So now he will release a list of clients and then the clammer will begin about whether those clients pass the purity sniff test and worse. He still won’t be able to disclose the nature of the projects McKinsey was hired for or precisely what he did and this ridiculous Warren generated charade will continue to be in the tiresome news.
3
'“We recognize the unique circumstances presented by a presidential campaign,” the [McKinsey] spokesman said.'
That's some real spin. McKinsey's NDA was impeding a presidential campaign. That is VERY bad publicity for McKinsey.
This whole episode should open up a discussion on why NDAs are bad for business and for democracy.
And the Times should work on getting a copy of the NDA itself, so people can see how oppressive they really are.
3
Buttigieg is the least qualified candidate in the race. He is being propped up by corporate donors, eloquence, and white privilege. Another commenter compared him to Obama, but he lacks Obama’s educational experience (a graduate degree). Hens neither run or won in a major city or statewide election. Obama survived the brutal politics of Chicago. Buttigieg has not experienced that kind of vetting and is ill-equipped to navigate Washington. He’s not a candidate that’s supported by African Americans. Missteps in his own city on policing and messaging blunders reg. education and Black students are reflective of this gaping hole in his experience/resume. Mark my words. No Democratic candidate can succeed without the Democratic base, which is largely compromised of African Americans. If this is the party’s nominee, prepare for four more years of Trump.
3
These purity tests are utter nonsense. That some on the left think otherwise and start ranting about corporations and rich donors leads me near to despair. What Never-never Land are these commenters living in? Donald Trump already has $125 million in his campaign chest with much more to come. How do you think we're going to compete? Where are you going to find a bubble boy or bubble girl totally free of capitalist contamination who also has accomplished something in the real world? Keep it up,and you can enjoy four more years of Trump and Barr.
5
To the most-left Democrats it won't matter what client portfolios McKinsey had Buttigieg work on in some low-level capacity. (They were not HIS clients.) The progressives have set their knives against him. If Buttigieg worked in development
at the World Wildlife Fund they'd shout that the non-profit organisation is funded in part by millionaires and billionaires and that he should have worked at his local shelter. This is what Bernie Sanders has wrought in Democratic politics.
6
Well done, President Pete! ;)
3
"... he could not sustain a transparency fight with Ms. Warren ... " And how does the Times know that he and his campaign didn't just think it was a good idea to be more transparent?
4
Love it. I saw the clip where he got snippy when asked a straitforward question by a good reporter about revealing his donors, oops seems it did not play well for Pete. Now he is back tracking. Thanks TYT for calling him on not saying who he worked for. Mainstream media up till now has handled Mayor Pete with velvet gloves. Pete got used to it, was spoiled and not happy about anyone daring to ask him anything he wants to remain hidden. Speaking of which The Hill interviews Jonathan Larson who was the only one to go to South Bend and dig into the cover up of racist activities Mayor Pete was involved in. I am glad it is finally getting out. Mayor Pete cannot be happy about that either. And I wish he would not have refused to have the racist tapes made public either or fired the first black police chief there because his donors may have ordered him to do so. Stay Tuned.
2
@cheerful dramatist
Your comment is full of misinformation and ill will toward a candidate that you may very well have a choice to vote for against Trump.
Just to point out one problem with your comment, it was not Pete's decision to release the tapes or not. He's said multiple times that if it were up to him, he'd release them, but that the courts have tied his hands on it. That's not being nefarious, it's being responsible, fair-minded and honest.
2
Pete is a good guy but can he get elected?
@NVHustler
Yes, I agree Pete is a good guy, and I believe he can and will get elected.
1
I spent over 4 decades in the oil patch.
I know McKinsey folks.
And some ex oil patch folks work there today whom I also know.
For a guy just out of college - what this man probably did like many young grunts do - spreadsheets and PowerPoints for others to present. I was one at one time.
As it is this man has zero resume.
What his McKinsey work product will show how little meaningful work he did for them.
Folks are making it out like he was some big shot consultant - and I know some at McKinsey.
They are going to be sorely disappointed.
If Democrats are hanging their hope on a man who has zero credentials - God help them.
1
Better yet let's try to suss out what Trump is going to hit Buttigieg with if he's the nominee, and let's try to neutralize that stuff in advance. He already said Pete looks like "Alfred E. Neuman," so that one's out in the open.
3
Drop out already and make room for people who actually have a chance.
1
@TK
If you're leading the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, why on Earth would you drop out?
3
Elizabeth Warren's narrative is packed with open criticism of corporate America, it's leaders and people who've done well financially. She is attempting to walk a fine line by, at the same time, telling us she is a capitalist. But once Mayor Pete discloses the clients at McKinsey and opens up his fund raising sources Elizabeth will be on the offensive trying to convince us all his background is evil and his funds are coming from donors seeking influence and are bad. She is merely setting the table to manipulate the disclosures to support her mud slinging.
2
Now to find out if this whiz kid will become the next Mitt Romney.
1
Pete is the darling of Wall Street and the Clinton crowd. I don't trust him at all . He will be the next deregulate Wall Street and more war cheerleader.
3
@gene
If you actually listen to what he says, I think you'll find he's not at all what you say with regard to "Wall Street and the Clinton crowd". And he's certainly no "war cheerleader", having experienced on-the-ground what it means to be in harm's way.
If you check out some of his one-on-one interviews, I think you may come to agree that he's actually looking to turn the page on politics as usual in some pretty fundamental ways.
1
Thank God McKinsey is going to be gracious enough to allow us, the lowly citizens, to have basic information about candidates running for President of the United States!
1
This is ridiculous. There is nothing inherently “wrong” with working for McKinsey.
Warren (and the rest of the “progressives”) have vilified big businesses and capitalism so much that Buttigieg is now supposed to be ashamed(!) of his working for that company???
What’s next for Comrade Warren and others like her… “Candidate x drank a can of Coca Cola… that’s a big company… he/she is clearly in bed with those big, evil companies. I, however, drink my local store brand. I’m a person of the people. If you elect me, I’ll be sure to tell EVERYBODY what they can and cannot do. This is still America but if you elect me, I’ll make this the Soviet Union of the good old 1970’s and 1980’s. We’ll have the KGB watching your every move.”
Meanwhile, instead of calling out Warren on her ridiculousness and instead stating that he is proud to have been hired by a company like McKinsey and that he worked hard in his role to assist their clients with whatever projects they needed help on, he has caved in to her ridiculous demands.
Well, I got news for you. There’s one candidate for president who would not cave into such nonsense. There’s one candidate for president who knows capitalism is what has made this country the best in the world. He’d call it out for what it really is. And, his name is… TRUMP.
Forget that he worked for McKinnsey. He's a Rhodes Scholar, so that says everything about why I wouldn't vote for him.
"... prompting Mr. Buttigieg himself to call for the firm to release him from a nondisclosure agreement [with McKinsey]."
This whole episode shows that NDAs are bad for democracy, so Buttigieg should also release the NDA itself.
1
At least Pete won't be accused of sexually abusing women, like so many others (from both parties).
2
At some point the Democratic candidates have got to quit feeding on each other. They are providing Trump and the GOP with a sideshow. They need to start consolidating what they stand for and start working to defeat Trump, not each other.
9
"They need to start consolidating what they stand for and start working to defeat Trump, not each other."
Wrong. Only ONE candidate can win the Democratic nomination. All that "let's work together" blather ignores the fact that the candidates are COMPETING to win the nomination.
And that competition is good for voters, because it shows how skilled each candidate is at political warfare.
5
@Brookhawk
If you can't make it through attacks from your fellow Democrats, there's no way you'll survive Trump's attacks.
If the point is to just elect somebody with a D beside their name, no matter how odious their policies, sorry that just doesn't fly.
There's already a swindler in the WH. Unlike Pete, he swindled rich people who like gaudy condos, golf resorts and get-rich-quick in real estate seminars.
Pete chose to swindle Canadian grocery consumers by fixing prices. He chose to swindle American taxpayers for at least $18 million by writing bogus reports in Afghanistan.
Why doesn't he commit to banning McKinsey from federal contracts? The firm appears in numerous government audit reports as having under-delivered on their contractual obligations to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.
1
The fact that the Warren campaign (presumably) thought they could get some mileage out of this has me doubting both her judgement and the judgement of her supporters.
4
"... the Warren campaign (presumably) thought they could get some mileage out of this ..."
Hillary Clinton was routinely excoriated for her highly-paid PRIVATE speeches. Warren is simply applying that standard to her political opponents.
"... has me doubting both her judgement ..."
Warren is an experienced politician -- she knows how to attack her political opponents where there can be real damage.
5
Buttigieg's McKinsey client list is entirely irrelevant to his candidacy but it will no doubt include some number of objectionable companies, countries and/or organizations. It may include an oil company or a tech monopoly or something that people will jump on. It's possible that one of these revelations could harm his candidacy despite being entirely irrelevant. And it will be thanks to the NY Times and others who should have been emphasizing the irrelevancy of this list rather than demanding its release.
6
"... it will no doubt include some number of objectionable companies, countries and/or organizations. ..."
That would be more than enough for B's political opponents to attack him. Elizabeth Warren isn't going to overlook ANY weaknesses in B's resume.
Warren is playing hardball politics:
"[B has] been challenged by Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts to open his fund-raisers to the press and release the names of the major financial bundlers who raise money for him."
2
@SJG
Why is it irrelevant?
If I worked to prop up a murderous African dictator who starved his people that would say something about my character. If I worked to justify an oil spill that damaged the environment, that too would be condemning.
Buttigieg was a Harvard/Oxford grad. He had more options than 99.9% of the world!!! If he chose to work for scummy people it says a great deal about his character, and none of it good.
Yes, people make mistakes and they change. But don't say it's irrelevant. That is offensive. Poor people, environmental causes, etc. are not irrelevancies. Those who work for them are heroes. Those who work against are despicable.
Both types are relevant.
5
I am impressed by the simple fact that Mr. Buttigieg appears to have amicably negotiated with McKinsey for the release of information legitimately shielded by their NDA. This reveals a leadership skill sorely lacking in the current administration, or it seems, Washington as a whole.
3
"This reveals a leadership skill ..."
Not exactly. McKinsey doesn't want to be in the news looking like bad guys impeding a presidential campaign.
