Pete has had a lifetime's worth of discrimination and unnecessary suffering because of who he is.
There may be reasons to think Mayor Pete isn't a great presidential nominee, but not seeming gay enough sure isn't one of them.
2
Spot on, Mr. Bruni! While some of your readers perceive your article as about the gayness of Mayor Pete, I don’t read it as that.
I believe your driving point is that the Dems (i’m one) are too engrossed and obsessed cannibalizing their own to the point that we’ll have another 4 years of Trump. They did this to Hillary in 2016! It can happen again in 2020. If this fault-finding and puritanical search for the right candidate continue, we all would deserve it!
3
Smart enough is the part that matters.
2
We all fall for the Karl Rove's Republican game of segment divide and conquer... Kamala Harris is half Jamaican, half Indian and 100% American, As a naturalized immigrant, My family and I are 100% American. And you cannot convince me otherwise.
We all vote based on our perception of the hierarchy of benefits the candidates will espouse.
The majority of Americans do not vote on the basis of whether a candidate is too black or not black enough, Gay or not Gay enough, unless of course you view life through Karl Rove glasses.
1
Bravo, Frank Bruni, as always a rational voice.
1
Will we ever stop eating our own? I still can't get over what they did to Al Franken without even as much as a "by your leave". Who asked the Dems to be the morality police anyway? Focus on the issues and stop with the purity. I thought that went out with the Scarlet letter!
3
The problem with being old is that you have experience. You've seen waves of political correctness (like McCarthyism) before, and you know quality people who could have benefited the country but were destroyed by it. When you grow up, Frank, and you come to realize how wrong Rousseau was, you will have to content yourself with watching your grandchildren try to clean up the mess PC has left behind.
Can't we just let people be themselves (however they are) and listen to what they SAY instead??
2
Absolutely love this column. The next election is ours to lose. Common, Democrats! Quit making tiny boxes.
1
Dems have to stop this insanity with identify politics. You can be diverse and empower people without the absurdity that's taking place.
I'm not gay, but it seems to me that Pete is where the LGTBQ community would ultimately want to be: it's a non-issue, just a part of who they are, and people accept that.
I can see the Dems blowing it again with all this focus on indentity politics.
The Slate piece was ridiculous, as were the statements by the feminist author who's been quoted in a few articles (can't find her name).
We need to nominate the best qualified candidate, period. Yes, we need to include everyone, but there should be no "affirmative action" checklist to be the Democratic nominee.
Just give me someone who can think, like Pete. He's in a league of his own. While everyone else is screaming and kicking and trying to drag us into "now," he's laying out a strategy for the future -- and that's what we need. If we just keep trying to play catch-up, nothing will ever change, really.
No one else is talking about the things he does -- how we need to plan for a new kind of workforce, because automation is coming and we can't stop it. He clearly sees the issues that lie ahead, and has plans to address them.
Also, it's very clear when you listen to his interviews that he has hands-on, ground experience dealing with issues like the opioid crisis.
That's way more important than any identity issues
1
"How do Democrats properly vet their candidates for president without cannibalizing them? How do they rightly insist on sensitive and inclusive leaders while making allowances for past mistakes, present quirks, human messiness and the differences in the conversation and the culture now versus 10 or 20 or 40 years ago?"
Lol. You mean how do Democrats give Democrats a pass on conduct that would cause tears and fainting fits if engaged in by a Republican?
"reclaim the word freedom from Republicans..." That's what I like to hear! I have the argument with my spouse that we should be putting out a flag which has become a nationalist symbol for the right instead of the banner for all citizens who make the country what it is. I'm a hard Democrat with social leanings and I resent the fact that the flag of our nation has become a symbol of xenophobia. We should take it all back!
Mayor Pete will never be corrupt. He will not start a foundation that takes money from the evil dictators of this world. He will never spend his days twittering lies while sitting in a golf cart. Mayor Peter will not compromise his personal moral code. He will not buy himself an 8 million dollar house after spending a lifetime swearing that type of capitalist indulgence was unacceptable.
Mayor Pete is true blue.
2
i want every democrat to be perfect. gotta be, because i'm a democrat and i don't brook no half-measures in trying not to offend me.
republicans? meh. They don't offend anybody.
THE DEMOCRATS WILL GET TRUMP RE-ELECTED BY RUNNING SOMEONE TO FAR TO THE LEFT FOR THOSE STATES NOT ON THE COASTS. SOME OF THE NOTIONS BEING FLOATED BY DECLARED CANDIDATES LIKE A WEALTH TAX, OR A PROMISED FIXED INCOME, OR ABORTION WITHOUT RESTRICTION, OR PAYMENTS TO BLACKS FOR THE INJUSTICE THEIR DISTANCE RELATIVES SUFFERED SIMPLY WILL NOT FLY. AMERICANS ARE AT HEART CONSERVATIVE BUT PROGRESSIVE. THIS MEANS THE VALUES THEY HOLD TODAY ARE SINCERE BUT THEY ARE OPEN TO CHANGE. HOWEVER, NOT RADICAL CHANGE.
THE FORMER GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA, ARNOLD THE MUSCLE MAN, HAD A KEEN INSIGHT ON AMERICANS WILLINGNESS TO CHANGE. HE STATED YEARS AGO WHEN GASOLINE WAS $7 A GALLON AND SMALL CARS THE RAGE, THAT AMERICANS WOULD NEVER GIVE UP THEIR DESIRE FOR LARGE TRUCKS AND CARS BUT WOULD EMBRACE HIGHER MILEAGE STANDARD AND ALTERNATIVE FUELS. TWENTY YEARS LATER IT'S CLEAR HE WAS RIGHT. GM IS CLOSING SMALL CAR PRODUCTION PLANTS, FORD IS DELETING CARS FROM THEIR INVENTORY WHILE BOTH SELL RECORD NUMBERS OF BIG TRUCKS . MOST OF THE TRUCKS SOLD TODAY WILL RUN ON ALTERNATIVE FUELS OR HAVE GAS MILEAGE CONSUMPTION WHICH WAS UNTHINKABLE TWENTY YEARS AGO.
IF THE DEMOCRATS HOPE TO WIN (AND FOR THE COUNTRY'S SAKE I HOPE SO TOO) THEY MUST RUN A PERSONABLE CANDIDATE , WHITH JUST LEFT OF CENTER POSITIONS, AND WITH A EMPHASIS ON WORKING CLASS ISSUES. TARGET THE FUNDAMENTAL CONCERNS OF THE AVERAGE CITIZEN. LOOK AT HOW THEY LIVE DAY TO DAY, AND OFFER PLANS TO HELP.
From my observations of "Mayor Pete", I would not have known he was gay had he not informed the public some years ago. Likewise, it has no effect on my opinion of him.
Unlike the current occupant of the White House, he is a veteran, a Rhodes scholar, speaks numerous languages, and brings a sense of honesty to the debate. He is also still in his youth and can speak more effectively to the younger voters the Dems will need to beat the beast name Trump.
5
Another very fine column from Frank Bruni.
As a gay guy involved in politics, in the past, the conflict about not being gay enough, or being too gay, is not new. And has been a "bang my head against the wall" frustration for years.
Second, the Democrats have a history of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The current "purity" tests, and immediate condemnation and exclusion of anyone even remotely tainted is incredibly self defeating and plays into the hands of the opposition.
Mayor Pete, as my sister in-law said, is "the real deal". The gays need to quit sabotaging their own, and the Dem's need to take a breath before reacting.
17
Bravo, Frank Bruni! This is an excellent description of the many faces of prejudice. You have nailed it on the ways in which these overwrought attitudes about the candidate not being "blank (insert favorite attribute here) enough" are hurting the chances of the eventual Democratic nominee winning the Presidency in 2020.
7
Thank you Frank Bruni for presenting a rational argument against identity politics. This concept has only created more divisiveness in our culture. Certain groups are acknowledged as being validated as ‘victims’ while others are not. There are many real victims in our society who do not fall under the categories of ‘Black’, ‘gay’, or ‘female’ but are ignored simply because they don’t appear under THOSE headings. Diversity SHOULD refer to all kinds of diversity, not just the ones that appear on the Democrats’ recognized list...
5
The wheels fell off the Republican Party bus when they decided that candidates had to pass litmus tests. If the Democratic Party does the same, they will deserve the backlash they will get.
Politics is about compromise if it is going to work, and the Democrats need to understand that because the Republicans have surely forgotten. They need to govern, in order to bring back trust in government. Will everyone get everything they want? No, but perhaps some things can get done.
2
Every time anyone quotes Buttigieg, I like him more. What an eloquent voice for truth, justice, and the American Way!
12
@Sheila
Sounds like a god you're looking for. Wasn't eight years of Obama enough?
And he also disparaged Black Lives Matter.
1
I'm 75 and Gay and I've been "out" for 50 years. To these people who feel Pete is not "gay enough," who would be your ideal candidate: RuPaul? The fact that Pete is open about his orientation is enough. He would still have my vote even if he were as straight as an arrow.
24
Why? The only thing you mention is his sexual orientation.
Like many commenters here, we are dismayed at the not-gay-enough, not-black-enough, too-old/not-old-enough, too-far-left/Republican-lite cannibal critiques. The primaries will reflect the wishes of the majority, and the nominee may not be the one we favor, but we will vote for the Democrat, even if the Democrat is a ham sandwich.
The media have an obligation to report the pluses and minuses of every candidate as statements of fact. Good. And the pundits will pick apart the negatives. But their focus ought to be on character, experience, and policy positions rather than on identity, which is actually a Republican dog-whistle. And they might consider whether their remarks not only discourage voters from supporting the eventual Democratic nominee, but also give aid and comfort to the enemy.
14
I can't wait for the primaries to be over. But before that I think some potential candidates should stop raising money and support someone else. Are they talking to each other? Let's focus people!
Of course the Dems are going to eat their own. They can't help themselves. This week's denunciations of Biden had the feel of a Soviet show trial or the French reign of Terror. And it is easy to imagine a Democratic primary driven by its most extreme fringe every week finding some candidate lacking purity based on either some decades old action or some political stance which was progressive yesterday but is now newly viewed as reactionary. An issue like opposing open borders. The real question is if anyone can survive this gauntlet will they then be able to run a campaign that can bring moderates along. If not start blowing up balloons for Trump's reelection party.
12
I agree with Mr. Bruni about Joe Biden having too much political baggage. It ain't carry-on - more like steamer trunks. He's been at the game for a long, long time. I think his time has passed much as I like him personally.
I have been following the campaign of Pete Buttigieg for months now, and every time I hear him speak I get more impressed with him. He may be a long shot for the nomination - at least right now - but he is gaining traction each day.
He will be in New Hampshire for a couple of days this week.
I could care less about Mayor Buttigieg's sexual orientation. And it looks like the electorate is indicating it doesn't care either.
18
Thank you, Frank Bruni, for this sensible column. No gay person can yet go through life without being acutely conscious of the homophobia that exists around him or her. This consciousness is in fact the characteristic that gay people most share despite their enormous diversity, including the ability to "pass" as heterosexual; and it is the characteristic that most nurtures empathy with other people who have prejudged on the basis of their more visible identities. Mayor Pete is, indeed, plenty gay enough. He and his husband are fine role models for glbtq youth.
8
What's important in a 21st Century President? And what is secondary?
I believe that every candidate for public office who will be asked to swear to protect the Constitution of the U.S. be asked to take a simple multiple choice or true-false test that a high school civics student takes.
There is so much discussion about secondary issues that we miss the crucial point of the job.
Another issue among my democratic friends, all of whom are over 70, is the importance of age. We know what our performance and speaking abilities are when we have grown older. We see it on display with our current 73-year-old leader. No one will speak about the elderly men who want to run. It is not PC and may seem like prejudice. We have a minimum age for a Presidential candidate but no cut-off point. My friends are unanimous in thinking a 76-year-old Biden, no matter what is sexuality, etc. needs to retire. He missed his last opportunity during the 2016 campaign.
There are so many public figures now who are openly gay I think the shock value is over.
Harvey Milk did a lot for those who want to lead.
4
@Lj - I'm in my 70s, and I agree that Biden is too old. So is Bernie, as much as I love him. I also agree with others who say Biden has been around too long and has too much baggage, even though we all know his heart is in the right place. It's time for someone young like Buttigeig - and so far he articulates the values and goals I support better than anyone else has.
1
I couldn’t agree more. It makes me so impatient to see people on the left attacking their own while someone like Trump is elected. Democrats are their own worst enemies.
17
Assisted self immolation is a tradition in the Democratic Party.
8
I say this sadly: Amen to that...
Buttigieg will be the first pol I will donate money to. I am SO impressed by him. He is exactly what this country needs, and has needed for a while, but esp. in the wake of the Donald Trump unnatural disaster. I am hoping for a Buttigieg/Harris ticket, or at least a Harris/Buttigieg ticket, followed by a Buttigieg presidency. Don't blow it, Democrats.
13
Virginia, I feel like we’re political twins—at least for this upcoming election.
2
I'm a Republican most times...but I like this guy. The only thing I wish was that he was atheist. Can't someone just come out and say...I don't believe in god?? as a politician. I truly believe it's easier to come out as gay...as opposed to coming out as atheist. Tell people your atheist and republican and it all goes to ???
10
It seems to me that the media is consistently pushing narratives about and are hyper focused on Democrats’ obsessions with current and past indiscretions and so called flaws, only for the sake of ‘news’ . This is not helpful and I’m tired of it. I’d like to suggest Dems ignore such opinion pieces and make up their own minds based on their own research. This flavor of ‘news’ encourages ‘eating our own ‘.
3
The first time he puts his hand on a boy’s shoulder will end the right’s jihad against “innocent touching.”
1
Those on the left who think someone is not gay enough or black enough...are they, by any chance, Russian?
4
Mayor Pete is not gay enough? Some Jews think others Jews are not Jewish enough. Catholics think that the Pope (which ever one you want) is not Catholic enough. This is a sign of serious mental derangement.
5
If you're worried about it and think it's stupid, why are you amplifying it? This is the fatal weakness in the media that Trump has exploited so successfully. Stupidity and shallowness and dumb thinking of every variety has become reliable clickbait. I'll bet most people never even knew that there was some idiot questioning Buttigieg's gayness - but they sure do now. Next headline will be - "People are talking about....."
6
Fortunately for all of us, black voters didn't hold it against Obama that his mother was white and his father wasn't the descendant of American slaves. Any gay person who isn't proud to have their community represented by a person of such obvious intelligence, integrity, and competence as Mayor Pete is a fool.
13
Black voters may not have held it against Obama that his mother was white but the media often did by claims that he was the first Black president, whereas, in reality, he was the first ‘mixed’, Black AND White...the ‘white’ part often being ignored...another downside of ‘identity politics’.
3
@Observor
The word Gramsci didn't appear in this virtuous description, but "gay" does. Wrong focus?
1
Pete Buttigieg situation does not seem a serious threat to his candidacy. Joe Biden's is--and to democracy. I agree that Biden is past his prime. which was never very "prime" in any event. However, his situation represents a recent, ugly turn in "liberal" politics, which have become anything but liberal. Such a turn is to be expected when identity replaces ideas as the basis of political judgment. It divides rather than unites, erects "walls" between people, and establishes the conditions, first of bigotry, then abuse, then worse.
The irony is that the attacks on Biden's social behavior, of relatively little consequence of what were once acts of social nonchalance, by women discredit women and feminism. In the day, when a man patted a woman's bottom or ventured a kiss, a woman said "fresh" and slapped his face. Boundaries established, mission accomplished, and job not lost. Today's women seem weaker, not stronger, than their predecessors. For more, see: https://firstimpressionssecondthoughts.blogspot.com/2019/04/do-women-want-to-be-regarded-and.html.)
2
@Michael L Hays - Women did NOT slap someone's face for unwanted sexual touching. We kept our mouths shut so we could keep our jobs. We know that if we reported it, the man (who was almost always of higher status than the woman he was assaulting) would deny it, we'd be regarded as troublemakers, and if we didn't lose our jobs on the spot, we'd be slowly eased out the door. And that's not to mention the question we'd be asked: "What did you do to make him think you'd welcome that kind of attention?"
1
Bruni should focus on keeping his own house clean. The Republican party is a dumpster fire.
1
Democrats are going to make the mistake of eating our own. We are such fools.
4
@Souvient - No, it's not "Democrats" as a whole. It's a few loudmouths who say something controversial and then, because controversy generates clicks or views, gets repeated over and over on every newscast. It was the media who helped elect Trump, because his always outrageous or controversial comments and actions were considered "newsworthy," while the actual policy proposals from the other candidates weren't worthy of making news. That goes for all of the other Republican candidates as well as Clinton. It's time for the media, columnists, etc., to start telling us where candidates stand on the issues instead of endlessly chasing controversy.
3
I am a straight man, although I'm a queer. I am not feminine in the least. I am consistently in lust of good lookin guys, although I do not act on the feelings. I was raised in a very straight society where queers were despised. But ever since the age of three I knew. But so what. Its not anything about that. I have no idea why you've written this article except to give wind to the sails of those you say you are exposing. Just as in the Albigensian Crusade where "God will know his own" was the catch phrase, we will know our own is the the way of liberals today. The baggage and the journalist doesn't matter. Its what the man says and stands for. So please stand down on your pontification. Please.
2
Ca;m down Mr Bruni. The race has just started.
Politics is a blood sport.
Buttigieg looks like he can take care of himself.
6
"Mayor Pete Is Plenty Gay
And Democrats better not eat their own."
Disgusting title. Smarmy and belittling. I think I am letting go of NYT.
2
Not gay enough? What does that even mean? These people need to shut up.
7
The whole point in my judgment is (or should be): who cares whether he’s gay? This isn’t a gay popularity contest. We’re not voting on the quintessential gay candidate, the quintessential white or black or brown or fill in your favorite color candidate. If we were, it strikes me as an organizational principle uncomfortably close to a eugenics party. Let’s focus on the important question: is he or she the best candidate to lead us out of this living hell? Period!
5
Seems to me that this column could have been far more powerful if the focus had been on how amazing Mayor Pete is. Why even dignify the banter, if there is any, about how gay he is/isn't?