That's a significant pressure point that B. is exploiting. So B. is demonstrating his POLITICAL skills.
3
I don't understand Pete supporters' rush to make his time at McKinsey utterly irrelevant. Or his opponents' attempt to smear him for taking the job at all.
Yes, it was his first job. But he wasn't 11 years old when he took it--he was 25. Presumably you have a moral compass. Particularly a person who keeps reminding us how important his faith is.
That said, you do get to make bad decisions in life and if he worked for an unsavory company on unsavory accounts, his age is absolutely a mitigating factor. So too is the fact he quit McKinsey after a relatively brief time and spent the next 10 years in public service.
The $64,000 question is how unsavory was the business? Was he a union buster? A pension dipper? Those would be disqualifying roles for me but hopefully it's something much more unremarkable.
So let's wait and see before we exonerate or condemn him. It's the fair and decent thing to do, and I presume all Democrats are in favor of fairness and decency? Hope so....
3
Revelations that Elizabeth Warren, despite her anti-corporation stance, has managed to receive almost two million dollars for corporate consulting makes her assault on Pete Buttigieg's three years with McKinsey a bit like living in a glass house and throwing stones at some one. Landing a job with McKinsey was all the rage among the most talented young men and women a few years back. This was well before moral doubts started to be raised about some of McKinsey's clients.
Transparency is to be applauded, but "gotcha" efforts to undermine a rival is a bit unseemly. No one wants the campaign for the Democratic party's presidential nomination to turn into a circular firing squad.
4
@Dr. O. Ralph Raymond
Pete's campaign should of thought of that before he started throwing stones huh.
Tit for Tat. This is for The Leader of the Free World. I'd prefer a President that isn't beholden to the Corp./Wall Street/Billionaire/MIC system.
You seem to feel differently.
Good luck.
3
@New World
Some just join for the "free college".
Our neighbor's son joined at the impressionable age of 17 when the military recruiting officers showed up at our local high school and sold the military as a grand adventure with "free college" as the deciding hook. How many more young impressionable men are just like him? It's a well known fact that the military solicits in the blue collar schools since the wealthy kids aren't impressed by the "free state college" hook.
Sometimes it's nothing more nefarious, calculating or devious than that. Maybe you should direct your outrage at the selling of the military by our military industrial complex and their preying on young men and women of limited economic means.
Our neighbor is now a firefighter and has seen several of his coworkers die in the few short years he has been employed as a firefighter for a large New England city. He is publicly serving his community in an extremely dangerous job for paltry compensation. His military service was a key factor in his hiring since he suffered a disability serving in Fallujah. He could have just as easily ended up dead! No different than Mayor Pete.
The blame doesn't lie with the kids who go to fight. The blame lies with a government that has never seen a war that they don't like.
Maybe a Mayor Pete, having seen up close the horrors, death and destruction of war would be far more reluctant to enter a war for less than the most grave reason. In my opinion that's a plus.
2
@sharon
That young man made choices.
Pete made his with a million other avenues available.
As for being "far more reluctant to enter a war", we don't have that proof. That's your opinion. He's been to the ME for 3 different entities now. Many Republican's who've served don't seem to have an issue with wars of choice, neither did Pete. He chose to serve in a War Crime years after we ALL knew it was based upon lies.
In my opinion that is a disqualifying mark on his resume. I'd prefer a Leader of the Free World who isn't a willing tool of the MIC.
3
Note to Buttigieg supporters:
Your guy isn't some modern day Thomas Becket. The Man for All Seasons agonizing over a horrible moral dilemma. He's a pol, asking to be made president. Rightly, he should be held to the highest possible disclosure standards.
1) Yes, names of bundled donors should be public
2) Yes, press should be allowed to attend fund raisers
3) Yes, you're work for a union-busting, pension-fund dipping corporation is relevant to Democratic voters.
4) Yes, Elizabeth Warren's consultancy info was/is relevant
To all those saying NDA can't/shouldn't be broken. They are broken all the time: Stormy Daniels. #MeToo survivors. Are these people dishonest? Certainly not. Hiding behind an NDA could be immoral: using it to conceal bad acts.
Buttigieg could and should have argued "it is in the public interest and the interest of good governance that I reveal my clients. In 30 days I will do so, with or without McKinsey approval. Sue me if you like."
McKinsey would never dare, but suppose they did? In 24 hours a Go Fund Me account would contain millions.
There was always a way to get to this place that was easier than Pete made it. Glad we're here. Take off the halo and move on.
4
When Buttigieg is taking hits for consulting work he did a decade ago it is a pretty good indicator that he is rising to the top. Now we'll see if he has what it takes to stay there. Without asking Russia for help, of course.
4
The devil’s in the detail but not in every detail.
NY Times, not every peace of information is meaningful. Please report on where the candidates stand on the issues. I’d loved to see a spreadsheet with a side-by-side comparison. Like many of your readers, I’m really not interested in what Pete did when he was in his 20’s. All I need to know is that he left that profession and life.
3
@Quantummess
It's not the NYT's job to decide what detail is "meaningful". It's their job to present the facts so that voters can make up their minds.
You're free not to care about what Pete did when he was in his 20s. So don't read articles about it, then. They have plenty of others.
Why should coverage be eliminated just to please you?
3
@Quantummess
Did he leave that life?
He's fund raising off those same entities.
His "security" is a para military org.
What he did in his mid-late 20's is relevant because he's only in his late 30's. His resume has only those few points on them. These are HIS choices. He will be judged upon them; because we have nothing else to base his candidacy upon.
3
Buttigieg is now revealed to be a candidate who must ask permission from corporate headquarters before he talks. This does not bode well.
6
Sigh. I wish the press would focus more on Donald Trump than on Democratic candidates who would all be far superior presidents. NYT and MSNBC in particular harped on Hillary Clinton during the entire 2016 campaign and we got Donald Trump as a result. We already have Fox News. Now let's do some reporting that really is fair and balanced.
4
@Paul in NJ
Less evil is marginally better.
How about we not do the same thing every election.
Lets try NOT putting into Washington a Corp., Wall Street, MIC funded/backed Pres. for a change.
3
Preface: Mayor Pete is not my first or second choice for nominee. That said, my daughter worked for a large consulting firm first job out of college. If her experience is a guide, Mayor Pete has little or no say on what projects he was assigned and made few, if any, decisions on his client said behalf. He most likely prepared research reports and presentation decks under the guidance of many levels of more senior supervisors. His time at McKinsey should be a non-issue.
3
"... Mayor Pete has little or no say on what projects he was assigned and made few, if any, decisions on his client said behalf."
That's the "I was just following orders defense". And it doesn't work.
"He most likely prepared research reports and presentation decks under the guidance of many levels of more senior supervisors."
"Reports" can be used to make decisions that can have deadly consequences.
"His time at McKinsey should be a non-issue."
Nope. Voters should have a chance to assess B's. COMPETENCE while he was at McKinsey. Trump is routinely mocked for his failed casinos, so why should B. get a free pass when his business experience is assessed?
6
@Steve Cohen How about the issue of his cozying up to the Tea Party during his 2010 run for Indiana State treasurer? It's definitely an issue for some of us.
https://www.newsweek.com/buttigieg-tea-party-video-1472730
1
In normal times - if they ever existed, transparency and taking the high road when your opponent thrives on the low road are good values and the right thing to do. It is possible for Democratic Candidates to stifle and deny their own egos enough to compete and campaign, but as they race for the prize, make sure that one of them defeats Trump. The DNC leadership must appear, act, and behave with equal focus and support for all of it's candidates and this includes stopping infighting and being ahead of surprises or revelations. Trump is the largest threat to America and Democracy in our history. November 3rd 2020 is a must win!!!
5
So we’re going after Democratic candidates for the exact thing the current president is clearly doing ( along with much more, as well, we must agree!) himself.
It seems to me that we are destroying our party over such details while we let the biggest issues slide.
Is there no way these candidates can agree to attack the myriad of wrongdoings by our brutish president in order to rid our country of his stain, rather than finding more ways to cut down each other? So depressing.
5
So far, every candidate running for president right now on both republican and democratic tickets is a far better choice than the thief and tyrant currently in office.
6
We have mayor Pete who worked for McKinsey and Trump who works for Putin.
Who would you rather vote for?
7
@confounded
Luckily we still have many other choices.
Both of those two are non-starters.
NEXT~!!!
2
@confounded
No question, Pete.
But we also have other options: Booker, Warren, Sanders, etc. It's not Pete or the abyss.
1
Awww come on, lay off Mayor Pete, he's... he's like America's Mayor... or something. Forthright! Strong! Business Oriented! No questions on racial relations.... come on Progressives, get on board the Mayor Pete Train. You've got nothing to lose but Hope and Change just like last time!
3
This was never a story nor worthy of an editorial. I have no idea why the NY Times pursued this. Concession, really? Buttigieg signed an NDA and McKinsey gave him permission to reveal the projects he worked on. Don't NY Times employees sign NDAs? What's their policy on employees breaking them?
12
What concerns me more than the McKinsey work, is the amount of corporate and Wall Street money animating Buttigieg's campaign. An LGBT Wall Street candidate is no different or better than a female Wall Street candidate, or a POC Wall Street candidate, or a straight, white male Wall Street candidate. The problem is that they're Wall Street candidates who will only offer superficial, cosmetic "change" while leaving an entrenched status quo in power, and thus failing to properly address and resolve long neglected systemic problems.
34
@Dominic
As a small ball donor to Buttigieg--I send in $100 per month (with a $10 tip to the Act Blue collection agency)--can someone please detail the "corporate and Wall Street money [that] animate[s]" Buttgieg's campaign?
Are we talking firms wholescale--e.g., Facebook as an entity or Mark Zuckerberg as an individual or through a personally managed foundation? If the latter, for instance, shouldn't we then critique Corey Booker for partnering with Zuckerberg, who donated $100M to revive Newark schools, an effort that, by all accounts, failed quite spectacularly? See, for instance:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/27/business/dealbook/the-melting-of-mark-zuckerbergs-donation-to-newark-schools.html
I keep reading this charge against Buttigieg's alleged corporate collusions levied over and over again in NYT readers' comments. Please enlighten the rest of us with clearer-sourced--and identified--evidence.
8
@Dominic
We share the same concerns however, we will not get there if we don’t first defeat Trump. No doubt in my mind that money has corrupted our system. So long as each candidate plays by the rules that are currently in place, then there is nothing there but sour grapes. Truth is not Warren, Sanders or anybody else is going to make a dent in the system without the Senate. And let’s not forget the composition of the Supreme Court has stacked the deck against “We the people.”
6
Buttigieg does not accept corporate PAC money (though Warren and Sanders have in the past). What Wall Street money do you see “animating” his campaign?
3
Good grief. Who cares what clients a junior consultant who didn’t have a real voice at age 23 worked on. It’s a tiny part of a broader experience...and something he chose to walk away from.
23
@Ghost The fact that the Warren campaign thought they could get some mileage out of this has me doubting both her judgement and the judgement of her supporters.
2
"His decision to do both is a tacit admission that he could not sustain a transparency fight with Ms. Warren and the additional media scrutiny that comes with being among the presidential campaign’s front-runners."
This is a non issue and the Times should stop trying to dent his prospects with Warren-leaning verbiage about how he has had to bend to a non-existent public cry for his info. And where are Warrens tax returns mentioned in the article? They would be a lot different than the paid fees she received in what she did release. But I don't hear Mayor Pete insisting she offer them up. I will vote for whoever gets the D nomination but I hope and pray it's Pete all the way!
13
The story here is not who Mayor Pete represented in his entry-level McKinsey job. It shouldn’t be, at least.
No, the story should be that Mayor Pete’s professional career consists solely of:
- 3 years of entry-level consulting (read: he made powerpoint presentations);
- 2 years of campaigning (read: he lost statewide election by an overwhelming margin, and then he garnered 10,991 votes to win a city election)
- 7 months of deployment with the Navy reserve (read: he was his commander’s chauffeur);
- 8 years as the mayor of a city of 100,000 people (read: wait, that’s exactly what it looks like).
I am sure he is a great guy, but Democrats, this guy is not even remotely ready to be our president.
7
And yet if he is the candidate, he has my full support. Honestly, you could take the majority of current graduate students from our nation’s top 100 colleges and they could do a better job than tRump.
4
@Jonathan: He’s infinitely more ready than Trump will ever be.
1
It seems we look for shades of perfection regarding some presidential candidates. Just look at what we have been tolerating for years now...
10
Amen brother.
1
Everyone seems to miss the part where the article says the focus on McKinsey is opposition based. Meaning some other candidate in the Democratic primary planted the McKinsey story in an attempt to damage Buttigieg. Most probably Warren.
We'll set aside the fact that Buttigieg is such a boy scout McKinsey is the worst thing any one can dig up. More importantly, the revelation says more about the opposition than it does about Buttigieg. Mayor Pete is considered a serious enough threat to someone that running a negative media campaign seemed worth the effort. Unless there's something really damaging in the McKinsey list, which I doubt, the entire episode is something of a compliment to Buttigieg. Other candidates certainly take him seriously.
105
@Andy
The oppo is probably being done by the Warren campaign. It's been revealed she has some damaging skeletons in her past, including her lies about her child's private school, not public school, education, her "reluctance" to release her tax returns,and most damaging her defense work of various chemical companies, insurance companies and other industry giants, some which were being sued for product related serious medical issues.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/09/defenses-warrens-corporate-have-holes/
I used to think highly of Elizabeth Warren and campaigned for her in 2012. The more I see and hear from her the less I like her. It's disheartening to find that the person you admired truly has feet of clay and chooses to attack a political opponent when her own history is far more damning. Was she so naive that she believed it would not be found out? The attacks on Buttigieg for actions by McKinsey long after he left their employment, implying that somehow he is still responsible, is just nasty mudslinging and diminishes her further.
Her constant pitting of the wealthy against the rest of us is getting tiring as well. I don't really care if someone has a billion dollars as long as they pay a fair share of taxes on ALL income, including capital gains. Instead of punishing those who work hard they should concentrate on rewriting the tax code, closing the loopholes and getting rid of the tax breaks that benefit only the rich.
She will not get my vote.
15
@Andy Plus we don't hear what role he played at McKinsey.
Sounds like he was a junior guy on a larger team..typically a Subject Matter Expert on one particular field who gets tasked with giving 1000 hours of work to Client A, B or C.
This is a nothing-burger, except for the work he did for a healthcare insurer in MI.
At which point the small role he played becomes a big role perception wise to the public.
Irony is that neither he nor Biden nor Warren nor Sanders can win Michigan against Trump..so this really shouldn't matter.
2
@Andy
You make this sound sooooooo nefarious. Every campaign points fingers at the opposition and sends the press sniffing in their direction. It was only 5 days ago that Pete was shocked, absolutely shocked that Elizabeth Warren refused to release her list of consulting clients (which she has since done, taking the bluster out of his sails).
They both are guilty of this tacky tit-for-tat naysaying. It's called politics. Let's not anoint either one Boy Scout in Chief. Let's just see what he did at McKinsey and if it's not awful (like union busting or pension dipping) just move on.
10
My first job after college was working for Michigan Bell Telephone Co. where I worked with computer printers creating paper bills, checks and other forms. There. I said it!
11
And you should be ashamed for printing paper bills thereby destroying the planet by killing the trees to make paper. Sorry you can’t run as a Democrat for any public office.
3
Why would they slow down the process of having an alumnus as President?
1
Where political privilege is checked, and higher laws and lines are conceded to, there is call for celebration and praise to be both received and given
1
Transparency is important when a political party casts itself as a big tent representing all who wish to come.
The lack of Ms. Clinton’s transparency regarding her Wall Street speeches and her stonewalling as to the content undermined her with many Progressives. When you get money from wealthy donors there are likely strings attached and when you speak in private for money, people begin to doubt the veracity of what you say in public. The same is true of someone who worked for a corporate consultant firm that is notoriously secretive.
The media and pundit class are tone deaf regarding these concerns as they are over-represented by people who went to elite schools and often came from privileged backgrounds and it shows in the questions they ask and the opinions they offer.
Beyond the Progressive left, many centrist and conservative leaning swing voters are devout Christians who know the Bible quote “where your treasure is, your heart is also” Matthew 6:21. Show me where your money came from and where your wealth is stored and I can find your heart and your true motives. A related verse is that we cannot “serve two masters”.
3
I'm surprised at the number of people who don't seem to understand what an NDA is all about and that includes Elizabeth Warren. Since Ms. Warren did consulting work for over three decades she must have signed her fair share of NDAs so they aren't foreign to her. What's interesting is that we can infer from the way she has gone after Mr. Buttigieg that she would have no problem discussing information covered by any of the NDAs that she signed. What does that say about her?
I like Mayor Pete and am very glad he didn't give in to the pressure to disclose information before getting permission from his former employer. I also have to admit that Ms. Warren has diminished in my estimation for attempting to force him to do so.
12
Let’s talk about Pete B’s work in Washington and on the campaign trail, on his voluntary military service. Or no Sanders then no Trump. I agree on Mayor Pete’s not Medicare and free college for all. I paid my way (not a penny from family) and my child’s. With a 50%!dropout rate From college absolutely not! Put the money in crumbling public schools.
10
Funny how it’s only Democrats and Liberals who demand or are hounded to produce information about a junior job with a company a decade or more in the past. A company that at the time held a higher reputation at the mention of its name. By the time every piece of paper has been analyzed, that candidate will be called a “flawed candidate” at every mention of their name. Mr. Buttigieg followed the conditions of his NDA, saw that those conditions were not acceptable to the current environment and worked and negotiated to change those requirements. Seems like the qualities I want in a President.
22
Carolyn, I agree. Mayor Pete has shown that he stands by his commitments when he did not break his NDA. Shows he can be trusted even when under pressure to do otherwise.
I paid my way through college without a penny of assistance and paid back every dime of my student debt. Free college for all is not what is needed. Not everyone is college material. How about we bring classes into schools to teach technical skills, teach students how to budget their money, balance a check book, fill out a job application, write a resume, how to dress for a job interview, how to conduct themselves in a job interview. Too many students leave school without the basic skills to succeed in life. Free college for all is not the answer.
1
Where privilege is checked, and higher laws and lines are conceded, there is call for celebration and praise to be both received and given.
It does not matter who he worked for. All that matters is that the alt-right will be able to find some name or organization and produce a set of lies about it. Then Fox will pick up the narrative. Trump will make a claim over and over and over. His lemmings will believe him. The "press" will run stories based on a false narrative. In the end, Mr B will be seen as another corrupt politician. We have seen this story before.
6
This smacks of desperation. Not by Buttigieg, but by the New York Times Editorial Board, the reporters the NY put on the (non) story to back up their ridiculous editorial the other day, and Buttigieg's opponents. Pete Buttigieg worked for the most prestigious consulting firm in the world, one that Elizabeth Warren hired, and that's a bad thing? Please.
39
I take issue with the statement that the $1.9M Warren earned in consulting fees is far less than she could have earned as a professor at Harvard, etc. True, but what is omitted is that the consulting was done while she was working as a professor at Harvard, etc. Nothing wrong with that, but why imply that she was scraping by on $75K per?
14
Buttigieg was never the villain here. All he ever did was honour his NDA, which shows him to at least be slightly more reliable character than the present occupant of the office. If there was a villain, it was McKinsey, who seem to have been a bit slow to recognise their duty to the public.
13
Why does a non-disclosure agreement stop one from revealing who his major campaign financiers are? I'm sorry, but watching Pete B brush these questions off so smuggly reveals who he is and who he would be as president.
11
@Mark, I think you may be connecting two separate issues. The NDAs prevented Buttigieg from disclosing McKinsey clients. Now that the firm has cleared it with those clients, Buttigieg is released from the NDA.
As far as I can see, it has nothing to do with disclosing the names of his donors.
15
Marilynn, her point is that he was ducking on the campaign bundler names and opening his private fundraisers too. The NDA had nothing to do with him being more transparent on the campaign financing front. He just wasn’t.
3
@Mark And so the false narrative takes hold....