6
Why did NYT run about Slate writing that Mayor Pete is gay? I didn’t know he was gay and I could care less - he is the smartest and best Democratic candidate in the field. This was an attempt to derail his campaign because Bruni is not sure he is electable. Both articles should never have been written. Shame on the NYT.
2
@Rich C It wasn't a secret. It has been written about in many places. You can be sure that the Republicans will ensure that EVERYONE knows that Mayor Pete is gay.
1
I thought this a hit piece on the Dems.
Already the Dems have elected a gay governor of Colorado, a gay female African American mayor of Chicago and a gay man running third in the Dems presidential primary race.
Of course, we will see no such thing in repub land, but instead of criticizing them, you chose us?
Yes, Biden was criticized, rightly so, for his touchy feely behavior towards women. I believe Biden a good man and a gentleman, but he should have learned long ago that this was not acceptable.
1
@Gene - My red, red state replaced our Trump-enabling GOP Congressman with a lesbian Native American woman. Even in red America, fewer people all the time care about whether someone is gay.
2
Funny, maybe I've missed something, but I haven't heard a single Republican talk about Buttigieg's sexual orientation.
I can't believe how dysfunctional the Dems have been & for so long. The moment you start attacking someone on your own side, you've lost. You're doing the Republicans dirty work for them, & you're doing it better than they ever will because you're turning off the exact voters you need to win.
This is the Dems biggest problem: they're never miss an opportunity to cut their nose to spite their face.
6
@BP - Stop blaming "the Dems" for click-bate comments by those whose job is to create controversy. It's the media that's pushing these memes.
3
Nice job Frank. You, like, others played into the narrative of not talking about policy but personal issue. Please policy narrative not personal. Gee...gay enough...black enough...how about competent enough
5
What? Democrats better not eat their own? Do you have a time machine? Because the ultra-PC wing of the Democratic Party have been eating their own since 2016. It started when Hillary began attacking Trump over his past sexual history, ignoring the fact that she’s married to the man with the most sordid sexual history to be president up until then. Republicans tried to destroy Bill Clinton over his sexual history, and it backfired miserably. Then Hillary tried the same hack-job on Trump, and everyone knows how that turned out: Fail. The #MeToo witch-hunt will destroy only Democrats, because those who vote Republican already know that it’s a witch hunt, while Democrats have to pretend it’s not. In other words, Republicans will not resign or drop out because they know that their Republican supporters know it’s a #MeToo witch-hunt, and they’re against #MeToo and it’s mob-like mentality.
3
Should Mayor Pete win the Dem nomination, expect trump and his minions to absolutely skewer him for being gay. So yes, he's gay enough. If Kamal wins the nomination, expect the GOP to subtly and not so subtly demean her for being black, a woman, and a black woman. So yes, she's black enough.
10
Since no one reading this (with the exception of his husband) are going to have sex with Buttigieg, why does it matter how gay he is or isn’t?
3
Mayor Pete is the no brained. But Dems will torpedo him on this cross of race, gender, and orientation. This is exactly why the democrats will always be LOSERS!!!!
Hypocrite! You tell Democrats to ‘not eat our own’ and then proceed to devour Joe Biden! That strategy cost us in 2016! Practice what you preach!
2
GOOD COLUMN
2
NYT blames everything on Bernie supporters like republicans blamed everything on Obama.
White, black, pansexual, zombie...who cares.
We need to vote for a bucket of paint in an apple tree if that's what it takes to whup trup.
5
This looks like another media-generated pseudo-issue caused by people who are just generating column inches for no other reason than to meet some quota of column inches.
3
A few boneheaded op-eds don't represent reality.
3
I don't know why Bruni wastes a column on whether Buttigieg is gay enough when the only reporting on this "subject" is a column in Slate. While he protests that this is another case of the Dems eating their own, he is the one giving it publicity and circulation. Are we really concerned whether Buttigieg shows up on someone's finely turned gaydar? The whole thing makes me want to throw up.
3
frank: you'll pardon the discourtesy, but that is a truly idiotic and inappropriate title for your piece. one is either gay or they are not. the use of "plenty" is ridiculous, and does a disservice to him and to the entire community. shame on you!
4
Hey Mods~!
I've tried to defend the Bernie folk from the repeated attacks here in the comment section.
You know the action that Frank Bruni has said isn't acceptable.?!
Yet not one has been published.
Kinda leads on to believe eating of a certain Democratic candidate is acceptable to the NYT~! AGAIN~!
C'mon! Be fair.
Don't be like the previous primary NYT.
The obvious lack of disagreement on Mayor Pete, and the acceptable vilification of Bernie Sanders is once again a dead give away of you partisan unusualness.
Be better!
2
Ironic, isn’t it? As a straight man and longtime supporter of gay and lesbian causes, marriage, etc., I’m not sufficiently qualified to determine whether a person is “sufficiently gay.” However, I have encountered sufficient gay bashers to know that in their view, touching another man’s penis just once in your entire life qualifies you as completely and totally homosexual to the core. Building a sea kayak in your garage, however, renders you a hobbyist, not a boat builder. Ridiculous debate. IMHO.
4
Hey Frank, don't play politics with your gayness. You know as well as anybody else, whether you like it or not, an effeminate gay man would have a much harder road to the White House. Don't be so easily baited, mate.
4
The Democrats were handed an enormous gift- a Republican opponent who is a complete moron. It’s amazing to see them waste this opportunity as they devour their own. Not gay enough, not black enough..? Joe Biden being treated as a rapist for being to “handsy”?! Trump is going to have the last laugh as he cruises to a 2nd term.
3
The Left wing of the Democratic Party seems Hell bent on re-electing Trump in its preference for ideological purity over electoral success. They have gone bonkers.
4
So Dems...do we risk it all on a Gay man or a Black Woman
or a Jewish Socialist, or a Mexican American....in PA,OH,MI...etc.
in the age of Trump..remember McGovern.....sad!
Feeling lucky??
I was waiting for the first op-ed about this candidate's sexuality. Of course Frank Bruni wrote it because like straights, he, too, is obsessed with sexuality. He's so Old School. And he's the Times "gay" columnist, just like Boylan is their "trans" columnist. Neither are close to representative of either group.
There will be an avalanche of such articles. It's America, where a non-typical sexuality (is gay that non-typical?) is endless fodder for discussion, regulating, denial, scorn, hate, humor, titillation, or religious outrage. Which one do YOU fall into reader?
Not a single policy of this formidable candidate will be remembered; just who he is in love with. Tee Hee...
America, you are such a grind.
Times: call this a Fail.
Bruni: work harder for your pay: this is phoning it in.
2
As far as I can tell, there is one writer who questioned whether Buttigieg is “gay enough”. She exists purely as click bait for Slate: a very dim writer who revels in being contrary and ridiculous on anything and everything. If I see her name on an article, I know it’s a must-to-avoid. My question to Mr, Bruni is: why on earth would you base a column on the views of one rather irrelevant writer? Nobody’s worried about Buttigieg’s level of gayness except a crackpot, click bait columnist. Ignore the trolls.
7
Agree the Dems need to break free from their masochistic approach to elections and recognize that the American people have been trained to like “Winners.”
Frank, also agree that stereotypes are dehumanizing but the fact that Mayor Pete doesn’t come across like someone from the Village Halloween parade will certainly help him be accepted by people who are unfamiliar with gay people (or who think they are). Sorry, but that’s where we find ourselves st this moment in history.
Sadly as I listen to his brainy memoir, I am actually more worried re the anti-intellectualism among voters rampant in this country and how people will react to his data-driven approach and literary quotes.
That said, he clearly enjoys people and finds something to understand and appreciate even in his opponents. And he is allergic to virtue-signaling! Bravo!
3
Thank you!!
I have been practicing how to correctly pronounce his name for some time !
I am a life long Democrat who has voted for only one Republican since 1962 and he was a friend running for a Judgeship.
I am wholeheartedly and totally throwing my support behind Peter Buttigieg. He is the person this nation needs to start pulling it back out of the dark dank cave of Donald and his Gang Of Perps, uh, I mean GOP.
For the record I am a 75 year old white male and a Vietnam Veteran.
13
Is the left truly eating their own, or is Bruni fanning the flames of a tiny, tiny issue?
Gee, somebody with an identity agenda wrote an article that got published by Slate. So what? 99% of the public would not have seen the article, nor had the concern.
Yet Mr. Bruni takes this tiny molehill, and marches it to the top of the mountain that is the front page of this newspaper. In doing so, he, and he alone, creates the impression that identity politics is larger than it really is.
4
"How do Democrats properly vet their candidates for president without cannibalizing them? How do they rightly insist on sensitive and inclusive leaders while making allowances for past mistakes, present quirks, human messiness and the differences in the conversation and the culture now versus 10 or 20 or 40 years ago?"
Answer. They don't because they can't. They're the new Puritans. They used to give a pass to a number of their grievance groups. Now only rappers get a pass.
I saw a tweet last week from CNN reporter, Dan Merica, who mischaraterized and was spreading misinformation what Mayor Pete said in an interview with KQED in San Francisco about "coastal elites."
LGBTQ tweeters jumped on this immediately questioning Mayor Pete's gay cred. NONE of them who supported that tweet could have possibly listened to that interview. I shut that down. I won't stand by and let this stuff start and will call it out wherever I see it, regardless of the candidate.
They've all agreed to play fair and positive, which I hope holds in the primary debates; there's no reason for voters to do otherwise. As far as I'm concerned ANY of them will win my vote in the general, which is the way it should be if we want to defeat the Oaf of Office.
3
The only people who seem to be imposing purity test on Democratic candidates are political pundits who have nothing better to do than nitpick every candidate for being too this or not enough that. Democratic voters are smarter than that to care if Joe Biden is a handsy guy or of Kamala Harris is black enough or if Pete Buttigieg is gay enough. What we want are candidates with smart policies that are inclusive and protect Americans from systems that favor the wealthy at all costs.
4
Nailed it.
1
Pete's gay - SO WHAT? All of this tragic handwringing just smacks to me of character assassination... originating from bigoted prudes in both parties and Trump's hit squad trying to throw as much mud as can be slung at any D candidate to see if it sticks.
Get Real. Get Over It.
2
This article misses the forest for the trees. "Identity politics" itself is a loser, and it's one of the stupid platform issues raised by the Dem elite to generate pointless divisions. They do that in their own party because they are actually the puppets of the rich, and corporations - just as the Republicans are. None of these people want real progressive candidates to win - or even to primary, but that's what we need in this country to take it back from the nuts currently running it.
3
Not one of Mr. Bruni's better pieces. But his advice to Dems in the first part is wise & sound. After that it turns into a gay tempest in a teapot.
2
I am a life-long Democrat who happens to spend 6 months of the year in fly-over county in contact with folks who think liberals should be tarred and feathered, or maybe even shot.
I can assure you that as soon as Pete Buttigieg shows up with his husband on the political circuit the fly-over folks will rush to whoever is running against Mayor Pete.
2
It strikes me that no one has ever questioned if a lesbian candidate was “gay enough”...Double standard, perhaps?
4
I've seen and been around these types of Democrats, you see them in the people who think Biden isn't good enough because he touches people, and two (out of a lifetime, and only when he's a potential candidate) said that it was not sexual, but it was mildly unwelcome.
The woke-er than thou variety of liberals are always seeking another more perfect level of purity, ignoring what our most notable non-white-male President said - "Do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good."
Democrats need to speak against this, and deal with the heat from the extremists who would disqualify an excellent candidate for putting his hands on people's shoulders, or for being a non-effeminate gay man.
2
I swear if Jesus came back and ran for office, he would be disqualified by the Democrats: He consorted with prostitutes! He turned water into wine - that just encourages drunken behavior! He wears sandals!
Grow up, my fellow Democrats. We have primaries for a reason. That’s when you get to vote someone off the island.
6
Gay? I had no idea. But I sure like his ideas!
1
Thank you, Frank Bruni!
2
What annoys me is people who let their sexuality overwhelm their own identity. If you are gay, Gd bless you but do you have to rub it in my face?? Mayor Pete GO FOR IT RUN FOR PRESIDENT you have my vote! Who cares if negative nabobs say "you aren't gay enough" nonsense, its just part of you. I am sure nobody in the department had a problem with Father Mychal Judge (FDNY chaplain 9/11 victim #1) and his homosexuality.
1
He has a problem, a white, gay socialist man cannot compete with a black, socialist female. Harris will win the primary.
Democrats seem unable to step back and view ALL the candidates Democrat AND Republican in perspective.
Democrats are up against a man who has paid off more than two women to avoid publicizing affairs. He's proud of grabbing women by their genitals. He's openly racist, proven by housing lawsuits.
Yet Democrats persist in splitting hairs over whether candidates are "pure" enough to meet a continuously moving set of standards. Democrats, CUT IT OUT!
Our job is to quietly remove the worst President that the US has ever seen by providing a good candidate that can beat him. He doesn't have to be excellent, or the best President we've ever had, or the 2nd coming of the saviour. Just competent and capable of beating the clown and fool that is in office.
2
Well said sir. Trump will romp for a second term. The Democrats are lost. When a “clown “ like Sander’s. can be the first front runner says something about America. I fear for the future of my beloved America.
1
Buttigieg & Abrams 2020
Abrams & Buttigieg 2024
2
I had read the Slate column earlier; this just reminds me how stupid it was. I am not interested in selecting a Presidential candidate based on points for being the most racially, sexually, ethnically marginalized person in the race.
3
Pete Buttigieg says publicly that he is married to a man. Can you be more gay than that? Democrats need to stop eating their young.
1
The motivations underlying the questions encircling Buttigieg, Harris, and Biden have nothing in common—except to jeopardize their candidacies.
Slate reflects the Procrustean minginess of certain so-called “progressive” types. Most of us are tolerant, but few are interested in constantly being bombarded with articles on sexuality and queer performance. This is just another manifestation of America’s atavistic Puritanism, which suggests that a gay politician is newsworthy but also vulnerable because of the performance of their sexual orientation. The rest of the world has moved on from this jejeune topic long ago.
The questions confronting Harris challenge her lived experience of “blackness” in the US, which has everything to do with whether she is descended from slave ancestors who experienced Jim Crow. Harris is a member of the professional class, and she is more upwardly mobile than most whites. Her phenotypic blackness is the only thing she shares in common with American blacks, just as in Obama’s case. She is not “blood,” as they say.
Biden is not just a politician out of step with the times. He is an invasive toucher who needs to be stiff-armed to keep him in check. The man’s personal behavior could be ultimately reflected in policy. Still, Biden is no Packwood, who was sent packing in 1995.
Buttigieg is more empathetic because of his sexual orientation? But “looks” and “vocal inflections” do not affect the empathy quotient?
Where’s Bruni been lately?
Best Bruni piece in a while. Many thanks
There is no left left because of the wrangling about who is more politically correct or acceptable than whom. While Democrats dissect and deconstruct every last thing that could be less than P.C., we have a dangerous, mentally unstable, brutish, cruel, narcissistic misogynistic racist in the WH behind whom Republicans are in lockstep. A houseplant would be a better President than the current one. I wish Dems would learn something from Republicans on this.
2
Identity politics is ruining the Democratic Party...full stop.
The irony and hypocrisy of such reductionist thinking appears lost on a large swath of the Party.
If you care more about the sexual orientation, skin color, chromosomal makeup, or any other more or less permanent individual trait than you do about how a candidate or elected official actually votes or espouses policies affecting your family, community, state, or country, then you’re no better than the white nationalists, misogynists, or homophobic bigots you condemn.
3
It's politically unwise to give much weight to the sexual preferences and conduct of presidential candidates. Clinton was an obvious philanderer but won election in 1992 and reelection in 1996. Trump was heard on tape confirming his sexual boorishness, but still won in 2016. Biden will probably lose, but not because he's a handsy smeller. Biden has already shown himself to be a loser at the presidential level, in 1998 and 2008. This is not new. Back in 1828, Jackson was elected resoundingly over incumbent Adams despite Adams' big campaign about Jackson having married his wife before she was divorced from her prior husband.
Those infatuated by sexual matters in politics are sniffing the wrong thing.
1
Wonder if Pete is practically impossible for even Trump to insult!?
Would Trump mock Pete’s sexuality? I doubt it...Somehow Mayor Pete might be safe from our President’s insults!
1
Why hasn't anyone asked whether Donald Trump is "white enough" to be president?
2
Oh goody.
The Primary kerfuffle and accusations have started already.
Best get ahead of any slights or derogatory language by throwing out the race, creed, sex, what have you card.
Seems kinda early for such...but hey, it is the same every election.
If one disagrees with a woman, then they must be misogynous.
Don't like older presidents, ageism.
Not black, brown, purple enough...too white...racist.
No we can have homophobia and not gay enough too.
Thus the media cries crocodile tears as they stoke the fires and gleefully report any and every juicy scandal and implied put downs.
Hooray for our 2yr election process.!!!
So much fun.
NOT!
3
"As for the mini-debate about Buttigieg’s gayness, it arose principally from this column in Slate,"
Slate?
SLATE?
All interns, all the time Slate?
The clickbait colony?
Please tell us someone forwarded that to you, Frank. I'd lose a lot of respect for you if I knew you read Slate.
5
Frankly, is this topic that important?!
1
Ugh.
Ok. Let me say two different things.
Thing 1: If we are trying to "sell gay to America" then I think Major Pete is perfection. Give middle America their "gay lite". You know why? Because once Grandma knows that "gay lite" doesn't bite, she will be the one doing the hustle with the flaming queen to YMCA at someone's gay wedding. I am speaking from experience.
Thing 2: Should the Dems pick Major Pete for the nomination. That's a whole other consideration. But what the Mayor does in the privacy of his home..... and what type of genitalia his spouse has....should have NO BEARING AT ALL WHATSOVER on the job. Let's talk about his ideas, experiences, and temperament...but leave his love life within the the walls of his home.
6
Right on Frank.
1
The real question is whether a privileged white male mayor of a small Midwestern city would even be given the time of day in a democratic primary if he wasn't gay.