3
I remain utterly baffled at what earth shattering insights those who have been clambering for the release of the McKinsey client list expect to now find. Buttigieg was a low-level consultant who probably spent most of his time on technocratic work streams involving crunching data and preparing presentation decks. He was a worker bee contributing to whatever work McKinsey was engaged to do with the organizations that hired it. Typically this work resulted in a series of recommendations that a client could accept or reject as they saw fit. It is hard to imagine how having this information will be of any import in assessing Buttigieg’s fitness to be president.
It is also worth noting that typically as part of its contract, McKinsey was required to sign its own NDA with its clients. It is likely that McKinsey has needed permission from at least some of the clients involved to release information about McKinsey’s work with them.
There is a nearly infinite list of more scandalous behavior going on within the Trump administration; those interested in the quality of our democracy might better focus on shining a spotlight on those outrages than trying to make this molehill into more than the molehill that it is.
193
The nature of the projects are what's relevant.
Did he, for example, work for a client who asked McKinsey with help preventing workers from forming a union?
Did he work on a project whereby McKinsey helped an employer tap into the company pension fund, diminishing an employees retirement?
Those things would and should be disqualifying for any Democratic candidate and are certainly revelatory about Buttigieg's character.
Let's hope he didn't.
7
@Laurence Bachmann He was straight out of college. I don't care what work his employer had him do, as long as it was legal. You dont pick and choose assignments at your first job, you get what you get and you bust your butt so one say you can chose.
19
@Laurence Bachmann "There is a nearly infinite list of more scandalous behavior going on within the Trump administration"
This is part of the problem. People like Buttigieg are perceived as being squeaky clean, so even the slightest hint of scandal damages them. Trump is scandalous all the time, so one more scandal doesn't make any difference.
12
If Democrats truly have such heartburn over this, then they do have a choice — I can think of at least one candidate who doesn’t carry such baggage.
These past few months watching the Dems, I’ve been reminded of cage fighting — which was what I feared when the cast of thousands entered over the summer and the debates became the “American Idol” of politics — and this was long before Bloomberg joined the pile-on. It’s Buttgieg’s turn now, and he’s just the latest casualty in this war of attrition that will last into spring, leaving nothing behind but hard feelings and the overall image of a party at war with itself. Excellent recipe for a November victory.
I’m meh on Buttgieg as a presidential candidate. Like many in Indiana, I was seeing this as a possible prelude to a gubernatorial run, which did have some support. Now with this, it’s hard to tell what his political future looks like. I, for one, can’t in good conscience back a corporatist any longer, no matter the office, and obviously, I’m not alone.
7
@MDB And this plays right into the hands of political party and president so steeped in corruption that it is now just assumed. GOP corruption is not even news.
7
Not sure the label “corporatist” is appropriate for someone who worked for 30 months at a junior-level position and then decided to quit because the work was not meaningful enough.
5
We are living in an irony-free zone. You want him to break a legal agreement to prove that he is “honest.” I’m impressed that he honored his word and it’s worth noting that McKinsey actually has to gain the permission of each client org he served (a decade ago!) in order to allow him to take this step—they also signed an NDA with these clients and they have been honoring their agreements. NDAs are very common and do not imply that anything nefarious is going on.
28
This is not a proud moment for the democratic party.
I’m glad Buttigieg can move on from this petty squabble and he and his campaign can focus on more important matters.
18
30 months of work at McKinsey now qualifies a person to be president of the United States of America?
9
Um... along with a strong education, military service, 8 years of executive experience, and clear political talent.
5
@David: Being honest and respecting the Constitution qualifies any US person infinitely more than the current occupant of the White House. Pete Buttigieg qualifies!
1
The more Warren asks Pete about his work at McKinsey, the more I find her petty and dislike her. She sounds like someone who cares about the meeting minutes and ignores the wasted hours.
24
I wonder whether Chelsea Clinton will be commanded by the progressive left to release the names of the McKinsey clients she was assigned to serve, once she runs for office.
11
Note also that Elizabeth Warren’s own daughter - Amelia Warren Tyagi - worked for McKinsey as well after she graduated from Wharton.
She now runs her own consulting and outsourcing business - the Business Talent Group.
6
Yet our Sitting President is anything but transparent.
9
Buttigieg went to McKinsey to learn what McKinsey/corporate America does...
If you're I guess a moderate Democrat who thinks unfettered capitalism represents the America of all your good dreams then that's great. Pete 2020!!! If on the other hand you're aware of the importance of addressing profound social and economic inequity McKinsey is the stuff of nightmares.
8
I’m a moderate, I suppose. I don’t believe in unfettered capitalism, but I certainly believe in capitalism. Much like democracy, it’s the worst system except for all of the others. Pretty much the whole country feels the same way, so trying to drive the more socialist progressives and people like me apart before the next, most crucial election, seems like a tactic designed to divide the Democrats and re-elect Trump. Scandinavian model countries have safety nets, but they are capitalist countries. Progressives know that!
13
Squabbles over who was a young man’s clients in a beginning job out of college, when we’ve got who’s sitting in the White House.
Wake up people.
30
Good, but McK probably has some ulterior motive. What out for what they want. The last ten years at McK have been filled with very bad leadership decisions. Mayor Pete should be more transparent. Having said this, vote blue ANY of the DEMs running would be a vast improvement over the treasonous circus in the WH. There is no comparison between a corrupt syndicate and Pete or anyone of the other candidates.
3
I applaud Mr. Buttigieg for honoring his word and not providing information about his work at McKinsey until that firm released from his promise not to do so. It is refreshing to see a man whose word means something. Bravo!
175
@Dorothy I mean, he isn't really in a position to be able to violate the NDA. He would've burned bridges/had his pants sued off and doesn't have the financial resources to fight it, so there was definite self interest there. Let's not pretend that this was strictly a moral decision.
1
We have no idea about Trump’s taxes, he’s a known crook, half his associates are heading to jail, but let’s dissect Mayor Pete and forget about the swamp in the Whitehouse. Democrats are predictably ridiculous when they continue to destroy their own.
18
Careful to those throwing shade on Pete. He is going to be a great president.
10
Like Trump and unlike Obama he does not have the requisite experience to run for President. He has a mediocre track record as mayor of a small Iowa town. He’s got the attention of the LGBTQ voters or those looking for a “first” but he’d be far better served doing a term as senator and cutting his teeth. Nice guy and all but not for this time around.
9
If you’re still unaware that Buttigieg is mayor of a city in INDIANA, perhaps you should re-evaluate your own stances on the candidates.
2
South Bend is neither small or in Iowa. It is in Indiana, where a Democrat has no chance of succeeding in running for governor or for the a Senate. Gerrymandered to the hilt by Republicans, no Democrat has a chance of winning a congressional seat either unless one is from Indianapolis or the NW district near Chicagoland. (Both are in Indiana, not Iowa.)
5
Dispiriting to read commenters trashing Obama, raving about “Mayor Pete,” disparaging Warren. Obviously any of these people would be a vastly better president than Trump; so would I, so would you. This “I Like Ike” popularity contest, where everybody picks their favorite and then consults google for ammo against the rest is a soulless exercise, gets us nowhere.
These are public servants; not saviors. You want a better life? Make it yourself. And just vote for the Democrat. Barely matters who it is.
12
McKinsey promises its clients privacy. I was an outside consultant with McK. I was sworn to secrecy and given a laptop with extensive security features to use for all communications with the company. The decision to reveal Mayor Pete's clients must lie with McK.
7
The story of how Pete won his position at McKinsey - which I think I read here in the NYT - is VERY impressive. We're dealing with a genius-level IQ here - a master strategist, a master problem solver. At McKinsey he developed solutions to the extremely complex, intractable problems confronting his clients - the kind of problems you need the best and brightest to help you with. That sounds like ideal training for a future president. In the Navy, he worked to disrupt the financial networks of terrorist organizations. He was literally on the front line of the war against terrorism - our biggest national security threat. That also is fantastic experience for a future president. The common knock against Buttigieg is that he lacks experience, but the reality is he's loaded to the gills with extremely relevant and useful experience. He's the real deal. More and more, I think we'd be crazy not to nominate him.
21
Why is it so important to know what Mayor Pete did right out of college? Oh, wait. It was 3 months ago.
4
@Roy Hobbs: It was 15 years ago.
Too much focus has been on Buttigieg’s role at McKinsey. He was a very junior consultant at the firm and basically responsible for making PowerPoint slides. He didn’t have much say in the final recommendations made to a client, and on client selection. As a junior employee he was there to learn the ropes, the business. I don’t think we should be focused on his role here at all; rather we should talk more about his duties as mayor.
11
Buttigieg has not cultivated any goodwill in the democratic party in his 8 years as an elected official. How does he expect to be able to work with Pelosi and Schumer? A bigger service would be a gubernatorial run in Indiana...but again, he's built no bridges there either. The country needs structural change. Pinning that hope on a guy that picked up 10K votes to win a mayor's race in a city that has voted D since 1964 in a state that has become almost as red as Mississippi doesn't move me. We deserve better.
5
Your misrepresentation of our Mayor and who likes him and who doesn’t is misguided and probably due to your being in France. While we have a vile person in the WH and sycophants defending him to the detriment of our democracy and a field of qualified people (of which most have dedicated their careers in the public interest), please hold your opinions and fire for the 2020 election.
3
@Karen Jacob My being in France has nothing to do with my observation. I am what colloquially is known as a "Region Rat". In my seventh decade, having strong ties to Indiana (family, labor movement, political friends including elected officials), still a US voter who happens to live in France, I still say that we deserve better. Sorry if that offends you. C'est la vie.
2
It's worth noting that Buttigieg left McKinsey and ultimately took on jobs in public service. He could have easily stayed at the economic consulting firm, become partner (which is common) and made millions down the line. But he didn't. And that in my opinion is another strength in his resume (and character) and definitely not a weakness.
17
Interesting, given that Warren and her husband have a net
worth of $12 Million. One must wonder if the Warrens have divested themselves of stock and IRA holdings that ever did busniess with McKinsey.
11
I worked for McKinsey, 2 years after Harvard, I met several “Petes”- they were whip smart, eager and brought a perspective I did not have as someone who did not grow up in America. McKinsey was an even better education than I got at school, thought me how to approach issues from every perspective and provide a set of solutions and recommendations based on all variables. Like Pete I had no say on which projects I worked, I was just a cog in a vast organization. I worked 90/100h weeks, I met the most interesting people that came from everywhere in the world and most of us after 27y are still friends. If critical thinking and coming up with solutions is a problem, then we better rethink our values. Really, go ahead and criticize people who help with infrastructure, ngo’s, resource maximizing, just bc they are not socialists. You know, we have actually done the research and the whole “kill the golden goose” does not work. Honestly, the PC anti-business crowd really exhaust me. They should leave twitter, the comic store or academia and live in the real (non self righteous) world for a while and see that it takes to put food on the table. Real work leaves very little time for all this manufactured indignation.
34
This is the sort of attitude that breeds absolute contempt for individuals who come from “elite” backgrounds with every opportunity laid out for them and completely blind to the reality of the less well off. The presumption that anyone who is seeking a more progressive and economically liberal candidate must surely dwell in comic book stores or has never gone out to put food on the table is ludicrous. The “PC anti-business” crowd is more numerous and puts in more man hours than whatever self congratulatory circle you sit in. The society and world you enjoy is operated largely by that very same crowd you despise.
Of course, perhaps the status quo would be preferable? Rising expenses, a market running on excess capital rather than growing demand, inequality on the rise, stagnant wages. Oh surely the plebeian class can understand what wondrous times we live in! Surely the research done by the elites to ponder whether keeping the elites strong is beneficial is relevant!
7
@Robert
Well said Robert.
Thank you.
7
This is the kind of internecine squabbling which will lead to another 4 years of Trump—and more ultra-conservative judges packing the highest courts for generations to come. They may even retake the house. Get it together, people, or you won’t have a chance ever again.
6
Releasing the names of the clients of McKinsey for whom he worked is not sufficient. What he actually did for those clients in detail is required. Not a summary. If he did not release what he did in detail for those clients, then his political rivals has every right to say that Buttigieg is a participant in his clients dirty work. All that is needed is dig up the dirty work his clients did or do. Buttigieg should not have started, now it is too late.
8
@Kodali
Oh please. Warren earned millions from clients she chose. Pete was a junior analyst who had no say over his assignments.
I’m all in for Pete in the primary here in California, but I’d vote enthusiastically for either of them in the general.
10
Buttigieg's rise from obscurity is a mystery wrapped in an enigma.
11
@William Baker
Not really. Pete is pretty impressive. Check out his town halls on youtube and watch him interact with real people. He seems genuine and the face of the future of America a lot of us are looking for.
11
I'm not sure being brilliant and young should be considered disqualifying. Don't you really want to have the smartest person in the Oval Office?
34
@Andrew Freinkel
I’m all in for Pete for the primary here in California on Super Tuesday. But I’ll vote blue no matter who in the general election.
But Pete’s smart, kind, forward thinking and has a personal stake in the future. We can point our children to him as an example of how to be our best selves in service to others with pride.
That’s exactly what America needs right now.
12
I would love to see the non-disclosure provision that was silencing Buttigieg. Was it overreaching by McKinsey or was Buttigieg reading it expansively? I would think it a rare case where there would be a legitimate interest in keeping secret which of a company's clients an employee worked for as a young professional ten years before.
5
I love Mayor Pete but I’ll happily vote for Warren if she wins the nomination.
10
I think Buttigieg has behaved quite properly in this case. He abided by the terms of his contract until he was released from it. The people who suggested that he violate his NDA because McKinsey would not actually sue him are a) probably wrong - McKinsey would sue because otherwise they would risk losing enforceability of other NDA's, and b) missing the point: he was honoring the terms of his contract. The comparison with those who testified in the impeachment investigation is not appropriate: they never agreed not to disclose what they know and the "order" that they not testify was not and is not legal.
14
Since I think Mike Bloomberg is the only Democrat who can beat Donald Trump, I am not a supporter of Mayor Pete.
However, Elizabeth Warren seems disingenuous
when she suggests Pete can be bought and also accuses Bloomberg of trying to buy the election.
Bloomberg is the most sincere and genuine candidate in the race- and he definitely can’t be bought!
7
Ahh McKinsey and Company. I've never met a management consultant yet - from anywhere - that was actually competent and added any value.
They're fantastic illusionists though. Do just enough to simulate that they are delivering something, fluff about, talk plenty about things they aren't qualified in and then milk the client for all they're worth.
Oh, and when crunch time comes to deliver something, just recommend what you always do. Slash costs. Cut, Cut Cut.
Just as conservatives seem to say that you can't tax yourself to prosperity, you can't slash and burn to do it either. But any management consultant will always recommend you try!
14
He was a junior consultant for a huge firm. I don’t understand why anyone cares to which projects he was staffed.
19
While the Dems are jeopardizing their own, by forcing unprecedented “transparency”; Trump is hiding his tax returns; silencing witnesses; hiding unclassified phone transcripts on top secret servers; and arguably making a mockery of democracy. Save the ammunition.
18
Buttigieg decided he must give out what will turn out to be minuscule essentially unimportant information about his work past. Petty stuff. I am more concerned about the direction of his campaign. More of a ‘what have you done for me lately’ approach.
4
McKinsey are enablers for greedy corporate executives who want to offshore jobs, freeze wages, erode employee benefits and engage in profiteering at the top. They are part of the reason why so few benefit from this economy and so many suffer. To say nothing of their work abroad on behalf corrupt regimes and dictators, well documented by the Times.
No wonder Buttigieg is defensive about his time there, just like Romney was about Bain Capital. How does he expect to portray himself as the savior of the working and middle classes when he worked for one of their oppressors?
19
@Xoxarle Please. Just stop. It is the best training ground for critical thinking. Better than college. A Jr. Analyst is NOT why so many suffer. So many suffer because our politicians LACK moral compass. What you consider an Achilles heel, I admire; That he learned what he could, looked around and decided to move on. This says so much about his positive and grounded character. Look, do I think he should be President yet? Likely no. But, to rip him apart and call him an oppressor seems just so off-base and morally righteous. It so easy for you to cast stones, but what are you DOING to make things better? Please list/expound. And, if you're interested in running for President, I'm sure the dear readers of the NYT's, won't take you to task. Except, maybe Xoxarle.
11
Actually, comparing Buttigieg's compliance with an NDA is not equivalent to not releasing your tax returns because "they're under audit." 1, an NDA is a biding contract and I'm glad that McKinsey is now cooperating. 2, a tax audit does not contractually or legally bind an individual from releasing those tax returns. It's a false equivalency. When an individual works in the private sector and masters the complexities of organizations, this is an asset. This is an example of someone who can think quickly on his feet and make decisions that will inure to the benefit of the USA. Why not have the best and the brightest?
34
Why on earth is pricing groceries for Loblaws an election issue? Pete Buttigeig was an employee given work assignments like the rest of us. If they had been unethical, my guess is that he is the kind of man to say, "No, thank you", as I have had to do in my time.
35
Should we rely on your guess or just see what actually he did there?
2
Read his book.
Kudos to Mayor Pete for transparency. However, it is really maddening that the Dems devour their own for a "lack of transparency" and force revelations that might produce some inkling of fodder when Trump manages to keep the details of his finances and so much more under lock and key. Let us remember who the real shady dealer is and eject him soundly no matter who his opponent turns out to be.
47
It’s imperative we know who is bankrolling Presidential candidates. There should be no closed-door fundraisers.
A million species are at risk of going extinct because of Climate Change. Nothing will get done in Congress if politicians are beholden to special interests.
Buttigieg’s climate advisor is David Victor, whose research is funded by BP and the Electric Power Research Institute that represents the interests of energy companies.
These guys have been deceiving the American public for two decades. Climate change is barreling down on us. We can’t kick the can down the road any longer. We can’t take a risk on someone who accepts money from special interests or hires “experts” from the fossil-fuel industry.
Buttigieg calls small donor money “pocket change.” He is personal friends with Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook. His national policy director is a former executive at Goldman Sachs and Google.
We can’t afford to take a chance on an unknown entity, someone who pivots left to right, someone who buddies up to billionaires and powerful corporate executives, someone with so many secrets. This is a battle between corporate Democrats controlled by special interests versus true progressive Democrats who will fight to save our planet!
16
“It’s imperative we know who is bankrolling presidential candidates.”
I agree, and so does Pete. That’s why literally every donation above 200 dollars is transparently traceable. You can look up the names of every significant donor.
Closed door fundraisers have nothing to do with secret meetings or dark money. They are simply private events hosted at people’s private homes. You can find countless videos of Pete at these events where he uses the opportunity to present the same stump speech he always does.
Furthermore, Pete has specifically rejected the use of PAC money, which is how corporations and special interests can fund campaigns past the 2,800 limit.
There is no evidence that Pete is beholden to any special interest.
In actuality, he has more individual donations than most other candidates (with an average donation of $40, by the way).
12
@Ed David Victor is well-regarded in the climate community and is only one of Buttigieg's advisors.
@Ed No, Ed. This is a battle between Democrats and Trump. Not corporate dems and 'true' progressives. This, right now in the moment, is a fight for Democracy with a cap 'D'. We don't get to save the planet, certainly something we all want, without T gone, gone, gone. Please stand behing whomever is the dem candidate! Literally, the world and the planet are counting on you!
6
I worked at McKinsey and was a consultant at a major competitor of theirs previously. The young Associates (like Pete) were earnest, smart and highly educated though often lacking in feet-on-the-ground experience (because they are young!).
Consultants are asked to weigh in on issues for clients. It is up to clients whether or not to consider their recommendations, scenarios, projections, etc. And, to determine whether such study outputs are compatible with their values and objectives.
26
Amazing to read this. I thought transparency had long gone out the window as a requirement to be president. Having avoided a prison sentence seems to be the current standard.
12
I don't understand the concern about Mayor Buttigieg's employment at McKinsey. McKinsey is noted for identifying the most talented graduates from around the world and offering them exceptional opportunities and experience. He worked for them for 3 years and decided he'd rather pursue a life of public service. What's wrong with that? He is an extraordinarily bright, articulate veteran who served with distinction in Afghanistan before becoming the mayor of South Bend, Indiana at age 29. I'd say that's impressive.