1
Who care if Mayor Pete is gay? Is he competent to do the job? ....that is what matters.
4
Oy. Are the positions and policies of these candidates even relevant? I'm not looking for a perfect human being, just a competent one. Michelle Goldberg thinks Biden is too old. Others think Mayor Pete isn't gay enough or that Harris isn't Black enough. This is stupid talk people. I really need you all to shut up. Thank you.
5
I am getting pretty tired of democrats
If the candidate is truthful, smart, with a good agenda and doesn't describe himself as a socialist I don't care if it is black, white, latino, gay, women, men, transsexual or if he likes to hug or kiss affectionately as long as he is OK with people prefering a less touchy interaction.
The Democrats can always be counted on to eat their own—mine boggling.
1
Can we please stop with the sexual orientation politics.
If the candidate is qualified for office and promises to
help all Americans...
As for Pamela Harris -
Senator Harris you are not an African American.
None of your ancestors were Slaves in America.
You come from a very privileged background.
Just state your policies.
As for Mayor Pete - possible V.P.
1
@John Brown
Who's Pamela Harris? In any event, we'll let Pam be the judge of her own African-Americaness, thank you. And we won't start referring to her as Senator Harris until she wins something.
2
I didn't bother to finish reading this column. You are part of the media problem. You sound just like you did in the last election. Questioning and deriding Hillary and the nonsense about her email servers and trump won. Thanks Frank. And no one seems to care much about the daughter and son in law trump using private email. Here you're worried about the Democrats attacking their own but what are you doing? You yourself might not be 'gay enough' to be an out writer for the NYT but here you are writing away. Democrat bashing. Everyone you're writing about is running for pres and I guess it seems you're just not satisfied with gay enough or black enough or too old or too young. As we get closer to trying to rid this country of the current sloppy failure of a leader that we have could you just stick to fluff like why gays over 50 should stay home for dinner and not venture out to eat? (You forgot to mention in that column that the reason many over 50 don't go out to eat is we just can't afford it). As I look back on that election I stopped reading your column because you didn't have anything decent to say about any candidate and while complaining or pointing out what you don't care for in this or that candidate you simply help people like trump win. Maybe it's time for you to take a long vacation or sabbatical. You are part of the media and unfortunately you're sometimes part of the problem. I guess I'll have to take another break from reading this column like I did in 2016.
4
Gay enough? Black enough? White enough? Enough, enough! If this doesn't stop, we'll fail to do the one thing we absolutely must: remove Donald Trump from the White House. Personally, I really don't care who opposes him; I only care that s/he wins.
3
Frank, enjoyed your essay this weekend, but now you are right back on the 'adding nothing to the discussion again'....I think it is time for a sabbatical...try again after the elections...maybe a guest lecturer at ND....
2
Out political culture is getting nuttier and nuttier. On the bright side, Frank's columns just get better and better.
Who? Really? Pull-eeze!
There is no template for being gay. Some play sports, some are drag queens, some wear flannel, some wear silk, some love opera, some hate opera, some are not good at anything and some are great at everything. Someone who is gay or straight and does not like everything you like is only important if you want to have sex with them. When voting, do your homework and vote for the best candidate.
1
You sub-headline? They already have, Frank. Exhibit #1; Joseph R. Biden. And the few Democrats that have?
SHAME ON THEM!
Who cares that he’s gay? Not me. It’s his record and his policies that matter to me. I’m for Bernie but except for the ridiculous affectation of the rolled up leaves this guy seems a good choice as a VP!
Worst thing that can happen to my country, the once great USA under my favorite president, (Barack Obama) is to re-elect this current abomination of a president. For the record, I am a year old union man, Vietnam Veteran and white heterosexual male. Please, I ask my fellow democrats, knock off the ridiculous nit-picking of all our potential candidates. It is just plain stupid.
4
Kirsten Gillibrand led the devouring of Al Franken for a stupid, juvenile, sophomoric prank done when he was a COMEDIAN!!! Franken's offense occurred at the height of Harvey Weinstein's unveiling and was exacerbated by the moment. Nonetheless Franken was pilloried and the Senate lost a powerful progressive member. All this whole the White House is occupied by a demented, brain damaged, sexually deviant, pathological lying clown. I'm all for finding out what candidates stand for but Republicans on My have to check a few boxes... God, guns, gays, judges and abortion. Democrats have a list of 112 boxes. Get a grip and recognize tbat no seeker of the Presidency is perfect and if that's what Democrats are looking for them brace yourselves for four more years of Le Grande Orange.
5
I wonder if this writer from Slate feels that Obama wasn't "black enough", having not been descendant from slaves here in America.
The party of Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt is now the personality cult of a bumbling Nazi, but who has the existential problem? Why it’s the Democrats, of course! Relax, Frank. What you are seeing is a party not goose stepping in unison, unlike what both parties did in 2016.
1
Excellent column, Frank. So many non-issues in the long string of political noise. This one not unimportant (still, unfortunately) - but so unnecessary in real life in 2019 for easily a majority of American voters. And I'm saying this as an old (68), straight, married 40 years, Vietnam military veteran white guy. Honestly, I don't know anyone in any of "my circles" who would put homosexuality even on the list of concerns if a candidate is the right candidate overall in their minds. Maybe I just don't know enough narrow-minded people. If so, I'm okay with that. In any case, I sincerely believe that whatever the percentage of voters is who might vote against Mr. Buttigieg because he is gay, or because - am I actually saying this? - he doesn't look "gay enough" (so OMG! I was hoodwinked! I didn't even know!! He looks so [fill in the blank]!!") will be inconsequential. Their votes just tiny drops in the water bucket of history. If it turns out Pete Buttigieg gets nominated - then clearly the "issue" of "...he doesn't 'look' [this or that] enough..." will have become moot. Much too late at this point, IMO, to sweat the remaining drops of ignorance on this subject. BTW: Pete's surname - Buttigieg - needs to be added to the NYT online dictionary! Hard to pronounce? Check. Hard to spell? Yes! So since he's real now, his name should be auto-spell checked! :)
I knew who wrote this before clicking on the link. Christina Cauterucci. She’s a self-identified “queer” woman whose carefully practiced wokeness belies anti-male homophobia. She embodies everything wrong with leftist identity politics. Intersectional feminists like her are the biggest threat to the liberal coalition.
1
As expected from racist frank we have here the dog whistle: it’s ok to be white. The packaging is irrelevant to that message
Sadly, Pandora’s box has been opened and there’s no going back. Everything gets put under an electron microscope - for analysis, debate, and an endless stream of opinions - because a captive audience - of literally billions of people - would rather read what’s on their phone or iPad than actually relate, in human ways, with other people. It’s politics as entertainment, and with entertainment - not governing - being what we want from our politicians, we got a reality-TV star for our President. The crowded field of Democratic candidates has no one with an “entertainment quotient,” or the charisma (Obama’s forte, along with his dignity and cool), to beat Trump, who’s the biggest news magnet the White House has ever contained. If Mayor Pete were 10 years older, and had ten more years of experience in higher offices, he’d be the frontrunner, but now he’s just another specimen under the microscope.
1
Members of the media who focus solely on the defects of Democratic candidates are carrying Mr. Trump's water and doing Mr. Trump's work. Mr. Trump very skillfully deployed the mainstream media against Clinton in 2016. He's doing it again.
1
I've made a deliberate decision to sit out the primaries until about 4 weeks before Election Day. I'll cast my primary vote for a sensible candidate, but without casting aspersions on other candidates.
In the general election, I will then vote for the perfect candidate, imperfect candidate, talking parrot, or ham sandwich with a D next to its name.
3
Time out. There is not "an actual mini-debate on the left recently over whether Pete Buttigieg is gay enough." Or maybe there is, but it's not contained in either of the links provided to demonstrate that. There is a Daily Beast article titled to that effect in the first link, which links to some people on Twitter who do not make that argument, and then a thoughtful Slate article (the second link contained in the paragraph in this article that refers to an imaginary "mini-debate") that, among other things, such as denouncing the oppression olympics that this OpEd article is accusing it of perpetuating, discusses his connection to the community and it's struggles. It's no kind of hit piece or accusation of Buttigieg not being "gay enough."
But this is how you craft a narrative, folks. You misrepresent something, get a cohort to repeat the misrepresentation, then you take out OpEds everywhere possible analyzing the made-up reality, thus moving the conversation past the validity of its premise altogether.
Don't fall for this nonsense. You want to have an argument with people who want diversity in the party and don't think that homosexuality qualifies? Have that argument with them. Those people exist. This OpEd is pure, shameless and cheap propaganda.
4
Identity politics at its worst:
"MetroWeekly, a magazine for Washington’s LGBTQ community, asked Buttigieg if he’s worried that he appears to be 'part of the status quo' as a 'white cisgender man.'"
1
It's a fraught time. People are obsessing over every sleight, real or perceived. College students are petting puppies. Trigger warnings abound. Democrats must resist the impulse to pile on or we'll face another four unholy years that may indeed take this nation to its knees.
1
Atheists are still the people the fewest voters will support in the US. And that has no racial or sexual basis whatsoever.
3
As soon as you stereotype anyone you demean them. You make them less than the full complete person they are. We long to be seen as humans not robots that represent some class, gender or color. If we fall into this trap we are no better than those who demean immigrants at the southern border as all rapists and murderers or those who see women as only sexual objects. We are better than this. Justice is represented as blind folded as she holds the scales and some how we must find this ideal in ourselves.
We are not better then this. Our current President is proof of that. Yet the U.S. still stands for something that used to be admired in the world. Even Trump can’t take that away.
1
Why would you even bring something like this up. It’s absurd!
I would love it if Pete were to make a difference in our world, but I’m afraid America is too mean and hateful to have a president who is gay. They don’t mind a philandering sexual predator, but a gay man is too much for these faux puritans. I don’t know what the answer is, but four more years of Trump is not an option. Good luck to Pete. I wish him well.
3
Nothing makes people more uncomfortable than not being able to readily categorize someone; they'd prefer to be wrong than stumped. Was Obama black enough? He thought so and was confident that people would vote for a black man so they could feel good about themselves, but he approached governance no different than the whitest of the white Ivy League backslapper. Once he gave away the store after the crash, I saw that he was trading in on his inspiring story, and not using it to inform his decisions, something reaffirmed by his cavorting with billionaires once having left office. Believing that you know somebody because they fit into one or more simple categories is just intellectual laziness. Unfortunately, it usually works - until it doesn't.
1
I want to be Frank Bruni when I grow up. Unfortunately I’m in my 60s. Oh well, maybe next life.
Gay. Schmay. Who cares. Mayor Pete is smart, sympathetic to those less fortunate and has some serious ideas about how to narrow the gap between the top and the bottom of our economy. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. I hope he can put together the campaign staff and effort he needs to succeed, because he's the best antidote to Trump.
5
Is this reverse discrimination? I certainly don’t recall seeing any comments about whether a lesbian candidate is “gay enough”
Imagine having a President again with a well-stocked brain. When I read Buttigieg's bio I nearly swooned. Military background AND Harvard AND Oxford AND a minority? What a refreshing change from cunningly ignorant.
6
The fact that this is a conversation at all drives me out of my mind. Did Joe Biden frame his apology/explanation incorrectly, as Michelle Goldberg suggests? Is Mayor Pete openly gay enough?,Aren't we actually the party of snowflakes that Republicans say we are? Or is this nonsense confined to the New York Times bubble? God I hope so. I really can't take much more of this without completely losing faith in American politics.
2
I like ALL of the Democratic candidates. Every. Single. One. Each of them has more integrity in her/his little finger than you-know-who has in his entirety. But I think Pete has an edge over all of them - I don't see him letting himself get pulled into the muck. He's smart and has proven himself a leader. I think he'll run a smart campaign based on policy and the issues. There is no need to attack DT and his minions - all of their warts are right out in front of us to see every single day. I'm gonna go all optimistic here and say that I can't wait to see who he picks for a running mate after he is nominated!
1
Even if someone is ridiculous enough to say that Pete is not gay enough (whatever that means) or that his whiteness, upper-middle-class background and Harvard and Oxford degrees nullify his experience as a minority (that make no sense at all) and undercut his status as a trailblazer (whatever that means) it doesn't mean anyone should pay attention or repeat it, much less put it in the New York Times.
Those immature and flaky ideas do not exemplify "the left." They exemplify immature and flaky people. Lay off the rest of us lefties. When a minimum level of gayness becomes a plank in the party platform, let us have it. Until then, insufficient gayness in anyone, including a presidential candidate, is most definitely not a thing.
There are lots of flaky ideas out there, and it's maddening when media people hear them (or make them up?) and smear all of "the left" with them. Stop doing that.
2
Go ahead Frank play the game.
The real issue is the bought and paid for electoral college not gayness...
2
Here we go again! I heard this same kind of nonsense in 2008 about a guy named Barack Obama, except that with him the question in some quarters had to do with whether he was “black enough”!
I could care less whether Buttigieg is “gay enough” because it’s irrelevant. I was all set to support another candidate until Buttigieg came down the pike out of nowhere. Initially I was concerned about his age, but then I heard him speak. This fellow is intelligent, wise beyond his years, and seems to have a very good grasp of his own limitations. This last fact leads me to believe that he would appoint only the best people to staff the White House and the Cabinet.
I’ll go out on a limb here’s: out of all the candidates running for President (and this includes that dyspeptic old curmudgeon from Vermont) Buttigieg appears to be the most qualified.
1
Not only is he called out for not being gay enough, (huh?) he will also have to conquer the monstrosity of not being a woman or a minority candidate. Sacre Bleu!
All that aside, it would be such sweet, sweet revenge on the Evangelical community and what a bunch of hypocrites they have shown themselves to be in their support of Trump. Many heads might explode to see Mayor Pete taking the oath of office, while his husband holds the Bible, looks at him adoringly and then gives him a kiss at the end. "Clean up in Isle 3!"
1
This guy sounds like the real deal and thus far, my vote is between Mayor Pete and the Governor of Washington whose only advantage is the amount of experience he brings to the table. An all white male ticket? Dems will croak! Not that there aren't plenty of great women also in the mix but if the Dems lose this one as they well might, the ball game is over.
1
[[I’m worried because there was an actual mini-debate on the left recently over whether Pete Buttigieg is gay enough.]]
Those people have too much free time on their hands.
The Democrats need to get out of their own way!
This seems like the perfect place to recall that classic quote from Democratic President Lyndon Johnson..."The difference between liberals and cannibals is that cannibals eat only their enemies."
4
Take away the gay and then Buttigieg is just another Beto—upper middle class, privileged and white—only with even less experience. To support his candidacy just because he’s gay is ridiculous.
Ok but the media feeds us most of our information, so if all we are seeing is front-page articles in papers like The Times, on Biden's "handsiness" or stories about Harris not being "black enough" or Buttigieg "not gay enough" this is what we are going to follow with our votes. I don't even like Biden but the media is so out of control on this, it's just nuts. Maybe it's time we solely listen to the candidates' speeches and read their websites. I don't want to think of my esteemed newspapers as junk but the more junk stories I see on the top page the more I wonder if I've wandered into the gossip column aisle in the supermarket. Your colleagues and editors need to be more "choosy" about what gets published. You're responsible for our democracy as much as the courts, the governing bodies and the voters.
2
You need to pay some attention to the Headlines of these pieces. I read the article and I found it informative, helpful. But the Headline, "Mayor Pete Is Plenty Gay" means different things to different people. My take on Buttigieg was determined by seeing him interviewed a few times. I came away with real admiration and probably support. This headline sorta makes him sound like a flamer and I don't think it was given much thought. His sexuality isn't all that necessary to wade into. There is a lot of diversity in the Democratic camp... How about dealing with points of view, prospective policy and coherence. He's plenty smart, plenty articulate and plenty qualified. BTW I'm heterosexual, 78, white and plenty impressed with Buttigieg.
“Democrats better not eat their own”, its already happening Frank. Watch the Biden (not a Biden supporter, don’t want him or Sanders or that empty suit Beto either) pile on, started by a Sanders operative and now being driven by #metoo like rhetoric. And that’s just the beginning. You have candidates and their supporters going after anyone not on board with their agenda. Moderate and compromise used to be dirty words for tea party types and Trump zealots, now its part of a anti Lino (liberal in name only) purest agenda on the left. Its fascinating how much of it is coming from the Bernie bunch (formally Bernie bros) since there was considerable marginalization of women within the 2016 campaign. Really what the ????, do they even want to beat Trump. Biden’s and Sanders time was 2016 & the Hillary fix was in, get over it. How about they play the elder statesmen and give the women and younger guys a chance. You know, like a openly gay mayor from Ohio. (not ageists, am in my 60’s) or an African American lady from Georgia.
1
A Democratic ticket of Michelle Obama and Pete Buttigieg would be the perfect antithesis to Trump/Pence.
1
Thank you Frank!
He's a great guy and public servant. The headline should say that rather than blast us with the gay word.
1
Quick candidate review here
Warren-female but wont be viable, too old not ethic or gay
Harris--woman of color. Viewed as a good dem candidate
Hildebrand--gay white woman. Another leading candidate
Biden--old white male with #metoo issues. Wont be viable candidate at all
Mayor Pete--young gay white male. Too early to tell.
But is seems that you need to have at least 2 of the 3 criteria (female, non-white, gay) to be considered a viable candidate. Personally, I dont believe you need to have any of those criteria, you just need to be the best person for the job. But I dont feel the party agrees with that anymore.
What is abundantly clear is that if you are an older white heterosexual male, the democratic party is no longer for you.
1
The sturdy ties to straight culture is stupid too. That would only make it more difficult.
Mayor Pete's gayness won't be what turns people onto supporting him. What des it for me is his intelligence, his empathy, his realistic approach to problem solving, his inclusiveness.
If he can't be the nomineee this time around, can the eventual nominee please make him their running mate? Mayor Pete vs Pence in a VP debate? OMG - epic television!
2
An article that purports to decry intra-party cannibalism and then, by way of the worst of identity politics, ignores Mayor Pete's policies. Cool story, Bruni.