106
The framing of this article suggests a pro-Warren bias. Some examples:
- Failure to mention that Pete has been wanting his NDA lifted for months and suggesting that this is purely reactive
- Framing Pete’s request for Elizabeth Warrens tax returns around the sufficiency of 11 years when he provided merely 3. It wasn’t about the years, it was about the contents of those years. Her corporate work wasn’t included in what she released
- Suggesting Warrens ~1.9M in fees wasn’t on top of other employment - it was!
- Suggesting Warrens ~1.9M in fees was evenly distorted across 3 decades - it wasn’t! Its only
15 years of earning, in some of which she earned >$400k (on TOP of her salaries income) - more if you factor inflation.
Anyway, it would be nice if these articles demonstrated less bias in their framing.
46
Well, it is only fair for him to disclose his clients, as Warren did. And 1.9 min for 15 years it is not very much. 127K per year is respectable salary, but by no means crazy high for lawyer.
6
@yulia This was not a salary; this was $675/hr consulting. And Buttigieg has released more than 10 years of tax returns, including his consulting years.
8
@yulia he signed an NDA, he would be breaking the law until McKinsey releases him, which I believe has happened. Is that still a question of some sort?
I'm reminded of the old adage "choose your battles" and some of these battles that the press and some candidates are levying against other candidates seem...petty...or confusing...or like infighting, bickering, etc.
I'm half expecting the next headline to read something like "X candidate drove luxury class car to work for 8 years, they paid a total of $56,739 for the vehicle."
1.9 Million over 30 years for Warren? 3 years at a consulting firm out of college for Buttigieg? These are headlines you'd apply to broad swaths of white collar workers. They are non stories, especially when there are so many more pressing issues going on.
43
@P Thank you, P
Wise words.
2
So what? I really don’t care about a do nothing low level job. However, I do care who is funding him with behind the scenes. He’s a flip flopper. One year he’s for M4A and the next year he’s not. No firm commitments or. Ew ideas. No state or federal experience. No sincere commitment to causes affecting women, children or African Americans. Big view of himself but Not ready for the WH.
13
Pete has not changed his position since starting his campaign. That is a simple mistruth.
Pete has long stated that he supports a single payer system. The question is—how do we get there?
Pete is proposing a robust public option as a glide path to single payer. And again, that has always been his position.
Honestly, I don’t see how there is any other way. The fact is that many people have good insurance. Many union workers have fought for decades (and given concessions on their wages) in order to secure good insurance.
It is not politically or logistically viable to flip a switch and change the entire system within a single term.
Pete’s plan speaks to values of freedom and choice in a way that doesn’t alienate more conservative voters, while simultaneously insuring almost every American.
Framing is everything in politics. This is a good path forward.
13
He actually didn't describe his public option, and definitely mudded the water by introducing the term Medicare for all who wants. Based on what did he calculate the cost of his program? How much will the public option cost per person? How much the program will cost if everybody sign up for Medicare? How much will be total healthcare cost? Seems like he like to grill other but not so forthcoming himself.
5
@Louise
He just released a plan (Keeping the Promise For America’s Children) that among other things, invests $700 billion into universal full day childcare and pre-K for all children from infancy to age 5
His Douglass Plan is the most comprehensive of all the candidates in battling the effects of systemic racism
Did you know that in South Bend he instituted for city workers paid family leave and a living minimum wage and for undocumented residents he instituted city ID cards for them
He never flip-flopped on Medicare For All Who Want It. That is a false narrative. I’ve been following him since the Spring and in podcasts and interviews as far back as January he talked about M4AWWI as a glide path to single payor. In the summer debates, when it became clear that Warren’s definition of Medicare For All included kicking people off private plans, Pete continued to emphasize that people could keep their private insurance under his plan, which was how he has been describing his plan all along
10
The American political process has been reduced to petty squabbling which benefits no one.
Have we forgotten that the outward appearance of hatefulness is perceived as a direct reflection of the country?
20
Until yesterday I had refrained from making any but the most generally supportive FB comments to the Dem candidates. Too many of my more left-leaning FB "friends" are "triggered" by anyone who doesn't support their candidate. But one posted a disparaginging bit about Pete from a fringe news outlet the other day. He is one of three Dems to whose campaigns I have contributed, and, as a sane person, I intend to vote for whoever is the nominee. I expressed this thought, only to be trolled by that "friend" with several more disparaging articles about Pete. I prioritize getting rid of Dump, and having any rational Dem nominate the next Supreme Court Justice. Don't engage with those "my candidate or no one" types who really need to just grow up.
71
In the land of the blind.... Both Buttigieg AND Warren are up to their eyeball in corporate/PAC donors. Warren denounced these revenue streams this summer only AFTER amassing tens of millions from them; she transferred 10 million from her faux-senate campaign and about the same from the first half of her presidential campaign... and she sure isn't giving that money back! And Buttigieg has probably now raked in even more than this from such donors!
There are only three people-funded, truly grass-roots-driven campaigns this time: Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang. All the others are in deep with big money donors... despite what they might pretend.
16
@carl bumba
Again and again, I must correct this pernicious lie.
Pete has explicitly rejected PAC money! Pure and simple.
Every donor is capped at 2,800 and every donation above 200 is completely traceable.
Pete's campaign is 100% funded by individual donors, NOT corporations.
10
I don't think this was a "pernicious" lie (but I'll have to look that up). Donations are capped at $2,800 for ALL the candidates (The same for your trace-ability point.) It's true that Buttigieg did return (with great fanfare) the corporate lobbyist money that he received. And I believe he has since eschewed corporate donations that exceed $2,800, at a time, using PACs. But $2,800 is a LARGE amount of money for a single-serving! His 100% "individual donors" tend to be very wealthy.
According to a recent article I just fished-out from Normon Solomon (10/21/19); it's probably legit:
So far this year, Buttigieg has reported $27 million in contributions of $200 and above—accounting for 52.5 percent of his total dollars raised. Compare that to Elizabeth Warren at 29.6 percent and Bernie Sanders at 24.9 percent.
And here's NYT (who seem to like him) on the matter:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/01/us/politics/pete-buttigieg-fundraising.html
It seems it would be some kind of a lie to indicate that Pete Buttigieg is a grass-roots candidate, in comparison to Bernie, Tulsi, Yang or even Warren.
1
@Sean
Upon reflection, I should have used an "and/or" instead of just a "/" when referring to corporate and PAC money, in regards to Warren and Buttigieg. Warren had both and did not return either. And, from my understanding, Buttigieg had both and returned the PAC "and/or" lobbyist money. He still gets his corporate support (probably more than any of them, besides Biden) in the form of individual donations.
This is so opposite of what is expected of Trump. Thank you, Mayor Pete!
20
Ridiculous left-wing purity tests will usher Donald Trump into office for a second term, and a third as he continues to destabilize the foundation of our democratic republic. Buttigieg is doing the right thing - let's respect that and move on to get Trump out of the White House.
55
Sounds like he was like a younger version of a ‘Bob’ from ‘Office Space’. Hate to say it but I can kind of see that.
2
I love that he didn't cave to those who were trying to intimidate him into breaking a contractual agreement.
That is a real president for you unlike the current one who lies and routinely breaks contracts.
BTW, here is an outstanding NYT article that somehow got yanked from the digital edition today a few hours after it was posted.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/09/us/politics/buttigieg-black-voters-south-bend.html
Pete will be our next and best president.
38
@Simon Sez Thank you for the link to the article!
1
@Simon Sez
It's still under Politics, were it was this morning too.
1
"a series of significant concessions toward transparency for a candidate under increasing pressure to release more details about his personal employment history and campaign finances."
The only pressure I am aware of is Elizabeth Warren on his campaign finances and the NYT Editorial Board on his ten year old job at McKinsey. So please don't over inflate and give the man an opportunity to respond. I doubt that there isn't a candidate with their hat in the ring other than Tom Steyer who hasn't taken a big political contribution in his or her past or present. As to his job at McKinsey this is just an NYT fishing expedition at trying for a gotcha moment. This is like the NYT with the Hillary emails all over again a mountain out of a molehill.
24
Democrats acting as our own worst enemies. Shame on the NYT for advocating breaking an NDA. That’s a legal document and mayor Pete has done an excellent job of staying out of legal issues and drama. Don’t stir up nonsense.
26
So Buttgieg honors his commitments, gets released from the NDA and now can let us know. Sounds about right.
27
How can Pete run a country when he has failed at running a small town in Indiana?
16
South Bend is not a small town and he didn’t fail. Every mayor has detractors. His record in turning South Bend around is well recognized and widely appreciated in the city as a whole.
@Anne B
Can you name any of his accomplishments as mayor, and how he improved people's lives?
2
Pete now knows that McKinsey does not favor his candidacy
5
The president has had multiple bankruptcies, ran a fraudulent school ($25mm fine paid) ran a fraudulent charity ($2mm fine paid), has been sued hundreds of times, paid two women for their silence about his adulteries with them, and installed his daughter and son-in-law in topmost positions for which they are grossly under qualified
He has called on at least three countries to subvert our elections.
He has pardoned three convicted war criminals.
I could go on, but the list is too long.
And The Times sees fit to invent a crisis about Mayor Pete based on a non-issue?
Where is any sense of proportionality?
Our national house is in full blaze due the arsonist in the white house, and The Times is searching desperately for something - anything.
This is a non- issue in the extreme.
40
To all fairness, it was Mayor Pete's own making. He can not demand transparency from others, while he is hiding behind NDA.
3
If we ruled out every person who has ever worked for a company that has had some past ethical lapses or even engaged in illegal activities, we likely wouldn't have anyone left to run for president.
He was a freshly minted college graduate, not the CEO.
I guess no future president can come from the ranks of Amazon, GM, any major climate change accelerating Energy Company, Cable Company or the #metoo Media Industry. Certainly not the 3rd world sweatshop Fashion Industry, and god forbid the rapacious Finance world.
16
This is such a non-story. Seriously - who are we kidding. It is manufactured self-inflicted distractions like this that will cost the Dems in 2020. This nonsense is similar to the inconsistent and one-sided reporting that Mrs Clinton has to spend precious time dealing with rather than on what mattered. Shame on the NYT and the other candidates for creating this distraction.
37
The NY Times’ fixation on McKinsey is beneath the standards of good journalism. In a divided world that desperately needs honest and balanced reporting, the paper does a disservice to the greater good by distorting facts to paint a false portrait. The Times would be well advised to do an expose on itself to reveal what biases its own editors and journalists may be harboring.
Pete’s association with the management consultancy is unlikely to reveal anything damning. It may even help him. Go Pete!
59
This squabbling is unworthy of the intensity and importance of the debate over the future of our country. Warren is demeaning herself, her expertise and her campaign in her attacks on Buttigieg and the release of the client names will not help her campaign at all.
21
@Sipa111 Though her request to release campaign bundler names and include the press at private fund-raisers could change the game.
4
I like Buttigieg plenty but absolutely supported 1) opening fundraisers to the press 2) releasing bundler donor info and 3) knowing what he did at McKinsey (if you can't tell us about three years of your life, don't run until you can).
Let's all agree transparency shouldn't be optional. Now, let's get back to the campaign and the pressing issues that remain unresolved...
Question: does Elizabeth Warren's lack of a private option doom her health care proposal, giving Republicans a club to beat the Dems up with next November? I think so.
Discuss!
5
Warren will do and say anything to change the topic that:
*she does not want voters to have choice in healthcare
*Medicare for all would cause middle class tax increases
*she is against school choice but sent her son to a private school
*she and her husband are worth $12 million but she won't pay a tax on her wealth
*she voted against the Trump tax cuts but is paying taxes at the new lower rate. Why does she not VOLUNTEER to pay at the older higher rate? Time to lead by example Liz
she lied about being a native American
7
Awesome, we get to know Mayor Pete’s “clients” while he was a junior-level consultant. As if he had any real control over his work assignments and they were “his” clients. Working at McKinsey or a similar consulting firm was just considered good work experience post-college. And consulting was considered at least marginally more interesting than investment banking. In either instance, you’re not doing much of consequence if you stayed for only a few years. Sure, it’s resume padding. That’s about the worst thing you can accuse anyone of. Much ado about nothing.
31
Now let's wait for Sen. Warren to complain about the clients that were given to Mayor Pete by Kinsey. I am sure she will call him every anti-capitalist slogan in the book unless the only organization he had advised was Greenpeace. The Hunger Games of the Democratic party have begun and it is clear that out of the leading pack of four, Pete is the first one that the party establishment - including news outlets - has decided to get rid of unceremoniously. The only ones who are laughing are the Trumpists: they know that once the primary contest is over, the mud-slinging will leave Democrats look like they haven't taken a bath for a year. Then the GOP will roll out its swamp rhetoric cannon and they will be happily using all the ammunition originally produced by Democrats. The accusation of Buttigieg being a 'dishonest, filthy capitalist with murky ties to big business' is their sure-shot bullet.
10
Don't you realize you are just committing fratricide by making this an issue? Is it really a major issue? No it's not.
Since most of the media outlets have already declared their favorite candidate, whenever a different candidate actually starts doing well, you attack them and try to bring them down. It actually does nothing to prop up your favorite candidate. You are still left with your favorite candidate that the average person still doesn't like.
Thus you are just committing fratricide.
14
This infighting amongst the Democratic candidates are terrible .
Who ever comes as the front runner, be prepared for the wrath from other candidates
.
Latest in Mayor Pete Buttigieg , who is coming up in polls.
Hey I like to have a wiz kid who is opposite of challenged trump who is losing his mind or perhaps never had one.
12
As the campaign progresses, the more I like Pete.
31
@A Bravo from Miami (who likes Pete more and more but doesn’t really know why)
That is because he is much smarter than you. He knows how to manipulate the average guy (you). Sorry but I am being truthful. That’s why he was a At Harvard and a Rhodes scholar. Clinton is the closest he resembles to. Marginally smarter (Harvard v. Georgetown) but when you adjust for family (Professor and wife v. Drunken Salesman and gambler as parents) effects pretty even.
Stay with Bernie. He is the real mensch. No surprises there. Everything he did in life was not to maximize his own utility function first.
4
That is because he is much smarter than you. He knows how to manipulate the average guy (you). Sorry but I am being truthful. That’s why he was a At Harvard and a Rhodes scholar. Clinton is the closest he resembles to. Marginally smarter (Harvard v. Georgetown) but when you adjust for family (Professor and wife v. Drunken Salesman and gambler as parents) effects pretty even.
Stay with Bernie. He is the real mensch. No surprises there. Everything he did in life was not to maximize his own utility function first.
2
"Ms. Warren on Sunday night bowed to pressure from Mr. Buttigieg to release information about payments she’d received from corporate law clients, revealing she’d earned about $1.9 million over three decades — a sum that is far less than she could have earned as a law professor at Harvard and other universities."
I don't understand this paragraph, and it sounds more like biased editorializing than reporting. Isn't this consulting work done in addition to her work as a law professor?! She hasn't exclusively been a consultant for 30 years, has she? And she definitely leveraged her professorial work into these consulting jobs. Just the sort of self-dealing and conflicts she rails against. I can't believe people are minimizing $2 million in comp to help corporations avoid paying out to employees and avoiding legal pay outs for their misdeeds. Some of these fees, probably for a few weeks work, exceed what someone like Mayor Pete would make at McKinsey in a year.
6
8,500 votes for Sneaky Pete in his last reelection. This guy ain't ready to be President.
10
Mayor Pete, for me there is only one question that still needs answering: Why are you routinely photographed in your shirtsleeves? In Iowa. In December.
I tend to be a lot more forgiving of politicians than are most people I know, but one thing has always driven me crazy: the "just folks" pretension of dressing down. Used to be carrying the jacket over the shoulder, a la Lamar Alexander. Now it's Yang and his open collar. Worse, it's you aping Jim Jordan.
Phony.
4
Photo op management is definitely a critical issue when the planet is on fire and democracy is at stake. Yep that’s a real issue alright.
13
@DespondentD This shows you how desperate the competition is to damage Buttigieg. It doesn't get any more petty than this.
@FranknVA A sense of humor, people!
Throughout my nearly 50-year voting history I have voted for dozens of Democrats and exactly three Republicans. Of course, I will vote in 2020, of course I will vote for the Dem nominee for president, be it Pete, Liz, or the Man from Glad.
And of course my beef about his "just folks" pretension is petty, as are most of the complaints lodged against most of the candidates discussed on these boards.
None of it will matter if any one of us, using any excuse - petty or otherwise - chooses to sit at home and sulk come Nov. 3, 2020.
“...leading presidential candidate under increasing pressure to release more details about his personal employment history and campaign finances”.
I personally wasn’t aware of any such pressure from voters. I did become aware of The NY Times driving this issue. I think this is a non-issue for voters. I’ll await to see what next issue the Times creates.
15
Mayor Pete honored the rules of his NDA and he now has permission from McKinsey to disclose. Following the rules.
20
I wish him well, but Mayor Pete is going nowhere. I'm waiting for the infamous HRC to appear again.
4
My impression of Pete Buttigieg is that he is a true intellectual, but one without a soul. He has cleverly plotted his way form attending one of our top Universities to becoming a Rhodes Scholar and than a war vet. He becomes the Mayor of a city or 100,000. Unfortunately he left his minority community behind in South Bend. He has much to answer for because of his failures in South Bend, and his lack of understanding the minority communities.
Yes, he is very clever, but is he the best candidate.
5
@Victoria Francis Yes and no. VP material for sure.
1
Mayor Pete is a protectorate of the billionaire class. Do not vote for him no matter what!
5
He wants to raise taxes on the rich and make sure every American is insured through a publicly funded system.
He wants to make college free for 80 percent of Americans.
He wants to repeal Citizens United in order to stop corporations and the super rich from controlling Washington.
He wants to institute a carbon tax on polluting corporations and give that money back to the American people.
Oh, and he’s literally the poorest person in the race.
Yeah... sounds like he really loves the billionaire class...
1
“ Consulting “ is the NEW “ E-mails “.
Congratulations.
9
Confirms what everyone knew: Sneaky Pete is an empty suit with no real experience beyond running a small municipal government. But he’s got a lot of slick soundbites. Total con job.
7
@AJ
"Confirms what everyone knew:" Say what?
I think it's pretty clear your anti Buttigieg campaign isn't exactly setting this forum on fire. I don't know what your motives are but your arguments are just not based "on any real fault in the candidate.
3
This is what happens when you start to do better in a campaign. It's better to clear the air now, then to wait until everything gets magnified further into the election cycle.
Anyway, if Pete Buttigieg can't stand up to the criticism of fellow Democrats, how will he defeat Trump? Let's see what he did at McKinsey, let's see who he's raising money from, then let's move on. I believe Pete Buttigieg can defeat Trump.
12
@thetruthfirst Pete has released the names of all his donors who have given over $200.
2
My son worked for McKinsey. It was an arm of the CIA. If they are disclosing his records it is a good sign. He was neutral. Let us face it - he is the future and he is filled with integrity, honesty and experience we all should have, considering most Americans do not even own a passport.
Let’s take on that before we criticize a war veteran.
17
@Ruby T McKinsey “an arm of the CIA”? That’s fascinating and credible. I’d love to know more. Would you be able to supply some details?
2
My beef with McKinsey is not that young people like Mayor Pete worked for them, but that at 26, he and his cohorts there would come into companies like the one I worked for and sit experienced managers down for hours to explain our business and how we did things, and then make recommendations, that if senior management were doing their jobs, wouldn’t have been necessary. We’d always roll our eyes because the recommendations and implementation last about 2 months because said senior management never did the things that were recommended THEY do. Money and time down the drain. We weren’t a bunch of oldsters but it was such arrogance that turned us off.
8
@Pam B Your comment makes no sense. "if senior managers were doing their jobs, wouldn't have been necessary." So senior managers were not doing their jobs and the recommendations were necessary.
2
Bringing in McKensie wouldn’t have been necessary, because whatever problems senior management perceived should have been within their capability to fix, being senior management.
2
His willingness to play along with the NDA shows that Sneaky Pete will just play with the Washington rules as usual. He’s a talker, not a fighter, and that’s not what we need.
5
@AJ That's EXACTLY what we need. A cool head, a moral compass and for Pete's sake (pun intended) no more Drama.
2
Don’t we want our leaders to follow the law?!
Isn’t that the whole reason we’re trying to impeach the criminal in the White House?
And why it’s infuriating when the Republicans fail to uphold their lawful duties?