1
Are Democrats guilty of being so over wrought about trumps behavior and that of his cronies that we are taking it out on fellow Democrats by being so over the top PC that we are striving for the "perfect being" candidate.
So far Biden is being accused of sexual harassment over an incident back in 2014. Where on gods green earth has Lucy Flores been all of these years that she is now bringing this up publicly and getting national media coverage. Why did she not say something privately to Biden after the incident occurred and put it to rest. It makes one suspicious of her motives.
Then let us see Beto is now the "Jesus Texan" or the "rock star" depending on who you are talking with and he may also be "too white". Then Cory Booker is a "racial opportunist", Amy Klobuchar is a "mean woman who eats with a comb", Kamala Harris may not be "black enough", Bernie Sanders "too old" and a dare I say it a "Socialist", Elizabeth Warren "too old" and not "native American" and also a "socialist" and now Pete Buttigieg isn't "gay enough" and also "too white".
If this is representative of what the Democratic Party has sunk to then we will lose in 2020 deservedly.
The
3
Sorry Frank, but you haven't been paying enough attention to the way "your side" talks and thinks about intersectionality and white male privilege. Just shut up and sit down and nominate someone with more identity points than either you or your friend the mayor can ever muster.
1
If Buttigieg (I copied and pasted, too easy to misspell) is gay enough for Bruni, then he's too gay to win a national election. I don't see how the Dems could nominate him and expect to beat Trump. America isn't ready for this, I suspect the country isn't even ready to elect a woman yet. This isn't exactly PC but I believe it's the political reality. Do we want Trump out or not?
It doesn't matter if he is gay or straight - or anything else for that matter. He isn't a racist or bigot, and that disqualifies him from being elected president in today's climate.
While praising the intelligence of the American electorate, Donald Trump secretly knows that they can be led around like a bulls with nose rings - only instead of bull rings, he uses their beliefs and prejudices to lead them wherever he wants. Mayor Pete's DNA doesn't permit this type of campaigning.
If DJT doesn't destroy our fragile democracy, he has published the blueprint and playbook for some other demagogue to do it later. If a democracy like America's is going to exist, there will have to be a paradigm shift in human thought throughout the world.
In the near future, we will program the human mind in the computer based on a "survival" algorithm, which will provide irrefutable proof as to how we trick the mind with our ridiculous beliefs about what is supposed to survive - producing minds programmed de facto for destruction. These minds see the survival of a particular belief as more important than the survival of us all. When we understand all this, we will begin the long trek back to reason and sanity.
See RevolutionOfReason.com
What does Gillibrand say about Joe? She ran Franken out, while being happy to share her campaign stage with an accused rapist. What a hypocrite.
Re: Biden...
Pelosi kisses male colleagues while grabbing their arms and shoulders. So does HRC. Nicolle Wallace of MSNBC pats male guests on the arm and calls them “sweetie”. Where’s the outrage?
That said, Joe should not run.
".....not that there's anything wrong with that !"
It's 2019.
The vast majority of Americans are ready for a President who is competent, articulate, down-to-earth, honest, well-informed, dignified and appreciates that good public policy can really make a positive difference for average Americans....whether that person is white, black, purple, heterosexual or homosexual.
Pete Buttigieg appears to fit the bill.
And wouldn't it be great to see fake 'tough guy' and draft dodger Daycare Donnie lose to a gay guy who is also a former Naval Reserve officer who served in Afghanistan ?
Revenge has always been best served cold.
Buttigieg 2020
5
Mr Bruni,
You're always a voice of sanity in the midst of all this chaos and idiocy.
Thanks for an excellent column.
Being a gay guy is a huge advantage in the Democratic primaries - the only thing better would be being a lesbian black female. That beings said - I’m a moderate independent - and I don’t care a whit who sleeps with who - but the guy just doesn’t have the business and government experience I want in a president.
The more I read or hear about Mayor Pete, the better I like him for Prez.
And beyond sneering at the massive stupidity of anybody sho’d start up with the whole “not gay enough,” insanity, i’d say it looks like what they mean is, “Hey! He’s not the same as I am!!”
I have a simple, dopey solution:
Have him stick every wacko “joke,” attack, death threat and ugly insult he’s gotten via e-mail or Facebook or Twitter in the last week or so, up for all to see.
That oughta answer the question pretty quick.
1
Stop, already!! Enough with this! Focus on the issues! Media, you are NOT helping.
3
I will never understand Democrats ability to trip over their own feet.
Who are these people you are arguing with? Some other marginal media commentators? Nobody I know is asking if Ms Harris is “black enough”. Nobody I know is asking if Pete is “gay enough”. It’s stupid. I’m sure you can dig up someone somewhere who said these things, but to extrapolate from that and start lecturing democrats is a huge unsupportable stretch. People are going to say a lot of stupid stuff about each of these candidates. Let’s try to filter out the really moronic or fringe comments. Most people are focused on who would be a good leader. Who has the integrity and experience to do the job? Who can help the whole country? Who can help America become a better place for all its citizens. That’s what is going to determine this primary.
2
I had no idea Mayor Pete or Frank Bruni is gay. And I think that is how it should be. Because I think Frank Bruni is a great columnist. Period. No other qualification needed. If Mayor Pete ends up being the President, he will be POTUS, not GPOTUS.
This is the attack of Bernie’s babies and bullies.
They’d rather trump again than anyone else.
1
Hear, hear on this one! If a candidate is not gay enough, black enough, feminine enough, compassionate enough, green enough, vegan enough, agonistic enough, we will never win 2020.
1
Somebody said something stupid in Slate? Get out of town!
Seriously though, this is a made up problem. Not every stupid thing that somebody says needs to be taken as an expression of a serious current of thought. Social media rewards outrageous proclamations. Online publishing thrives by offering clickbait. When NYTimes Opinion page columnists decide to elevate such idiocies to even greater prominence by treating them as worthy of comment, they become part of the problem.
Buttigieg sounds like a pretty good mayor of a small city. Whether that makes him presidential material seems much less clear. My guess is that the present surge of enthusiasm for him comes primarily from the anybody-but-Bernie crowd's dawning realization that Beto and Harris are not really catching fire and that the only candidate presently polling better than Bernie, namely Biden, has already seen his best numbers.
Buttigieg flatters the certainties of the NYTimes reading centrists who like to call themselves progressives that what the electorate really wants is a lot of ultimately vague but high-minded talk from a guy who would never upset anyone at a cocktail party.
This represents a willful refusal to deal with the actual national mood or to take seriously its sources in the bankruptcy of the technocratic solutions and veiled servility to corporate power that go hand in hand with the platitudes that the chattering class confuses with "realism" and "thoughtfulness."
There's nothing the Democrats like better than a circular firing squad. In fact, it's probably their signature move at this point...
Let's say a miracle happens and Mayor Pete gets the nomination. Can Trump afford to throw stones in his glass house because of his opponent's sexual orientation? Keep in mind there are many gay voters in the Republican tent. I'll take a homosexual president who does not sexually abuse anyone over a heterosexual president who boasts about his libidinous conquests and pays off his concubines to keep things hush-hush. But the real issue is what each of them has to offer, and the articulate and knowledgeable Mayor Pete would do just fine on the debate stage against the inarticulate (the word is ORIGINS, not ORAGES and FUTURE, not FURNITURE) and ignorant Donald Trump.
1
Frank's take on Joe Biden's media thrashing is spot on. If you want to see Democrats eating their own look no further than that ridiculous spectacle.
The level of attack mentioned in this article is nothing compared to what can be expected from the Republicans. Be prepared!
1
WHO are these "democrats" asking these idiotic questions?
We must be focused on the candidates' ability to lead across the nation, be a unifying force and have sound, reasonable policy ideas that support the majority of us, without a corrupt, crime-filled personal history.
1
The Democratic are missing what America wants
The best person for the job .........period !!
Considering where we are politically thanks to old caucasian men, deeply closeted conservatives and the occasional misogynist sociopath... Can we do much worse?
The press has always had issues with gayness. Consider a local gay pride parade. Several thousand show up to watch, 99% of them look remarkably 'average', but on a passing float there's a Chinese fellow impersonating Judy Garland.
Guess who appears at the top of the TV news story...?
I agree,, let's not set up a circular firing squad.
We need candidates of integrity.
We do not need scandal politics. Trump is scandal enough.
We must defeat the Trumplicans if we are to save our democracy.
The thinking of the author of the Slate essay is treading perilously close to the waters of Nazism. The Germans asked the same question of the Jews. In the end it didn't matter: rich or poor - they were all Jews.
Thank you, Frank!
Oh, right, Mr. Bruni, I apologize if I do not want to teach my gay president what Jungle Juice is and not give in to heteronormative institutions like marriage and comparing him being a mayor to a “CEO at a 300 million dollar a year company.”
I apologize, Mr. Bruni, if my gay politics need to be seen in my gay president; because it DOES matter to ME as a millennial gay male. My gay grandfathers and gay godfathers and gay fathers risked way too much to let a gay male whose politics only until recently were truly progressive. In order to win the Democratic primary, it appears Mr. Buttigieg has to water down his gay identity and pander to corporatist denizens and the “Abby Huntsman centrists” in order to gain traction amongst the Democratic field.
I guess we should thank our gay Uncle Tom’s like yourself, Mr. Bruni, for the watered down version of up and coming politicians like Mr. Buttigieg.
Mayor Pete is the epitome of white privilege. He needs to stay in his lane. He will can run in 2028.
@Yellow Bird If "white privilege" is what it takes to defeat Trump, so be it. The goal should be victory, not achieving an acceptable coalition of the "downtrodden."
1
Bravo! Well said.
I have no idea whether Mr. Buttigieg has hit the Goldilocks optimal level of gayness. But Kamala Devi Harris is Black only if the old “one drop” rule is applied. She is definitely not African American, not even literally (her Jamaican father’s immediate forbears had no connection with Africa). And if one applies the more commonly applied definition of the term “African American” to mean the descendants of Africans brought to America for enslavement, then Ms. Harris has no connection whatsoever to that appellation.
This obsession with identity politics must stop. I hope people vote for someone because that candidate best represents their interests and not purely because they share an identity with them.
Is this REALLY the conversation? How well is he able to determine and implement national security? How will he handle the balance between legal and illegal immigration? How will he handle the economy both domestic and globallly? Democrats are nitpicking at the edges and missing the issues the vast majority of people are seriously concerned with. Gay or not or too gay?? Who cares!!!! Can he do the job and do it well? Does he have the chops to moderate the extremes, bring in the opposition and get things done? Gay, man, woman, black or white we need LEADERSHIP not an endless pointless debate about things that do not matter.
2
Yes. Great column.
Ugh. Saying that dems are calling Mayor Pete "not gay enough" because of one Slate article and five idiots on Twitter is a strawman argument if ever I saw one. The criticisms from the left of Mayor Pete were about his neoliberal, Mckinsey, playing-to-power red flags. A 10,000 word essay on Current Affairs entirely unrelated to Pete's sexual orientation.
The left doesn't care if he is gay enough. Or perfect enough (although perhaps Pete's being such a perfect darling is a red flag) We care if he really is in if for the little people. Don't distort the real criticisms and build up this fantastic strawman that everyone can self-righteously tear down.
This brought to mind a Hillary fund raiser I attended in 2016, sponsored by the DMCs gay arm. It was in a tasteful Chelsea loft and populated by the types of gay men that are able to write the requisite checks. Good jobs, good suits on well groomed gym toned bodies.
Then the Q&A came and a trans person began haranguing Debbie Wasserman Schultz in a totally inappropriate way over the lack of support in the DNC for their cause.
At a post mortem I was told that not only the DNC but the slick Chelsea boys as well needed to be more woke - that their place at the table was the result of male privilege. Go figure. Seems the Ds cant resist a chance at shooting themselves in the foot.
Better worry whether Americans are dumb enough, or are
clueless and debauched enough to be immune from Trump lies , or actions, noted or unseen. Or whether we
or are too stupid to see that the new AG, Bill Barr was
doing in his congressional hearings recently. Barr looked
like he was doing what he was doing, preparing to protect
Trump, after writing a 14 page letter saying he'd do just
How frequently, lately, has it seemed the American public has given up or doesn't care about the ugly stinking pile of lies and stuff we have become, no semblance of what we
pretend and were in fact so recently.
It happens so fast.
1
OMG! Thank you thank you thank you! I've been saying these words since 11/2016 and please keep spreading the word. We are apt to go down tripping on our own indignance while Trump waltzes in to his second term. no more!!!
As an ex-Hoosier, and from what I've seen/read about Mayor Buttigieg, I believe he would make a fabulous president. He smart and kind, thoughtful and articulate, the same qualities I seek in a boyfriend.
If he secretly wears pink silk undies, that's between him and his husband. The only thing I would not tolerate is if he were to fluff his hair into a flamboyant orange puff.
Frank enough with you speaking for the entire gay community. Jesus.
I am so with you on this self-immolation the Dems impose on themselves, I could scream.
On a bad day, I have.
1
Pete, Bernie, and Beto - white males with little actual government accomplishment. Democratic misogyny strikes again.
Interesting; I didn't know that the Democrats now had a gayness scale. It's just another effort to militarize their candidates into what they must be in order to be considered a Democrat. Joe Biden is showing us the lower limit of the apologist scale for overplaying his humanist side. Style is more important than substance, perception out ranks truth, emotion forges laws, intent trumps results. If you can't abide by those rules you cannot be a Democrat, you're an ignorant bigot who deserves what you get.
No, I am not a Trump supporter. Didn't vote for him and won't. I've got about as much respect for the Democrats as I do him.
Frank, your last two columns have been spot on! I'm a worried Democrat wondering why so many of us want to eat our young. If we're looking for a wholesome milquetoast candidate who's never so much as sworn or drank, why don't we just ask Mike Pence? C'mon progressives, if you don't like what Uncle Joe Biden has done then don't vote for him in the primary. But also don't cast him out over this, he might be the only one who can beat our current Molester in Chief.
You reap what you sow, Mr. Bruni - you reap what you sow!
Pete Buttigieg might be on his way to being first openly gay President of the United States but not the first president to be gay.
2
Identity politics is a dead end. The only germane question is whether a candidate is "progressive enough"? The question is a candidate "_______ enough"? [Fill in whadevah identity you wanna] is a dead end question. By your policies we shall know thee, not by thy whatever identity.
Mr Bruni, don't feed the troll
From Wikipedia:
In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, whether for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.
1
@RS Bruni is simply pointing out that the left is trolling ITSELF.
2
Granted I am an outsider as an Australian -a huge politics nerd-but an outsider none-the-less. And I see Pete Buttigieg as the antidote to the divisiveness and apathy that is gripping America (and lets be honest basically the whole world). People expecting him to account for who he is and provide justification at every turn are in my opinion leaning into more division. He can acknowledge, he has white privilege, he'd probably acknowledge that he has privilege in passing as straight, what else can you want from him? Democrats that criticise him for how he appears mustn't want unity. They must want to just win this time, so the cycle of complete polarisation will continue on every issue and nothing will get done. Can't you see how valuable it is to have someone that represents conservative values on appearance but is progressive to his core? He is the bridge. He's not polarising, he's unifying.
As someone who is queer but might not seem it to everyone. As someone who has spent a lot of time trying to not be too gay for my family and home town but not so straight that the queer community wont leave me out, give the guy a break. And know this; Australian's are really jealous that you even have Pete Buttigieg to choose. You should see the sorry state of our politics.
Here's the harsh truth that all the hyper-identity-politics types need to hear:
They may feel that it's "correct" to fixate on a candidate's various intersectional bona fides, whether he or she is X or Y "enough," but the fact is, despite Twitter and other social-media (and media) silos, most Americans inclined to vote for a Democrat do not care, and are put off by all this endless high dudgeon and navel-gazing.
"Progressives" (why isn't liberal good enough any more? How about we reclaim it?) may think they have an insurmountable majority, but they are dead wrong. And whether they like it or not, they cannot afford to alienate all those voters who may be — the horror! the horror! — white, male, heterosexual, non-gender variant and so on.
At my very liberal college, I hung out with mostly women. That made me what I called the "spiritual scratching post" for my friends, who would never dare to chastise an actual troglodytic male, but attacked me with glee for not fully subscribing to their every opinion (and not just on gender issues; one good friend attempted to tear me apart because I asserted that Faulkner, who, yes, used the "n-word," was addressing universal themes that made him worth reading. Her message to me? "Be careful!")
Circular firing squad time again? If so, welcome to four more years of an apparently dementia-addled, morally bankrupt "president."
Nice column. At least Biden is white enough.
1
Wow! when working 10 -15% of my fellow programmers and consultants in our team were gay men and women, none pranced in wearing feather boas or jackboots. I think people under 40 are scratching their heads wondering who are writing these op-ed pieces about being gay enough.
Bruni has personally attached more Democrats than any Democratic candidate. It is interesting that he only cares about eating our own after he himself has spent years feasting on them.
I guess Bruni has found the one Democrat he likes. It should come as no surprise how much that man resembles Bruni.
Mayor Pete is a candidate like all the others and should be weighed, experience and all, accordingly.
But make no mistake. Bruni wants special treatment for his man, not equal consideration for all.
Great column thank you
For some of these critics, they'll only be happy if Ru Paul in drag runs for the Presidency (not a bad idea, if I do say so myself!). For some reason, straight men are scared to death of effeminate men. Personally, I think these uptight straight guys are fighting off their same-sex attraction to guys, lol.
I'm sending money to Pete because I find him to be a fabulous and refreshing candidate. Okay, maybe he won't be President but a Kamala Harris/ Mayor Pete ticket would be wonderful!
I don't care whether Mayor Pete is gay enough or too white or too young - anyone who decides they can run this country because they have been a mayor of a small town is delusional.
1
I wonder when anybody’s gonna call Trumpists and Hannity to account for their psychotic demands for political correctness? I mean, they’re getting to the point where if you don’t wear a onesie with a double lightning bolt weave, it’s 48 hours of shrieking.
1
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Thank you for writing this piece. I am a gay man, and the Slate piece offends me -- outrages me -- to my core. You were able to discuss the problems and prejudice in her piece in a far more articulate way than I could have.
2
Now that’s Trump has a check (dems control house) it does matter who the dems present to run against Trump and not just beat him. We need someone to represent this country in a dignified and respectable manner. Someone who can remain clam in a storm guide the ship in the right direction and for Gods sake bring back common decency to the White House. That’s a tall order from the crowded field and so far I only see one maybe two candidates who can fill that bill and this guy ain’t one of them.
I am with you in this, great insights, excellent points. Thank you
1
"There was an actual mini-debate on the left recently over whether Pete Buttigieg is gay enough"
This is the stuff that the left is worrying about, and this is why Trump will be reelected.
2
I'm an old white guy, but I just don't care what people choose to do with their body parts. Let's stay focused on the issues.
5
A recent op-ed on Pete Buttigieg by columnist David Brooks had over 1700 comments, overwhelmingly positive. This man clearly has some momentum going. He is my favorite candidate right now and I donated to his campaign last night.
Please, let's not get into the "not gay enough," "not black enough," etc. accusations. Let's not hurt ourselves before Republicans even lift a finger.
Mr. Bruni also brought up how Lucy Flores' allegations are damaging Biden's prospects. Lucy Flores is a Bernie supporter. I also read in The Economist that a Bernie supporter heckled Beto at one of his rallies. Over on WaPo, Bernie supporters are caustic and disdainfully hostile to anyone who dares criticize their patron saint. One even called Buttigieg "Buttihurt." (Do these childish nicknames remind you of anyone?) I don't think they are making their candidate look better; they are certainly making him look worse.
As far as I can tell, Democratic candidates have not gone negative so far towards other candidates. Bernie seems to be the one exception (though sure, he does it through third parties). That, with much else that transpired during the 2016 elections, tells me that Bernie would be a terrible choice. Other candidates have embraced his early ideas and would likely be much better at implementing them. Please, for the sake of this country, I would ask him (and Biden, too) to please bow out of the race. Let a new generation drive.
3
Buttigieg makes more sense than any Democratic candidate I have heard so far. I just donated to his campaign. I do not care about lables . I want a president who is smart.
4
With every passing day I worry the Dems just aren't up to the task ahead of them.
2
I recall a similar silliness in 2008 when we briefly asked whether Obama was black enough. Let us hope that this to shall pass.
Just a little reminder, it's Donald Trump, people. This is your election to lose.
3
We live in a world where straight white guys are defined by their policies, and everyone else is defined by their sexuality, race and gender. True equality will be when people quit considering how they can use the gay guy to bill themselves as pro or anti gay, and start listening to what the gay guy has to say.
3
There are too many Medeas in the Democratic Party; we have met the enemy and it is us...be careful...let's work for a common goal..enough of this identity stuff...I want good government, justice, equality and opportunity for everyone, conditions that are rapidly deteriorating in our country.
4
Surely you jest. That’s what Democrats do, they eat - no, they devour their own. Ask Mr. Biden.
1
Why did you bring this up? Mayor Pete being gay is neither a qualification nor a disqualification for his candidacy in anything, including the presidency
i think frank may be overreacting to the jejune gay parsing by a millennial slate columnist and her twitterfed chickens.
the columnist seems to conjecture that a flaming gay would not face "the same hurdles" as a mainstream candidate. which is, after all, the kind of overconceptualized truism that millennials seem to find profound. (but ... as nietzsche said in another context: it's not profound, it's not even superficial.)
the key point is that all candidates face the same hurdles -- fundraising, meme spinning, tacking away from controversy -- and the same fundamental challenge: policy, anyone?
everyone should be aware that gays are actually thriving in the midwest -- as colleagues, as neighbors, as friends. the ease with which buttigieg leaves the issue aside and comfortably deals with it when it arises shows perfect political pitch; it also shows a mature ability to separate the significant from the inconsequential.
here's hoping the millennials someday catch up with that.
2
Pete Buttigieg is by far the most interesting candidate now in the race. If the left somehow decides en masse that he isn't qualified for the nation’s highest office because he isn’t “gay enough,” we will all look back at this as the moment when identity politics finally destroyed the Democratic party.
1
Democrats are so addicted to identity politics that there is no way they won’t tear apart their own candidates. Not black enough, not gay enough, not Native American enough. Too white, too old, too touchy-feely. Meanwhile, the antithesis of identity politics marches onward to victory.
1
Mayor Pete tries to reconcile his view of Christianity and how it comports with his lifestyle choice of "marrying" someone of the same sex. He belongs to the Episcopal" church" which is an apostate group--once a church, but no longer. I will not be surprised if Pete gets the nomination. He’s good on his feet. His homosexuality is not going to matter to most people. Sadly, this is the world we live in now.
Love this essay by Bruni. Perfect view of dem politics today - all about identity, not views, values, threats to our country, but identity.
1
The prejudices of the left will be the undoing of Democrats. When identity politics is a fundamental feature of the platform, segregationist mentality and gate-keeping can spread unchecked throughout the party ranks. Only articles like this please can bring these superficial tribalists back down to earth... more please!
To anyone concerned over whether the Democratic candidates are fully expressively gay; adequately representative of racial minorities; too old school around women; too old or to young; or whatnot, please remember that the ultimate alternative will be Trump, a man with a homophobic agenda, who encourages white supremacy and other bigotry, who brags of groping women and whose policies are misogynistic, and who is nowhere near adulthood in his maturity.
1
From where I sit here on the banks of the Missouri River (flyover country’s version of a coast), this column and most of the comments look like the proverbial tempest in a teapot. Frank sure did his part in selling a lot of copies of the Times today.
I was all in for Mayor Pete (indeed he’s plenty gay enough for me) and then I read Nathan Robinson’s piece on Buttigieg in “Current Affairs.” Now I’m hoping the Mayor will address why he chose to work for McKinsey and Company, a firm that has been described as “the world’s most sinister and amoral management consulting company” responsible for tasks the likes of advising Purdue Pharma on how to “turbocharge” OxyContin sales, not to mention their work for dictators and despots all over the world. Why did the Mayor, with his impressive CV, choose McKinsey?
1
Why did “this” guy take a job with aheads up company is a silly question, what has that got to do with his personal character. Can he lead the our country with wisdom for the future that should be the question. America’s problem is that it talks too much.
Gay, straight, trans or from outer space: for me, it was instant rapture at first listen. Mayor Pete has that quality that compels you to trust him from the word go. I really doubt that the not-gay-enough tag is going to stick.
3
Today’s NATO ‘s Secretary Genral’s Jens Stoltenberg speech to both chamber of Congress today, made it clear the damage Trump has and is causing the US, it’s allies and the world.
That said, the key questions the country should be asking is: do candidates meet the high standards of knowledge, ability, temperament and do they have the right set of analytical skills to find solutions to problems, big and small. Anything else is useless Hannityan/ Carlsonian/ Fox newsie noise.
Mayor Pete Buttigieg is becoming exponentially popular by the day because he’s relaxed, thoughtful, smart and easily connects with all people, specially working families, key for a Democratic Party victory. Mayor Pete’s gayness is more incidental than key, which is the way it should be. Ditto with the just elected Chicago Mayor (female, gay & African American). So, let’s devote ink to a good national conversation of the issues, including those being advanced by Sen. Warren, for instance, who’s being marginalize by the press
As for complaints against VP Biden, it all sounds more politically motivated than offensive which is a gift to Cable-TV and social media.
This was a home run Frank. You are doing, by far, the best work on the op-ed staff these days. Everyone else is too busy "eating their own," as you aptly phrased it. You're the only one with the eye on the prize.
1
I'm gay as a goose - not that I know where that saying came from, or how humanity has observed sexuality ratios amongst our pale, honking, feathered friends - but what on Earth does my sexuality have to do with my job, or my ability to do it?
Nobody ever seems to mention that so-and-so is Straight in an incidental reference to their position or job in life, or to have a rigid expectation of the 'expected' amount of their heterosexuality - so why should it be any different for Pete?
What on Earth does it matter if he's gay - or not - and how, exactly, is he to 'prove' the 'amount' of his sexuality, for anyone else to see, judge or consider? Just how gay am I supposed to be, and what is the 'right' way for me to prove it so that I meet Your expectations of My identity?
Just let the man get on with the job he was already elected to do, and let the wider electorate decide if he's who they want to do a bigger job, as it's his policies and political life that should define his role for America, not the gender of who he's attracted to.
To put it another way, the Taoiseach (Prime Minister) here in Ireland is gay, and absolutely Nobody in Ireland ever bothers to discuss his sexuality, apart from random, small gossippy articles about whatever show or holiday he and his BF, Matt, have gone to. Instead, he's just given the same sharp political criticism and disdain as any other leader gets - and that is all that Pete also deserves; no more, no less.
To these tired, old eyes he comes across like a bright, decent, hardworking kid who has already come a very long way and is now on the verge of capturing lightning in a jar.
The trick for him now is to stay on course. We are electing a President here, not recruiting candidates for the title of Gay Man Of The Year.
3
There is only one biological DNA genetic evolutionary fit race aka human.
There is only one biological DNA genetic evolutionary fit human national origin aka Earth.
There are only two biological DNA genetic evolutionary fit procreative human genders aka female and male. But there are humans whose DNA and physical genders do not match their emotional mental gender identities. There is nothing abnormal nor unnatural nor chosen by any of them.
The one and only human race species began in Africa 300, 000+ years ago.
Color aka race is an evolutionary fit pigmented response to varying levels of solar radiation at different altitudes and latitudes primarily related to producing Vitamin D and protecting genes from damaging mutations in ecologically isolated human populations.
Color aka race is a malign socioeconomic political educational demographic historical white supremacist nationalist right-wing American historical myth meant to legally and morally justify humanity denying black African American enslavement and separate and unequal while black African in America.
There is misogyny, patriarchy, homophobia, color aka race aka ethnicity aka national origin bigotry and prejudice based on factors that have nothing to do with race or gender.
Either all human beings are divinely naturally created equal with certain unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Or not.
1
Is he gay enough?
Please tell me that’s not a real conversation taking place in real places.
Let’s try this. Let’s think about our friends. Let’s think about people we admire.
A) Now let’s spend some time thinking about why we like or admire them. They are funny. They are smart. They are kind. They are generous. They are interesting. They have good instincts and policy ideas. They have principles. They’ve shown courage. They’ve displayed integrity.
OK.
B) Now let’s think about their sexuality. Or better yet, let’s spend zero time thinking about it.
So tell me. What matters more in deciding how to vote?
A or B. So if B is not important, why would gradations of B be important?
2
Whether Pete Buttogieg is gay or not doesn't seem relevant to whether he would be a decent President or not. Indeed, in terms of character he clearly seems more qualified than most of those interested in the job, who tend to be overly self interested and weird.
The fact that Joe Biden is both socially inappropriate and oblivious to the fact of the weirdness of sniffing other people's hair and planting big kisses on them strongly suggests that he would not be a decent President. This behavior reveals that Mr. Biden has little self awareness and little understanding of the feelings of others.
As a openly queer man who can "pass," I recognize that I enjoy certain privileges that my brethren who can't pass do not. That said, I would be remiss not to venerate and appreciate those who came before me that could not pass. They were the brave ones on the front lines that set us on our path to equal rights. Their very nature meant that they took the brunt when so many of us could hide. Cheers to them.
2020: Big Gay(or not ) Medicare For ALL.
That is the WINNING Issue.
Period.
Thank you Mr. Bruni. That article in Slate was beyond absurd.
This 'not xxxx enough' in both our major parties has to stop. I'm tired of hearing "not gay enough", "not black enough", "not mean enough", "not Christian enough", "not left enough", "not right enough" and so on. When extremists succeed in turning politics into a series of purity tests it turns off ordinary voters. I think that's partly the point, actually, and so ordinary voters need to just ignore it and push back by getting involved and promoting sensible people.
Of course, the Democrats will "eat their own." They have always done so. The Democrats are a very loosely-held-together coalition of special interest groups (they don't like that name, but that's what they are). Very loosely held = herding cats. There are identity politics, purity tests, and a willingness to savage one's colleagues to make a point, not win the election.
Talk about "eating their own!" AOC and the Progressives have decided it's more important to try to replace Democrats with "more pure" Democrats then keep the Dems in the majority--stupidity. Lose the majority and nothing "progressive" will happen. They don't care.
Agreed 100%, great column. The Slate writer should offer an apology for raising such inane observations and using them to make assumptions about someone they don't know. The country would be most fortunate to be able to say President-elect Buttigieg on 11-4-20, but while there will certainly be legitimate things raised along the way that may lead one to ponder whom they will select to lead the country next, the empty ideas the Slate writer attempted to force into the conversation, in a blatant attempt at gotcha! journalism, should not be among them.
2
An entity purporting to be a woke progressive states that person X insufficiently exemplifies attribute Y.
I’m not exactly in the same league with Claude Shannon or Alan Turing. Is there a way to determine whether the entity is probably a human woke progressive, a human troll posing as a woke progressive, or a bot?
The entity knows attribute Y is generally considered desirable by woke progressives. A troll would know that. Could a bot determine that by analyzing lots of data?
Trolls could probably pretend to arrogate to themselves the authority to define Y and test for sufficient Yness. Could a bot determine that Y is considered desirable by woke progressives, that woke progressives will then often define Y and establish tests for sufficient Yness, and then be able to go about doing just that in a believable way? If so I’m impressed.
Would a Democratic office holder know to size up the situation, contend with woke progressives to define the Democratic Party, and insist Democrats represent all their constituents with need, circumstance, dignity, and practicality in mind?
Thanks for your insight into this.
Actions speak louder than words! We like him! He is a man of character and understanding who chooses to serve his country. He is proactive, practical, educated, and aware. With Trump we are awash in lies, incompetence, petulance, and sleaze. Buttigieg has Character and awareness of how government works, and a deep understanding of Civics, law, and the Geopolitical issues that matter. Pete Buttigieg would be a president who can actually work governing at home and abroad. He can can speak plainly but clearly because, "origins" are not oranges!
Our current president is pathologically incapable of being truthful, he is deeply ignorant, peevish, vindictive and unaware, this is not OK. He has been supported by partisan self serving political hacks with vested interests, hypocrites and obstructionists like Pence, Graham, Barr, and McConnell.
1
Hear, Hear! My only interest in a Democratic candidate for president is whether they can win and whether they can generate enough excitement for a clean sweep of the House and Senate. For the party of inclusion, we sure spend a lot of energy excluding and dividing. Mayor Pete's worst flaw is an unintelligible last name. Joe Biden's worst flaw is that he's handsy. Kamala's worst flaw is that she has no sense of humor. But any of them would be heaps better than the person currently occupying the White House. I only hope that the Democratic Party can manage to not eat all of its young prior to November 2020.
1
Who cares if he's gay? That's old news. What we want to hear about is his analysis of his father's work on Gramsci and then of our Sovietized mass-media's obsessed with pumping out hate-Trump and Cultural Marxism ad nauseam.
Being the well-educated, glib fellow that he is, he's probably got a facile answer that will be snapped up and parroted back to us all by CNN, NBC et al.
Still, let's hear it, even Marcuse, I'm certain, would want to know.
1
Until I read this column I did't know that this guy (can't spell or pronounce his name) was gay, nor do I care. But the correct point is that Democrats have to focus on beating Trump, which will not happen with an extremist leftist candidate. Only a moderate will attract enough voters to beat Trump.
1
Being gay, like most other minority status groups in America, is something that probably most White Americans know very little about.
American history has for 400 yrs been a history bolstering and protecting the White upper class.
Time to re-evaluate and rewrite that history.
(and by the way... we should take back the image of the American flag from Republicans, Trump and Pirro! They've hijacked the images of what it is to be American.)
The Democratic party would be the best and most successful agent for social and economic equity --if only it weren't taken over by all those silly Democrats.
Once again, we Democrats are in process of eating our own. This one isn't gay enough. That one put his hands on a woman's shoulder, uninvited. A third had an affair with an older man decades ago. And the other one had a bunch of employees who found her too demanding.
Meanwhile, we are facing off against the most immoral, corrupt, dishonest president in any of our lifetimes -- and somehow his party remains fully lined up behind him. How many Democrats would rather see Trump returned to office in 2020 than see the worst of our candidates elected? Let's keep our eye on the goal: we need to elect a Democrat next year, not engage in a futile search for a candidate without visible flaws.
2
Mayor Pete is singularly impressive. Bright, eloquent, educated, seriously concerned about this country and its future. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. His sexual orientation is of no concern to me.
1
This is why I stopped reading Slate years ago. Every article started to feel like some sort of wokeness contest. It’s a shame, because I used to read it every day, but it’s become a parody of itself.
1
Gay christians like Mayor Pete Buttigieg have betrayed other gay folks. That he fails to grasp the nature of this betrayal and offers his religious belief as some virtue signal is even more unfortunate. He is like gay republicans and trump supporters in that sense. They are "gay enough" too, I suppose, since that has little to do with political affiliation, but we all know that you cannot count on them. Mr. Buttigeig may not be as bad for the community as gay republicans, but as a gay christian he is a close second.
Being a traditionalist in my use of English language, I thought at first that Mr. Bruni's title of the article meant "... Plenty Jovial".
Oh, how long will our patience be abused by endless digressions into a candidate's sexual orientation, skin color, religion, food preferences (although the latter may be important indicators of the candidate's true political character), all couched in the Newspeak of political correctness ?
Eat the rich; not our own.
Thanks for this, Frank. Useful, insightful, and wise. We will need this kind of thought leadership around the 2020 election process if we want not to get overrun by Stoopid.
The quote at the end of your piece is not claiming PB is not gay enough, it makes a claim to the contrary. it is simply pointing out that he is not an overtly sexual person, which is good. Good because we crave seriousness and competence, good because a slice of the country and a bigger slice if the world is homophobic and worse and PB needs to win and then lead. I think your op ed is a straw man this time.
I'm with him.
1
The raw sewage is backing up and it smells putrid.
We need a plumber. Someone who can fix the pipes and flush the system. The current plumber lied about being a plumber and flooded the basement, which he insists is a swimming pool.
We need a really good plumber who knows what they're doing. It won't matter and most won't know or care if the plumber is gay or straight, white, Black or Brown.
Mr. Buttigieg has a big disadvantage because he's unknown both as a person and as a plumber. If he's to succeed he needs to introduce himself before his competitors do because the first impression will be how most everyone will know him.
Unfortunately, absent any extensive track record -- Mayor of South Bend since 2012 is thin soup in a presidential campaign -- he's not running on ideas but on who he is and where he's coming from.
I doubt either Bruni or Buttigieg think homophobia no longer is a deal-breaker in American politics. And I'm sure they don't have any illusions about Trump hesitating to make sexual preference the sharp end of Trump's campaign, which will be an ugly fount of racism, homophobia, ad hominem bombs and all the dirt Trump's minions will concoct if Buttigeig is nominated.
Trump beat Hillary by savaging minorities, dismissing women, mob lynching Mexicans and Muslims, and making Hillary the issue.
The election probably turns on either side making the other candidate the issue. I doubt that Trump will suggest Mayor Pete isn't gay enough.
These radical ideologues on the far left who continue to engage in such rigid identity politics and extreme PC culture are going to be the demise of our party and will be the main reason that President Trump glides to easy victory in 2020. The wussification if you will, of the Democratic left is like an albatross around all of our necks. I truly resent the fact that their existence will greatly increase the likelihood of us having to endure four more years of such a divisive fool in the Oval office.
I can’t understand any Dem criticism of this guy. He’s pro-abortion even after birth; he’s anti-Electoral Colege; he’s pro-Supreme Ct packing; and he’s pro-Open Borders.
He’s as Democrat as they come these days.
1
If Buttigieg were trying to pass as gay, that would be a different matter. I get it that queer people who have stereotypical mannerisms or appearance may not be electable — yet anyway — just as I suspect that were Obama very dark skinned, he might not have been elected either. But that’s a different issue. I’m a gay man who went to a prep school where ties and sport jackets were required. A half century later I’m still wearing them. I could certainly “pass” if I chose to. But I’m out and proud. That’s what matters, not my appearance or my Ivy League education or how long it took me to get free of the closet.
Gay or not, he is too short to be president. He reminds me of Dukakis, who suffered from the same problem.
Interesting take. However, I think it is important to consider all sides of the debate. My hot takes.
1. The intersectionality aspect of a candidate is important to large and loud group of people. That alone gives any critique of the visibility of his "gayness" validity.
2. Mayor Pete is a white male, Ivy League educated, and comes from the upper-middle-class. This doesn't need to be explained and part of point 1.
3. Recent success of AOC and others shows how there is appetite for working-class politicians. Especially POC!
4. Is this article going to create more debate about Mayor Pete's "gayness" than what already was being discussed?
1
Thanks for the reminder of why I stopped reading Slate.
Don't know if FB wrote the subheadline telling Democrats what they better not do, but this Democrat doesn't respond to threats. When "Mayor Pete" counterfactually asserted that Israel is "moral" or somesuch, I can only assume that he's going to work on a potential vein of voters that might be smaller than he thinks. The "plenty gay" issue is a sideshow to provide material for today's column.
Indeed, this is how it is now. Everyone needs to be a stereotype who talks about nothing else but their identity, which is chosen by someone else. Kamala Harris needs to talk like Aunt Jemima, telling us that she is sho’ ‘nuff a good candidate. Pete Buttigieg needs to snap his fingers and talk about nothing else but his sexuality and details of his preferred sexual activities. No one must display any competencies or any ideas, but just talk about themselves and their identity. (Identity, singular.) In this way, we can put them back in their boxes when we are done playing with them, and let the “adults” be in charge.
The elephant in the room is Religion. What can we do about that?
We don’t need a candidate that has an unpronounceable last name. The only criterion that matters to me is the ability to defeat Trump. If Trump wins again, despite his rotteness, our country is not worth saving.
The best candidate so far. Go away Biden - you are a has been.
"A marginalized sexual orientation can remain unspoken and unnoticed for as long as a queer person desires. A gay man who conforms to a critical mass of gendered expectations can move through life without his sexuality attending every interaction..."
Is this article about Pete, or about Pence?
Bruni's view (and my agreement) reflects the trend of negative campaigning that has increasingly polluted politics over my lifetime. It is nearly impossible to discern what policies a candidate favors amid all the fear-mongering, finger-pointing, and general din. Now it has infected intra-party politics as well.
Mayor Pete is intelligent enough, articulate enough and informed enough on the issues that matter to most Americans. Don't worry: He's got more than enough of what it takes to become the front runner in the Democratic field sooner rather than later. When Pete talks, every Democrat is instantly reminded of why they are a Democrat.
2
This is another media circus. Can we focus on the things that matter instead? After 2016 I had hoped the media would feel a sense of responsibility and correct their mistakes. I want to hear how candidates are going to fix my country not who they sleep with or if they thought they had some sort of long ago ancestry etc.
2
Let’s take a step back.
The primary slog will be very revealing. The major blunder of 2016 was the way Hillary was anointed without the scrutiny of a multi-candidate primary process. Say what you will about Trump, but he did beat all comers through the ballot box.
There will be plenty of opportunity for voters to see and hear as we go through the process. The news cycle being what it is, the best candidate will eventually emerge as voters get to decide who they want as an alternative to Trump.
People have excellent antenna for making informed choices. The candidate that survives the process will have earned the right to take on Trump.
My belief is, like Republicans got with Trump, we’ll have a candidate we can truly get excited about.
Let’s not freak. It’s early yet. We’re only in the first inning of what will be a very interesting, and let’s hope inspiring and enthralling, game.
1
I want values and leadership over image. Do you project the proper image, hmm...It says a lot about us that we think that is important. I believe we will just get more of the same if that is our approach. Let's go for substance, inner strength, morality, fairness, the deep value of serving something greater than oneself, intelligence, compassion, courage, love of country and the world and of the diverse people who populate it, the willingness to do the right thing no matter the consequences to self.
2
Sorry Frank, but I simply do not trust your motives. I think your clickbaiting here, and I don’t think that’s a healthy way to present an argument.
2
White - black - red - green - gay - straight - bi - man - woman --- I think most democrats could care less - I just want someone who can beat Trump. Every time I hear Pete B. interviewed I think he sounds great!... articulate, thoughtful, informed/wise, reasonable, - I would gladly vote for him! Just give me someone who can beat Trump.
For heaven’s sake. Trivial much? I don’t care about gay, black, female, whatever. I care about policy. If someone doesn’t have good ideas about healthcare, housing, foreign relations, poverty, etc, they’re of no interest to me. This is the future government - not People magazine or Fox “news” - that we’re talking about.
Grow up people! ;)
Pete Buttigieg is smarter than any other candidate in the Democratic field. He knows how to be assertive on a wide range of issues in a way that is genuine, without ideological games. IMHO, he is the strongest candidate out there.
Get over the personal/ideological litmus tests and recognize a good thing when you see it!
Go Pete!
1
This headline is pure click bait. While I agree with what Bruni is saying, I feel like he read a thread or two of tweets that he has determined represents an entire political party. Get out and talk to actual Democrats face to face. Don't write an entire article based off what you read on Twitter. Twitter is not representative of how people actually feel. Sure it can be a part of the conversation, but it's a small part. BE A JOURNALIST.
4
Are the other Democratic candidates running as “heterosexuals”? Sexual orientation should not be an issue. This discussion is ridiculous - especially when you compare Mr. Buttigieg’s resume / behavior to the current White House occupant.
I can’t wait to see how Mr. Buttigieg does in the Democratic debates this summer!
3
When Mayor Pete Buttigieg holds hands with his husband in public, Americans see him as a gay man. It tells us who he loves, and part of who he is. It means the LGBTQ human rights movement made progress this civil rights attorney thought impossible until very recently.
Criticisms of Pete Buttigieg for not being gay enough are about a problem with America and the left, about his refusal to embody a culture of victimization. Trump stoked white straight Christian resentment based on that idea of victimization, proving Identity Politics and claims of victim status very valuable.
Identity Politics confers tribal identity, and members obtain gains out of being victims. Buttigieg, an openly gay man refusing to embrace victim status, is what the Slate article is really about. Stereotypes of how a gay man must act are about him explicitly announcing at every turn how different he is, and that he's a victim. Buttigieg is directly violating the left's Identity Politics victimization platform.
This is also about how people in positions of cultural and political authority on the left have abandoned all critical thinking and vilify any who won't abandon circumspection. An incredibly vocal faction on the left seeks to drive their agenda and force out any out who don't conform to it.
Harris, Biden, and now Buttigieg, have been attacked because authenticity is not about who a person actually is, it's about how rigidly they both embody and embrace the left's identity politics platform.
2
Great piece, Mr. Bruni. Not a thought (nor a word) out of place. Well done. Much needed.
2
There are so many elements to any person’s identity. Who’s to say that sexual orientation need be the focal point?
Apparently all of these fraught conversations among Democrats are happening where I am not. Is it on Twitter? Are these folks talking around Frank Bruni's water cooler? Because the only place I consistently hear it is from the news media. They keep telling me that we're in disarray and that picking among several candidates will be too difficult because I guess we're cannibals?
The last time I went to buy deodorant I had to pick among hundreds of choices. I survived and picked the one I liked the best. Stop trying to create conflict where it doesn't exist. No political race is free from speed bumps. That's the nature of the game.
2
Who knows, and more importantly, who cares? That this question is even out there points to something very wrong with the Democrat party. How about questioning candidates’ accomplishments, philosophy or experience?
I think Buttigieg should be President if he shows depth and wisdom and courage and fortitude. But being gay is not a reason to be President, the job is too important. Progress is when being gay is not a factor. And the same goes for being a women.
We should stop with the identity and start with the issues and policy and character. And if (s)he happens to be a first X Y or Z, then that will be remarkable ... after the election.
2
Again Frank hits the nail squarely on the head!! Here again, we have the media telling us how to think. Did they not learn their lesson in 2016? It's insulting that Slate presumed to think anyone cares what they think about Pete's "gayness". I think they overestimate their importance in our universe!! I think the candidates sexual orientation is private and should stay private. For example, I don't care if Cory's new flame is making him "more sensitive". His discussion about this seemed forced and contrived. As a Democrat, I would like Pete to have a lot more air time and exposure. He's intelligent and thoughtful and a critical thinker. I'm embarrassed by Beto who is like a 5 year old in an adult's body. And Gillibrand who bends with the breeze. And I'm appalled by what the Dems are doing to Biden. If the party continues down this path, they will implode.
1
The practical obstacles in front of Pete Buttigieg’s candidacy, in order of importance: his age (no one so young has come close to being elected president), his current job (no sitting mayor has ever been elected president), his name (no one with an unpronounceable name has ever been elected president), and, much further down in significance, his sexual orientation (no one ...)
I would like to add ageism into eating our own. Addressing Joe Biden, who stated he has grown and learned as "out of touch " is another way to claim he is too old, yet the NYT had an earlier report of Joe Biden jogging the White House with President Obama. Same with Bernie Sanders and Nancy Pelosi.
These politicians have enormous experience that cannot new denied.
Progressives label. This is merely an example. Labels help and hurt. Witness the recent attempt to label Biden. Also, If Pete’s sexuality doesn’t matter, why even bring it up? Those who do show a significant anti-gay bias. I thought we were over this people. Just like race bias, it seems we as a nation are not I’ve anything. Sad.
1
The day that pundits start wondering whether O'Rourke, say, or Booker are "straight enough" I will worry about Buttigieg's "degree" of gayness. If voters had been concerned about Trump's being "competent enough" America wouldn't be in the mess it's in right now.
Buttigieg is thoughtful, intelligent, really LISTENS and is the most impressive of all the candidates thus far.
1
He went to like the best schools, he's like really smart , I mean like really, really smart, just like Trump, what else do you need?
(Oh, and...classical trained pianist, speaks eight languages, an intelligence officer in the US Naval Reserves, war veteran, married, Rhodes Scholar, executive experience, former Mayor of the Year AND can converse in complete sentences.)
It's Pete for me for prez. Bring on the debates!
@Mike B . Well, this woman wants a woman. We also have a candidate, Amy Klobuchar, who went to , like, the best schools j(Valedictorian) Yale Magna cum laude, classically trained pianist, and commensurate experience. Ya, it's our turn but we're not going to get it--AGAIN. Anything but a woman, in perpetuity.
I'm a Dem living in flyover land. There are so few of us in this county we meet at Big Boys. We were evenly split between Bernie and Hillary but every one of us voted for Clinton. In spite of us Bernie supporters being lectured nonstop from columnists, pundits and tv hosts about how we were ruining it for Hillary. Nobody here has read of discussed that Mayor Pete isn't gay enough. Everybody here is already sick of the pearl clutching, finger wagging, the second guessing and the lecturing we're getting from both columnists like Bruni and anti-Trump Republicans. For crying out loud, we know what's at stake and if this goes sideways it won't be without the media's assistance, just as it was in the last election.
1
Mr. Bruni writes “Democrats need to show some proportion, realism and reason as assess and react to candidates.”
Mr. Bruni’s incredibly important message couldn’t have come at a better time as those of us who agree must make it our duty to push back against a self-defeating and toxic democratic primary battle in favor of “proportion, realism, and reason.”
Is there privilege associated with persecution identity? I grew up with the fear of being "not man enough", and now I must contend with being "not gay enough". Welcome to the world of bisexuals, who have never been gay enough, and aren't straight enough either. Asexual is even more suspicious. Maybe it really is none of our business.
Pete Buttigieg is human enough, accessible enough, and shows empathy, intelligence, sophistication, charisma, and a fighting spirit who is willing to get on the cross of candidacy and serve the nation . That's enough for me. Let's hope the DNC can pull its head out of it's tail as it eats itself and see some light. I'm not holding my breath. I expect Trump will win another term.
The problem with Pete is not that he's not gay enough but that his progressivism seems new-found and opportunistic. Prior he was content to be an utterly bland if charming technocrat of the kind this country can no longer afford.
I recall Dr. King's call to "judge people by the content of their character..." If voters used that criterion, Trump vs. Buttigieg would be a landslide for the challenger and sexual orientation would be irrelevant.
It does seem most people have gotten to the point where a host of things that once seemed important are no longer relevant to whether or not someone can be elected. Sexual preference I think is one of those things.
The first time I heard Pete Buttigeig speak, I heard more coherent policy ideas than all of the Donald Trump tirades over the past two or three years. He may be just what we need to clear the air of the Trump administration fog. So he is gay? Who cares? If we judge the candidates by one exceptional characteristic, we will not find anyone who pass that test - most of all, Donald Trump.
The mere fact we have to discuss this means Trump will win by default.
Extra: Op Ed writer complains that the media talks about what he is talking about, thus perpetuating and energizing a purile subject matter which exists only in the press.
Oh wait. Is that even news?
My haiku:
We don't
But Frank Bruni and Slate do
Think about it.
I am so tired of the excited preoccupation of the press, in trying to predict us, and to tell us what we care about.
This preoccupation is bad for free thought and individuality. It seeks to homogenize us and make us trends. The same thing that Google does.
Just write about the candidates and their platforms.
We are complex and simple beings.
Most of us think that gossiping about the depth of the skin color of Ms. Harris, or the degree to which Mayor Pete has been hurt because of his sexuality, is dumb.
If not a little bit disgusting.
Oh, for some privacy in public life.
Identity politics is a turnoff. Stop it. Mayor Pete is a great candidate. Kamala Harris is a great candidate. John Hickenlooper, and Elizabeth Warren are great candidates. All of them are great because of the things they want to do as President and because of their values. Sexual, racial and religious identities mean nothing except to the extent that they inform values and policies.
Focus on the values and policies and everything else falls into place.
We are living in an age that measures everything according to tribal fitness. I just finished Pete Buttigieg's compelling book, "Shortest Way Home," in which his "sufficiency" as the mayor of a struggling Rust Belt city is on full display. Is he "sufficiently gay?" The question is utterly irrelevant.
I think Mayor Buttigieg's sexual orientation is the least of what should worry him about the Democrats. Now, his progressive policy proposals? Look out. The leadership, the consultants and corporate Democrats will have the long knives out for this guy before one can say 70% marginal tax and Medicare for All for those that want it.
As always, on point. The larger issue is the Democrats lemming-like instincts that lead them to constantly try to form a circular firing squad. (I know I'm mixing metaphors.)
Love this article.
Makes me think of the outrage over the movie Bohemian Rhapsody. From previews alone people cried it wasn’t gay enough. Like, what kind of preview were my LGBTQ friends hoping for? Man on man groping and tongue lashings?
Once seeing the movie it was clear the film centered on the band and didn’t really give the audience THAT movie some were hoping for. But the film did introduce an entire new generation to the band Queen and I think that’s enough. Anyone is free and clear to write, produce and create that OTHER movie they want. But back to Pete, his job is to lead a nation, not Bingo night at Stonewall - my peeps can settle down. Not everything is about Fire Island, Grindr or Beyoncé.
I can not even finish reading this column.
The unrelenting focus on identity politics to the exclusion of the truly important issues facing this country and the world is totally nauseating and tragic.
I don’t vote for the candidate’s skin color or sexual orientation or even “humanity”. I only vote for their politics and ideology. All things being equal, certain identity markers may improve their image but only on the margins. I’d love to see a female president but I will never vote for Elizabeth Warren because of her class war rhetoric and her stupid idea of breaking up tech companies. I’d love to see a Jewish person in the White House but I will never vote for a socialist like Sanders. What I heard of Mayor Pete’s programs has struck me as rational, centrist and balanced. The fact that he is both an Oxford graduate and a gay man only increases his appeal in my eyes. This is a classic combination for an intellectual, and we could certainly use a real intellectual in American politics. There is still time until the primaries so I am withholding my judgment but I’m glad to have somebody in the race who is not a rabid left-wing ideologue.
Democrats have shown a tendency to eat their own, while Republicans will circle the wagons and defend to the ends of the earth whoever the Crony of the Week is. Stop the infighting and get it together.
1
Really don't understand Biden's stance. as an older white male myself, what is wrong with "of course I apologize ! I would never want someone to be uncomfortable because I tried to either console or encourage them."
1
Think pieces amplify this kind of anxiety and social media amplifies think pieces. I avidly consume written news media and I deliberately avoid agencies like Vox and Slate (and many others) precisely because they spend time stressing people out with clickbait garbage like this subject. I am very pleased to say that I had heard nothing of these stupid “debates” about gayness or blackness regarding Pete and Kamala respectively until I read this op-ed. Hopefully, most people out there are insulated from it, as well, so that they aren’t foolishly influenced by it.
The only people who will care about whether a candidate is gay are people who won't vote for a Democrat anyway. Democrats. on the other hand, must understand that we are all fallible, but grow and learn as we go through life.
Mayor Pete is beyond impressive. So far, he has my vote.
I still love Joe Biden and believe that the women coming forward now should be listened to, but question their motivations. Why now? Joe is an empathatic man who understands, more than most of us, the sadness and tragedies of life. That is what I want in the Oval office. Just because someone is old in years, does not man one is too old to learn and grow. I trust Joe to do the right thing. To serve and protect us. I do not care a whit his age or color of his skin.
As to the millenials who are screaming about their turn: start voting. Then I will listen.
Of the two gay men I know best, my adopted grandsons, one is always referred to as “flaming gay,” the other could be Mayor Pete. One loves his waxed eyebrows, has at least 40 pairs of shoes and hangs out with his women friends. The other is just your ordinary guy, who happens to love another guy.
Both are out, in their separate ways. Both are gay, and both are gay enough! Good grief, what is wrong with people these days!
1
Thanks Frank. My initial reaction to Pete is that he seemed a trifle young and under-experienced. Maybe not. I suppose my kids having so many gay/queer/alt friends kept my mind facile, but his orientation didn't hit me beyond 'it's about time'.
Oh, we have had non straight politicians. The long string of republicans caught soliciting sex in men's room while thundering against the 'gay crisis' from the lectern was pretty much the extent of it though. It's time people were allowed to be who they are and judged for their platforms and ability to execute in office.
I am first a Sanders supporter, but I will keep Pete in mind. I suspect that, even if he doesn't make the cut this time he is going places.
And so we can ask: Is Bernie Sanders young enough -- or old enough? Is Pete Buttigieg old enough -- or young enough? Is Elizabeth Warren feminine enough -- or too feminine? s Julián Castro Hispanic enough and does he speak Latin well enough? Is Joe Biden too touchy feely -- or too stand-offish and cold?
We've already determined beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt that President Trump isn't human enough, if he is human at all. That didn't seem to disqualify him. So, the critical question here appears to be: Is the Democratic Party's firing squad circular enough?
If not yet, it can count upon plenty of help from a giddy gaggle of media chatterers raising these absurd questions when the survival of the Republic is at-stake.
1
Thank you for the timely and important piece, Frank.
The Democrats are the party of enlightenment and tolerance, facts and skepticism, morals and principles, justice and equality, democracy and freedom. Our presidential candidates are human, with human flaws.
The Republicans can keep their immoral opportunism and their bottomless bad faith and their conspiracy theories and their white nationalist personality cult.
1
People in the media need to stop imagining that just because other people in the media muse on a subject that got into their heads in a burst of inspiration, that means their big idea is a "thing".
I've read the Slate opinion piece; not once in the whole article are there any direct quotes from actual Democrats or people in the LGBTQ community worrying about these particular concerns of whether he's gay enough or too white--I'm both, by the way.
He's not running for president of gay America anymore than Obama ran as president of black America. Nobody I know is worrying about these things; we just want somebody who can help the nation heal and reform after the most corrupt and benighted administration in the country's history is finally put out of its misery.
Pete Buttigieg has integrity. All other descriptors matter little without it.
Dear Mr. Bruni: thank you for translating the Slate piece for me, because upon reading it I had NO idea what the heck it's talking about. Never heard such obscure hand-wringing, that's for sure.
1
@Roberta
"...because upon reading it I had NO idea what the heck it's talking about."
Unfortunately, that often seems to be the writing style of the "left", and the further to the left, the more incomprehensible the writing.
Thank you Mr. Bruni, very well stated.
As a gay man who has been discriminated against (legally) in the workplace, and raped and sodomized at a major southwestern university I was exiled to by a well-meaning family, all I can say is Mayor Buttigieg is a breath of fresh air, and Not because he is gay. He is on point when questioned, he is not ashamed of his Christian faith but unashamedly discusses it (Episcopalian), has served his country, is a Rhodes scholar and is Ivy educated. Those are the attributes I respect and cherish. It matters not what a man or woman's sexual identify is. What matters is the content of Mayor Buttigieg's - or anyone else's - character.
1
As a gay white Millenial male quite like Pete, I have experienced the same demeaning criticisms. Someone in college, who knew me very little, claimed I was born with a silver spoon because of my sex and ethnicity. Now Pete is being harassed because of the parents he was born to.
It appears in the neverending Victim Olympics being gay doesn't count for much.
Nevertheless, he still has my vote in the primary and the general.
1
It is not too much to say that the next election will determine whether the United States remains a free country. You have a grave responsibility to make sure that Americans understand just what is at stake. If you insist on amplifying the sort of irrelevant gossip that Mr. Bruno relates here, then you will own the re-election of Donald Trump. New York Times, I beg of you, focus much more of your front page on hard news. Compare the (actual) candidates on the issues we have elected them to address. Leave the culture wars and the campaign tactics off the front page and move the "human interest" stories to the Sunday Style section. We are depending on you!
Mayor Pete Buttigieg is gay, as am I.
But that is not why I would vote for him. I will vote for him because he is the most intelligent, centered and cordial candidate in the race so far.
He is unflappable, because he is informed and has great judgment. He is relatable, because he has sublimated his ego despite his extraordinary accomplishments.
The media need not pick up on every straggler thread from Twitter to manufacture a lazy narrative.
This happened to Secretary Clinton when the media could not stop talking about emails, as there were no other controversies to discuss.
I am sure Mayor Buttigieg would not want to be evaluated by criteria like sexuality unrelated to the office of the President.
LGBT stars like Alexander the Great, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, John Maynard Keynes, Alan Turing, Bayard Rustin, James Baldwin and more great figures in history were recognized for their genius first, their sexuality a footnote.
Likewise, Kamala Harris need not meet a black litmus test. She is brilliant, tough, and tenacious. That she is both African- American and Indian is quintessentially American.
A Buttigieg-Harris ticket would be unstoppable. They would be elected on their merit, one of the strongest combinations in many years.
Comparing their qualifications and intellect to Trump-Pence - sans Russian interference - would be a landslide.
This is the opposite of identity politics. It is all about merit, and in America that was always the point.
1
Go Frank. Go Pete. You are both my heroes.
At this point in history and in the wake of the Supreme Court decision allowing for gay marriage, the fact that Mayor Pete is gay should be considered incidental. The fact is that his sexual orientation does not qualify him nor disqualify him from running for the Presidency.
What should matter is the content of his character, the power of his intellect, and the quality of his ideas to make this country the land of opportunity for all Americans. At this point, Mayor Pete rates high in those areas.
Unfortunately, and ironically, too many Democrats will go after him not because he is gay, but because he is a white male. And the daily refrain among Democrats here and on the comments boards of other major newspapers is that white men have no place in the Democratic party and last in line when it comes to policy.
Democratic party politicians such as Kirsten Gillibrand destroyed Al Franken and they are doing their best to get rid of Joe Biden. They will no doubt go after Bernie Sanders and Beto O’Rourke next, and they will go after Mayor Pete once he looks to be a serious contender. Never mind the Republicans. They will sit back content to let the Dems do their dirty work.
YES!!
This "Progressive" tendency toward something close to "obligatory ritual patricide/matricide" and a deeply pathological "Presentism" ("We are at war with Eurasia. We have always been at war with Eurasia") is maddening.
The overwhelming majority of people (rulers, politicians, artists, writers, musicians) have been antisemitic for the overwhelming majority of history. Does that mean that, culturally Jewish, I have to reject . . . just about all of human history, because pretty much everyone is "tainted"?
What hothouse, politically correct (and suicidal) madness is this? From what virgin planet are "Progressives" hoping to harvest sufficiently clean candidates? They might as well begin picking out their funeral wear for the next Trump inauguration right now. Why wait? That's the predictable result of this sort of behavior.
It's a huge achievement that Buttigieg can present himself as a viable candidate in our society and be openly gay, and MARRIED to another man no less, and have the fact that he is gay not be in the foreground of the reasons for why he is or is not electable. The same thing has just happened in Chicago -- where the city just overwhelmingly elected its first African-American female mayor who also just happens to be openly gay and married as well.
I think the issue raised by Bruni here isn't so much that there is a cohort of democrats that are now dissecting just how gay Buttigieg is, and how much he represents LGBTQ people, but that we need to look more at what our candidates can do for us while in that office, and how they will do it -- not how they can weather and deflect from controversies created and cultivated on Twitter.
16 or so candidates jostling for position going into the first turn. Who has the legs to go the distance? Gay enough? Ethnic enough? Woman enough? Man enough? Enough. Give me well studied, forward thinking, willing to seek out and use expertise in areas of weakness, able to bring divergent groups together for common causes, someone who can inspire the youth and reassure the old. I'll support anyone that fulfills those categories no matter what package they come in. Enough with not enough. We got some serious pruning to do to bring back a country that has and is losing what luster it had.
This is so ridiculous, I don't even know where to start.
Who cares if Mayor Pete is gay? He has a great message and should have an opportunity to be heard. Although not my favorite, he's miles ahead of someone like O'Rourke. Listen to what both of them have to say.
Who cares where Harris's parents come from? She is not my kind of politician, but she too should be given an opportunity to make her case.
Even old Joe Biden, with his lame excuse of "changing norms," should stop being so wishy washy and get in the race if he's going to run. He may not be the winner he thinks he is.
But whoever the candidate, let's focus on the messages of these individuals, what they have done in the past, what they believe in (not what the pollsters or rich supporters say), and whom we want to lead the country.
And please Democrats, don't vote for someone just because you think someone else will vote for them. Do your homework and vote for the person _you_ want to vote for.
Most Democrats don't want to settle for second or third best, or the compromise candidate. And during such a vibrant primary, you shouldn't either.
1
An openly white guy from Indiana running as a Democratic candidate for POTUS? How dare he. And yet what courage, given the implied ingredients necessary to satisfy the broad spectrum of identities let alone philosophical positions that lurk in the post-Obama Democratic Party.
Mark Twain once defined a camel as a horse put together by a committee. No offense to camels, but can you imagine what kind of being would satisfy a committee representing all dimensions of the party?
While a camel can hold more water than a horse, I hope we end up with a candidate that talks horse sense. Pete does that as well or better than any other candidate I have heard as yet. He inspires. He gives us hope. He encourages our better selves. And he has experience solving problems in a midwestern city. He is also a fresh horse ready for a long race.
We in Colorado just elected the first openly gay governor in history. Colorado is a purple state: deep blue and deep red. So is the country. Governor Polis’ sexual orientation never came up during the election season. He kept us focused on issues and problem-solving.
This coming election should be about character first and foremost for obvious reasons. Pete meets that requirement hands down.
As for Democrats eating their own, a lot depends on the Independent running as a Democrat. If he turns on Democrats like he did on Hillary, then we are in trouble. He as much as anyone helped defeat her.
So Biden is so old that he carries too much baggage? At least we know what his baggage is. I would take my chances with Biden and his experience over any of these young inexperienced candidates who are still wet behind the ears.
Democrats are literally digging their own graves with this obsession on identity politics. If political parties are to focus on catering to people based on identity, shouldn't white heterosexual men be able to seek representation in the Republican party? Shouldn't every group be allowed to look after its own best interests?
Forget playing it safe. I love Mayor Pete and he is just right for this Goldie-locks.
1
The Slate column Mr. Bruni seems so worked up about is so inane as to not warrant much attention.
The author appears to blame Hillary Clinton's defeat on her being a woman. Yes, there no doubt are many voters who wouldn't vote for a woman but I doubt many of them would vote for any of the current announced seekers of the Democratic nomination man or woman.
As to who is sufficiently whatever, if Cory Booker is looking for votes because he is black, I only recall that when another black Democratic ran for mayor against Michael Bloomberg, Booker supported Bloomberg. I guess Bill Thompson wasn't sufficiently black for him.
1
I'm afraid you simply misread this, Frank. The point the Slate author is attempting to make, however clumsily, is that because Mayor Pete does not present as a stereotypically (flamboyantly) gay man, he is less likely to trigger homophobic responses and therefore has a better chance of gaining mainstream acceptance. There is no controversy here. Sorry.
Reading this column, it becomes obvious that Trump will win. The democrats seem to be in a circular firing squad. Very sad.
What is this notion of "Not gay enough", "Not black enough" etc.. What is it but a way to call someone names when there is no other reason. What about a candidate who is neither a person of color or openly gay? Is Elizabeth Warren "not female enough" and maybe Bernie Sanders "not old enough" ? What do Democratic activists do in their spare time after making the world safe for Donald Trump?
I don’t know...re: Biden, that Frank Bruni can say that a kiss on the back of the head as a sort of anachronistic pep talk is “demeaning”? Isn’t that subjective? We have heard various takes on this from women who experienced it. What turns me off about fellow Democrats is their grab of the moral higher ground.
What does gayness have to do with whether a person is qualified to manage the largest economy on the planet? And in that context shouldn’t Mayor Pete manage something larger than a small midwestern city before we in fact allowed him to manage the largest economy in the planet?
The great irony is that for most of my life, the questions of sex, color, race and creed, and now sexual orientation, were things that we were told NOT to discriminate on when it came to employment, housing, credit, etc. Now we have people saying that people have to meet benchmarks in those categories. Who determined that these benchmarks exist? Is a person black enough? Is a gay man, or lesbian the right knind of LGBTQ enough? Are they Christian enough. Get off of these stereotypes, focus on qualifications, decision making, quality of character. Get the bias out, and focus on the issues, the positions, and the solutions.
It seems to me the most important presidential qualities are: intelligence, historical perspective, an understanding of policy, genuine compassion, ability to unite, ability to articulate all of the above, ethical, moral, ability to learn, an appetite to continue learning and growing....TRUTHFUL, DEPTH and CHARACTER.
1
Democrats must learn to rise without stepping on the shoulders of their opponents whom they try to push down. In the past, this has happened and as recently as the last election. Not only the candidates, but their supporters need to think of the party and the country before their candidates and must not stay at home because their candidate did not get the nomination.
The mayor has impressed me plenty before I even learned about him being gay. That was a little blip on the radar, I am still impressed by how well and how clearly he can think of the issues and addresses them with flowing answers. I told people around me that he possesses a calming quality that demands attention to his calm statements.
No circular firing squad, please! Democrats, come to your senses and win this "must win" election.
1
How about just looking for someone with reasonable policy goals that their history tells you they are both serious about and capable of achieving.
4
"It’s nonnegotiable that Democrats hold their presidential aspirants to high standards on issues of racial justice, gender equality and more. It’s crucial that the party nominate someone who can credibly represent its proudly diverse ranks. But it’s also important that the party not demand a degree of purity that nobody attains."
This is also what turns off people who do not want to go about their day thinking that every small decision they make has catastrophic political implications: If I'm an older woman who calls people "sweetheart," am I demeaning them? Should I be offended if the sales clerk wishes me a "blessed day"? I read an article yesterday in the WaPO that blamed a 40-year-old murder of two children on Appalachian clannishness. The folks I live around really do feel marginalized, and when Democrats start talking to white grandparents raising grandchildren because of the opioid crisis or laid-off workers at my community college get lectured on white privilege, they do not get it. Of course, there are nuances, but when liberals talk about microaggression and become, as you say, Puritanical in their demands, they do as much as Republicans to drive wedges between people. It really does seem like an "inquisition" to them, and those who have neither their best interests in mind nor any real idea of social justice become even more empowered.
5
Spot on. I am 10 years older than Buttigieg, but I've had weirdly similar experiences, something I realized in reading his CNN interview on religion. I, too, came out at 33. Former Catholic, now Anglican, time in Oxford - even a love of Evensong at Christ Church. I am an over-60 white male with lots of education and a sufficient (if not excessive) amount of money. And I'm gay. To suggest that the other attributes mean I'm not "really gay" or "insufficiently gay" or (this will doubtless emerge eventually in the campaign) that I am "self-hating" is pure nonsense. Is one supposed to put on a stereotypical "gayness" to satisfy some group's sense of ideological purity? (Put out more throw pillows!) How is that better than cramming oneself permanently in a closet and "acting straight?"
2
@W. Davies
So, while I've been carrying on with my not-especially-gay day, I've realized that I confused Buttigieg's age with Frank Bruni's. I'm 10 years older than Bruni, not Mayor Pete. Sorry Frank, neither of us is young anymore.
It might be of interest to look back to the presidential candidacies of Samuel J. Tilden, who was defeated in the Electoral College and who never married, and that of Grover Cleveland, who won and who married (in what until just yesterday, so to speak, was the sole and conventional option) rather late in life. Might prove instructive, might not. Pete is neither qualified nor disqualified because he's gay. Other qualifications or the lack thereof matter; gayness, like being female, doesn't.
3
Grover Cleveland was a womanizer. There is credible evidence that he raped the woman who gave birth to his illegitimate child, and then had the victim committed to an insane asylum until after she delivered and had the baby forcibly adopted from her. If you want to find a gay president, look to James Buchanan and his "roommate", William Rufus DeVane King, who Andrew Jackson referred to as Miss Nancy and Aunt Fancy.
Well said Frank and I couldn't agree more. Democrats don't need outside forces to doom them as it appears that they are more than capable and better at it themselves.
1
Politics, especially presidential politics, are synonymous with theater; all the world’s a stage. Just ask Trump. And Mr. Bruni’s column punctuates that fact. We all need to go deeper as we evolve our political offices into places and people who have the intestinal fortitude to literally save the planet from our biggest issue - global warming. And when we as a people seek a deeper connection to our problems, we will demand from our political parties much more than theater.
1
Yes, the 37 year old, gay Mr. Buttigieg lives in Indiana where he is the elected mayor of a medium-sized town. The town, however, is South Bend, a college town. The largest employer is the university. The principal areas of economic activity are now health care, education and tourism. The traditional industrial base is mostly gone.
1
"I feel just as strongly that Democrats need to show some proportion, realism and reason as they assess and react to candidates (or, in Biden’s case, probable candidates)."
Yes, Frank Bruni! And let’s add...respect.
Joe Biden has spent a lifetime serving this country. He possesses more wisdom, experience, and maturity than any other Democratic candidate. But, the Democrats want “new blood.”
What? Obama and Biden didn’t do a good job for this country? Is everyone’s regret about Hillary’s campaign getting on Joe Biden?
It’s appalling the level of disrespect, rush to judgment, condemnation, and snark being leveled at Joe Biden. I am ashamed of us.
Joe Biden could go head to head with Donald Trump in a heartbeat and come out far ahead.
Further, the amazing irony is that now more than ever this is true. When Joe talks about how he has learned, grown, and matured in his empathy, understanding, and respect for women…what’s Trump’s going to comeback with? Really?
Seriously people, stop being social media darlings and dilettantes and get it together. The fate of the nation is in your hands.
5
I don’t care what Pete Buttigieg’s sexual identity is.
I know more about our current President’s sexual preferences, thoughts and experiences than I ever wanted to be aware of. He has discussed it on Howard Stern’s show, made a record of it in the tabloids and is currently involved in lawsuits that will play it out again. It has been publicized multiple times that he and his wife don’t sleep together and he cheated on her shortly after delivering their son.
I am happy to have someone run for President that is intelligent, polite, well educated, experienced in government, a veteran and in a stable relationship. The rest is besides the point.
5
After reading this article by a well-accepted Democratic icon - it has to be clear to any rational person that identity politics reigns supreme in the Democratic Party.
3
Bruni, you're blaming the wrong people. You say that Democrats are "eating their own", but what I see is the media doing most the eating. I don't do twitter or enage in Democratic party social media, so I don't even see what the chatter is about, but I do read the NY Times, WaPost, and other news media and I do see what all the reporters and the Opinion writers are saying. The media have been especially negative about the female candidates, although Biden has gotten a fair bit of negative press, while they seem to be fawning over Buttigieg as some sort of Indiana superstar and O'Rouke as a boy wonder.
2
Excellent point. Its especially frustrating when make believe news network Fox is militantly in the tank for Republicans. Then you have democrats falling for click bait on their own candidates
Biden truly feels that his actions towards women were meant to support them, not to demean. He sees himself as being paternal. My problem is not what he did, but why he did it. The belief that women on a stage need this type of support is the demeaning part. Would he ever go up to the husband of a candidate, put his hands on his shoulders and whisper in his ear? Of course not. Biden comes from a time when women were considered the weaker sex. Where Trump sees women as prey, Biden sees himself as protector.
Biden is absolutely qualified to be President. Trump is not. I agree with Mr. Bruni that this is not Biden's time, but, if he is nominated, I will be happy to put my hands on his shoulders and give him my support.
Harvard Law/Oxford ought to disqualify him gay or not. Harvard Law has dominated American law since 1890 and has brought us a dysfunctional legal system. It and Yale Law alone staff our Supreme Court with its consistently right-wing law making or Congressional law destroying decisions. As for Oxford, as European critics have noted, public school and Oxbridge grads are leading backers of Brexit who pursue their own destructive policies.
In the 1890s an English visitor said Harvard Law was more English than English faculties.
1
Pete is smart enough, educated enough, government and military experienced enough, and moral and stable enough. Boy do we need Pete now.
3
Could we please STOP with the identity politics and PLEASE focus on each candidate’s position on the issues and their proposals to address the challenges facing society today and in the future.
4
It’s nonnegotiable that Democrats hold their presidential aspirants to high standards on issues of racial justice, gender equality and more. It’s crucial that the party nominate someone who can credibly represent its proudly diverse ranks. But it’s also important that the party not demand a degree of purity that nobody attains.
-----------------
Why aren't you looking at their policies, past records, experience and all the other factors that you consider about a job applicant before you interview them. You have the cart before the horse here, telling us how they stack up in an identity politics race. But why assume that because it happened with President Obama it will happen again in the Democratic party? The Dems have lined up one this, one that, another mixed this and that, and are trying to be all things to all peoples. Why not rally around ideas, and let the best candidates sell us on those?
The truth is, it would be harder to research and examine their past records like that, but what if the country had known what President Obama's grant-funded community service work on the South Side had ended in, or how ineffectual really was his legislative leadership back in the Illinois House?
If we look past superficial identities, we can build a coalition and win. Otherwise, this will be splitting the vote. I am okay with that because I do not think the Democrats are in any way ready to lead on the national level.
I will take Trump over stagnation, and identity politics
The zealot branch of the Democratic party has been alive and well for decades. No-one is 'pure' enough for them and the more radical, the better. All we can hope for is that after the carnage of the primaries, one will emerge with enough support to overcome Trump and the atrocity that is the current GOP. I'm not holding my breath.
In the ancient Greek sense of democracy he would be as good as any other upstanding citizen to serve for a time, except for one small detail: we’re not ancient Greece. We’re not a full-fledged democracy, we’re a republic and we’re a republic for a good reason: Fairness to the States!
He would desire to remove the proportional voting system set by the founding fathers of the USA and in its place position a population-only based voting system, like so many democrats expound to do. That makes him irrelevant. Any other program or desire he may have, no matter how good or noble falls on deaf ears in my case.
The republic is the United States of America, not the United Population of America. We are--at present--50 States, and those States desire a somewhat equal say when it comes to choosing the president of the United States. To remove the proportional voting system is the same as removing the USA.
Sure, one can get rid of the Electoral College. It is a relic that is no longer needed, but the proportional voting system allotting a handicap for smaller states is the backbone of this nation and shouldn’t be messed with. It’s that one item that forces presidential candidates to tour the whole country, instead of just California, Texas, Florida and New York.
Indeed, our Senators are allotted two per State and our Representatives are based on Population of the States. That was a good compromise and the selection of the president is based upon those two systems put together.
It works!
This is really getting tiring.
The goal and the only goal at this point is to beat trump.
Bringing forth all this issues will destroy whichever candidate is nominated and will give the Republicans all the information they need to further destroy the candidate.
Every candidate that has announced his/her bid for the office of president has been attacked in some kind of manner.
I have not yet found the perfect person, unless it is the newborn baby.
Let him/her who is without sin cast the first stone.
2
Thank you for writing this. I’m so tired of the purity police, who made a serious hash of 2016 with their demands for such excruciatingly fine calibrations of proper behavior that they damaged a good candidate, because she failed these supposed tests. And now the police are back out in force, sanctimoniously proclaiming one candidate or another doesn’t meet their specifications and is therefore “not gay enough”, a “corporate shill”, or some other imbecility.
I perceive Sanders supporters as the worst offenders here, but perhaps that’s my anger from 2016. Regardless, the focus should be on one thing and one thing only: who is the best person to defeat the Orange Menace. All else is commentary.
1
Sorry, Frank, but this is just acquiescing to more of the Dems identity politics.
I really don't care if someone is gay - flaming or otherwise - in deciding if they should be voted in to office. In the instance of Pete Buttigieg, he's got an extremely thin resume to be seeking the presidency. Further, to me his youth is a negative, not a plus, since I don't think he has the seasoning to serve effectively.
When we elected Barrack Obama, a community organizer with 2 years as a US Senator, we set the table for a lot of our problems today. Obama didn't have the chops to get the job done - banksters going scott free after the economic meltdown, the monstrosity of ObamaCare, the unconstitutional expansion of an imperial presidency via executive privilege, etc. - all still haunting us today. Worst of all - it was Obama's divisiveness that directly precipitated the anger in much of America and leading to the election of Trump.
So, I don't see what Buttigieg, gay or otherwise, and many of these other less than stellar Dem candidates are offering us as an antidote to the sickness that is Trump.
Great column. I am sick to death of hearing about Joe Biden and his "invasion of personal space", although I admit to not having heard of Mayor Pete not being "gay enough". What I have realized in watching all of these social movements -- LGBTQ, Black Lives Matter, #Me too - is that they have their own political agendas within their ranks, and it doesn't take a lot of discernment to see the vying for power and attention and yes, discrimination even amongst their own. All are important and necessary social revolutions. But we need to apply some common sense to the rules. What is, ultimately, important in a political candidate is probably not who sleeps with, or whether he gives a hug to a grieving widow (for God's sake). Let's get some sanity back.
Who cares. I want a qualified candidate with experience, who articulates my concerns and who can lead ALL.
1
I saw Mayor Pete on Bill Maher last week. He presented himself extremely well but I believe it is old school liberals like Maher who may present a challenge to Democratic victory in 2020. Mayor Pete spoke of treating all Americans with respect. That is something we must do if we are ever to heal the divide in this country. Later in that same show, Andrew Sullivan also expressed the need to show respect for people who, although they support Trump, are not inherently ignorant and worthy of disdain. Maher does not want to give up his shtick of dissing the Trump supporters. But unless he does, I think he strongly risks becoming part of the problem. No we cannot indulge bigots but only a minority of Trump supporters are clearly despicable. We must strive to make amends with the others. We have a long way to go before November 2020, but Mayor Pete gives me hope that we can get the country back on the right path. Bill Maher not so much.
Mayor Pete would make a great VP.
1
I’m old enough to remember when Mr. Bruni was trashing Hillary Clinton for minor sins (assuming they existed at all) in the 2016. He’s part of the atmosphere he’s describing - late to the party, Frank. (And the remarks about Biden, probably the most electable of the group, are predictably condescending). With friends like these....
I like Mayor Pete. His background is impressive. I think a winning ticket is Sen. Harris and Mayor Pete!!!
Mayor Pete arguments were on point, but again, I am distracted by the beauty and cogency of Frank Bruni’s writing. His recent restaurant for those over 50 article also lingers.
Please always use your super powers for good, Frank! You are amazing.
Democrats need to remember that we are trying to pick somebody who who would be good at being president, not somebody who perfectly represents a particular community or somebody who has never committed a venial sin.
I have to say that, having lived in America for a few years, and now as an objective observer having lived in Europe for almost a decade, American media have a problem in commentary, whether in political, entertainment etc. There’s a fine line between the thoughtful and insightful opinion pieces, like most ones in Times and like this one by Bruni, and the overthinking and pointless think-pieces that aim to get nowhere, and that will now crop up and populate publications in the election season ad nauseam and shred all Democratic candidates to pieces pointlessly. God help us.
Liz Warren has policies that people love, a charismatic personality with plenty of TV experience, a compelling back story and cannot. get. any. traction while the most callow of shiny baubles fascinates the media. Thanks for nothing, Bruni.
A 61 year old white, straight male from Virginia here that could not care less about Mayor Pete's sexual orientation. I care only about what the man says and more importantly what the man feels. So far, what I have heard from him is something I have been waiting for in a leader for decades and probably my entire adult life. This man gets it and if there is ANYONE that will be able to handle the garbage that will be thrown at him as his popularity grows it will be him. I truly believe that Mayor Pete will be the bridge this country requires to move from the corruption of current politics and leadership to a period of healing, inclusion for all and real representation of the people and not just the rich. For my grandchildren I pray for his success!
1
I’m almost willing to bet that if Mayor Pete is accused of inappropriate touching or sexual harassment, it will come from his military time. They did back Trump by over 60%, after all—and he fetishizes them. That won’t stop this Inpendent from from voting for Pete in addition to ignoring the Democrats’ “circular firing squad”.
Pete Buttigieg is an accomplished individual and a capable political leader who just happens to be gay. So what.
Does it inform and shape who he is? Sure, but so do his service to his country, his professional and academic achievements, his interpersonal style and many other of his life experiences.
I'm focusing on the latter, which should be the heart of the matter. I don't care who he sleeps with; I care what he does when he's awake.
1
Mayor Pete is my mayor and is terrific. He would make a fine President. The problem isn't DT, it's the D party. They look like a party in chaos, apologetic to a sickening degree, with factions willing to go to war over the slightest microscopic slice of an issue, and assuming that slice is as important to people getting up at dawn to work all day on a factory floor as it is to .005 of the D party. The GOP has always won elections on a simple message, repeated ad nauseum, and unified behind one candidate. I'd like the D party to give Mayor Pete a shot at the nomination. I know they won't. They will do the opposite of the GOP: have a complex, multitiered, philosophically dense message no one understands or cares about except .005% and fracture the vote in a thousand slices. Pete doesn't have a chance to win over DT. The D party is handing the election over to DT already.
It's not what you are, but who you are and, most important of all, what level of intelligence and ideas you bring as a presidential candidate that matters.
Of course he is. The OpEd earlier this week hit on many things about why many people love Mayor Pete. He seems super smart, thoughtful and of good character. So do, Gillibrand, Castro, and Booker - who has pointedly swatted away rumors about his sexuality, just to name a few. But the OpEd left out one salient point - he is a white male, and that's a bonus for many voters.
For the record, my only concern about Pete is his lack of legislative experience, but I'm sure he's a quick study. We just need to defeat 45 - period.
You only have to listen to Mayor Pete analyze real world problems—global warming, what "freedom" is for ordinary working people—to know that this Rhodes scholar is brilliant where it matters. He's taken on tough problems and the results have been better than good. Trump creates problems. He couldn't solve his way out of a paper bag. He is where he is now because of an army of lawyers, fixers, accountants, and Putin media trolls. I'd vote for Mayor Pete in a heartbeat. The rest is noise.
The one attribute in a candidate that might have the ability to take Trump down is brainpower, and Mayor Pete has that in spades. That's all I care about.
I'm pretty deep blue these days, my only concern about Mayor Pete is that he might be too much of an outsider. We all remember Jimmy Carter who was probably the best HUMAN we ever had as President, had great difficulty getting his agenda through Congress because he was TOO MUCH of an outsider.
Americans LIKE the idea of an Outsider, but you HAVE to be buddy, buddy with the Washington Elite or you CANNOT get things DONE.
Beyond that, I'm generally happy Pete ticks enough of the minority boxes to get past the people who are--annoyingly--whining "but it's XYZ's turn!" ignoring that what we MOST want is for it NOT to be Trump's turn again.
At present, I'm supporting Mayor Pete for President. Not far enough to donate money, but I LIKE the smart things he's saying. to this point, that's good enough for me.
Mr. Buttigieg is not gay enough? I had not heard the accusation until this column by Bruni. I don't think I'm out of the loop, as I read the news daily and read it fairly widely. But now I know the latest about Mr. Buttigieg. Thank you, Mr. Bruni, you did a fine job of spreading the word even more. Watching the Democrats cannibalize themselves is painful. Watching the news media help them is frightening.
my sister's partner was told at a meeting of black students at Vanderbilt University in Nashville that he wasn't 'black enough' to participate. not because of the darkness of his skin (he was identifiably black) but because he had a law degree, spoke proper english and his black father was a surgeon, his black grandfather was a physician and his black mother was head of a teacher's organization. apparently, being educated and having successful upper middle class relatives was sufficient to disqualify him.
I don't understand this. Kamila Harris not being black enough. Mayor Pete not being gay enough. These are silly questions. But then I despise democrat need for identity politics.
I like both of these candidates. I've actually donated money to mayor Pete. One of my only two political donations so far this election season (the other was to Elizabeth Warren). And the only issue I have with Kamila Harris is that I vaguely recall reading that she was adamant about not releasing a prisoner who had been proven innocent while she was a prosecutor.
The fact that one is black or not black, a woman or not a woman, gay or not gay is ridiculous. They are good candidates and good democrats. That should be all that matters.
Well said, Frank Bruni!!! It's important to understand that the methods of critical theory developed over the past half century have enabled us to make nearly every argument possible by positing that the absence of any particular thing (say,for instance, habits of speech or physical carriage) is evidence of the insidious suppression of or moral indifference to said thing and cooperation with power structures working against said thing. This has fed a culture of popular writing in which Marx can be deemed insufficiently Marxist, MLK insufficiently liberatory, and FDR a forerunner of modern neoliberalism. Fortunately, most of these arguments resonate with only a fraction of the population. But in today's social media environment where we "like" and retweet articles we haven't even read to signal tribal allegiance more than reasoned agreement, some pretty stupid arguments can get a lot more traction than theu deserve.
1
A very good article, Mr. Bruni.
Just want to say that I've just recently tuned in to Mayor Pete and have been very impressed. It seems my reaction is the norm. ...And I'm sure that people, like me, who are concerned about this Country, listen to him and see a leader. It is so palpable that maybe it can override identity politics.
Perhaps he can get us over that mountain of prejudice where we care only about a candidate's competence and whether he is a "DECENT" person.
As for Mr. Biden, the democrats need to stop the cannibalization. As a woman, I can't understand the need of coming out about someone putting his hands on her shoulders and, therefore, I am suspicious of the lady's motives. It will be really easy for a lot of people to reach that same conclusion for, after all, who would ever be afraid of Joe Biden? ! .... Or, interpret his friendliness as harassment.
I think this is going to be a big inflection point in the MeToo movement...perhaps a needed one.
Buttigieg so far strikes me as reasonable, thoughtful, intelligent... the sort of qualities that are missing today from the White House, and from popular culture and politics and the reporting on it.
Please, please, Democrats: let's not shoot ourselves in the foot over and over by insisting that our candidate comply with some rigid expectation or another. There is too much at stake this time to mishandle how our nominee is chosen. We have a real opportunity to rid ourselves of Trump, his awful staff and appointments, AND congressional Republicans, all at once! Let's have a reasoned, informed, adult-level primary, not a Republican-style, insult-infused, adolescent-level, smarmy distortion-fest.
This is Judi writing.
Once again, Frank Bruni has nailed it!
Has anyone thought of asking Frank to run for President? He's certainly one of the wisest people out there. I would fee very proud -- and very safe -- to live in a country headed by Frank Bruni!
Mayor Pete is a breath of fresh air. Breaking stereotypes is yet another of his many noble traits that makes him a good choice to lead the nation.