"...McKinsey, a firm distrusted by many on the left"
If this is a true statement it has dour implications for our society and our country. If McKinsey is a favored corporation of the right, we are in deeper trouble than many of us seem to have imagined.
McKinsey has revealed itself a viper's nest of unadulterated "the only business of business is business" amorality.
The mere existence of such a corporation, laden with too much unthinking prestige and a destructive amount of money, is an indictment of everything about the intellectual life of the Ivy League, a sword to the throat of concept "business ethics" and convincing explanation for Trump, Bush and the many education-hating conservatives who nonetheless can't stop trumpeting their elite degrees.
McKinsey is without morals or ethics, knows neither shame nor responsibility. It is as a-patriotic as it is amoral. It is the apotheosis of everything wrong, damaging, and dysfunctional in the world of American capitalism, so-called.
It is also the epicenter of a fast-unfolding global tragedy, as other economies make the decision to emulate the unsustainable perversion of American business.
Although he has distanced himself from the hellish cauldron of his early business experience, it would behoove Pete to explain himself, discuss what he might have learned from the experience.
One hopes he left for a better reason than that it was boring.
5
What a made-up controversy. Buttigieg was a low level employee with nil to zero influence on the overall direction of deals, which were specifically arranged for cost savings and privacy on behalf of the clients.
Criticize consultants and megacorporations all you want, but Buttigieg did not engineer the problems you see in the world.
83
Good maybe we can put this to rest now. This was never even an issue. To call this a tempest in a teapot would be a disservice to teapots.
40
I'd like to know how the candidates feel about the Iran Nuclear Deal, the Paris Climate Accord, NATO, global trade, what we can do constructively about the quagmire in the middle east, refugees and immigration....global recycling debacle?
I'd rather read in-depth articles about the candidates positions and how their past informs what they'll do in the future.
31
@Sharon
That's fair, however I doubt you'll find an article in this paper about what really happened during Buttgieg's tenure as mayor of South Bend.
Luckily, they have plenty of online newspapers in South Bend where you can read for yourself. Unfortunately, they don't make him look good, even if you overlook the whole police/racism fiasco.
4
@Viv Save the conspiracy theories for Fox News. Buttigieg has had an impressive record of accomplishments, covered here and yes, in the actual South Bend newspaper, the Tribune. Promote the candidate of your choice instead of spreading misinformation here.
1
@Jolton
Yes, everything you disagree with is a Fox News conspiracy or Russian propaganda.
It couldn't possibly be that people can make up their own minds about him by reading his book and looking as his record as mayor as presented in local papers. It's far better to take the word of journalists who never stepped foot in South Bend.
So tired of people acting like 'management consultant' is the equivalent being crooked. I spent 30 years in corporate America, 20 of those with a Fortune 500 company that worked with consulting firms regularly. While it's true that this isn't always money well spent... there is nothing 'nefarious' going on behind the scenes. And I'm sure Pete didn't get to choose his clients either.
For that matter, I'm sick of the competition to see who can be more 'pious' in not accepting corporate/PAC money. As long as we have the corrupted system of campaign finance that we have, I would expect most candidates to avail themselves of all legitimate funding sources. If one wants to ban oil companies are enforce some other 'conscience' ban, that's fine. But in a world where billionaires can literally buy unlimited exposure, I'm fine with anyone who can beat Trump getting funding in whatever legal way he/she can.
54
@Pat Bindrim
No one who engages in nefarious activity admits that it was nefarious activity. It's always spun as doing the necessary work to keep the ship afloat, and on course.
5
@Pat Bindrim This is the sad reality created by the extreme left and is undermining any serious effort to solve our country’s problems. I am speaking as a liberal female democratic voter. This has to stop before more voters are turned off by the Democratic Party and Trump gets re-elected.
9
@Viv Of course not. But it's an absurd standard to judge candidates based on a perception of their employers, unless there is proven malfeasance that the candidate him/herself was involved with. If someone were a CPA, would be want to evaluate the 'worthiness' of all of their firms clients? How about law firms, PR firms, etc. There isn't a private industry category that hasn't had bad players. It hardly means that everyone who ever worked for them is 'tainted.'
I am so impressed with Pete. He respected his NDA, a legal contract, and now McKinsey has released him from it.This is exactly the kind of person I want leading our already great nation. Integrity. Honesty. Intelligent. Articulate. He is a rock star with a moral compass. I could watch him all day long. Unlike, our current President - I can't even stand listening to his grating voice.
79
I'm surprised a secretive company like McKinsey would do that because they wouldn't want to create a precedent. Buttigieg was a young employee, so his list of clients is probably mundane.
8
@Mark McIntyre
Unless you happen to be Canadian and don't appreciate his knowing participation in a price fixing scheme that swindled millions of consumers for decades.
4
Oh, please. If he was able to do that when he was 24, then I’m even more impressed with him.
6
@JP
Yeah, I suppose it's plenty impressive to knowingly participate in criminal activity that bilks average Canadians who have no choice where they actually shop for groceries.
It's even more impressive to bilk the US government out of $18 million writing a bogus report about Afghan employers they never even met, and paint that as "serving" your country.
2
I’m sure, that at the tender age of 26, Pete had an overstated and impactful role that shaped McKinsey for the following decade. On the serious side, the PR team has done a masterful job of keeping him in the headlines.
7
He was a consultant. And so what? Large proportions of the nation's top BA's and MBA's go into consulting, to learn and grow and build great careers. Transparency is fantastic, but I think this is really about button pushing: All you have to do is mention McKinsey, and a certain sort of "progressive" goes nuts. That's very useful for candidates who need to distract potential voters from their gargantuan proposed tax increases and questionable math. Maybe their proposals would be more solid if they had gotten some consulting experience themselves.
87
It's important to point out that it wasn't Mayor Pete that made the concession to release the list of clients he worked with at McKinsey. It was McKinsey that made the concession to allow Mayor Pete to release that list. Mayor Pete was requesting McKinsey allow him to release that list BEFORE the NYTimes published its critical editorial of him last Thursday.
113
Mayor Pete looks like a Hillary style, poll driven candidate. Another middle of the road, poll driven, take people for granted candidate will get the same result as Hillary did. Time for REAL populism, not half measures!
22
Populism. Hmmm.
5
@Joseph
Yes, that's what real democracy is about.
Populism shouldn't be a slur in a democracy, but funnily enough certain groups made it so.
2
Really sick of this squabbling amongst Democratic candidates. I'd love Pete or Warren as president. The attempt to pin something nefarious on either of them is ridiculous and tiresome.
571
@John C Ditto for Enron and Dow Chemical, two of the many Corporations whose interests Warren represented and defended as a lawyer. It would be just as good for her to get it all out in the open too.
31
The entire point of primaries is to gather information. What you call nitpicking, I call information. Now us the time to be picky.
14
Absolutely! I couldn’t agree more
2
Ever since mr Buttigieg started using his past work experience as something he cannot mention because of an NDA.
For me that's a DODGE just like "I will release my tax returns after I'm done being investigated."
I'm a lifelong democrat. I cannot fathom hiding pertinent information while trying to be the Leader of the free world. Not even a vice president should be sworn in under these circumstances.
60
It’s an NDA! Legal issues if McKinsey doesn’t give him permission....
205
@daniel r potter You are so wrong. McKINSEY just confirmed that They are releasing client info for PETE. I also canceling his NDA.
49
@daniel r potter
So you support someone breaking a nondisclosure agreement?
151
Why is this framed as a "concession" and with him "facing pressure," suggesting he is purposely hiding something and resistant to transparency?? This was never the case. Stop using the language of Trump, who concedes nothing and resists everything.
687
@sansacro 1) Of course it was a concession, and of course he was facing pressure. We saw the pressure, and we saw that Buttigieg did not act until he was pressure. This is not subject to debate; it's a clearly observable fact. 2) If Trump "concedes nothing and resists everything", how are these terms, "concession" and "facing pressure", the language of Trump? That makes no sense.
Please bear in mind that at this point Buttigieg is not running against Trump; he's running against the other Democratic candidates for the Democratic nomination. Let's hold him against this standard, not Trump's. Of course Buttigieg is a much better candidate than Trump, but at his point that's irrelevant. Donald Duck would be a better candidate than Trump, for that matter.
13
@Jake Buttigieg was bound by NDA. It was not his to "concede." The pressure was mostly from the media and this paper--I did not see the public taking to the streets demanding Buttigieg reveal who were his clients when he was junior employee at his first and only corporate job. And, yes, Buttigieg then acted, and asked McKinsey to release him from the NDA.
Second, the framing of this issue in the language of transparency and pressure, concession and resistance, in our current climate of large-scale presidential obfuscation and mendacity, like it or not, positions Buttigieg into a similar Trumpian narrative. But now we can learn of any potential malfeasance and treachery that Buttigieg might have been up to during his years as a junior employee at McKinsey.
As for Donald Duck, I do not yet know his positions on labor, but considering his boss's rather draconian labor and anti-union policies, I'm sure Mr. Duck would not last a day in today's Democratic party, but the Republican's might embrace him.
17
Pete Buttigieg is the most talented American political leader to emerge since Barack Obama. He has an astounding—and effortless—grasp of the issues across the board, as evidenced by his calm and well-reasoned interpretation of the needs faced by farmers, Teamsters, African-Americans, and all other groups. Americans of all stripes and beliefs are increasingly recognizing this, as shown by his meteoric rise in the Iowa and New Hampshire polls. I wish Mr. Buttigieg continued success in his trajectory to the presidency.
764
@TaminoPR
wow, I thought the same words apply to Cory Booker, minus the meteoric rise in polls.
And Mr Booker is the former mayor of a much larger city, not to mention Senator of the US.
I'll stick with Cory, thanks Pete. Maybe in a few years for you, but not now.
27
@TaminoPR I would love to see him explain his speech to a Tea Party group when president Obama was in office. https://www.newsweek.com/buttigieg-tea-party-video-1472730
20
@TaminoPR
Buttigieg's "meteoric rise in the Iowa and New Hampshire polls" doesn't indicate "Americans of all stripes and beliefs" are behind him. It indicates a rather narrow cohort supports him.
Iowa and New Hampshire are two of the nation's least diverse states.
38
This is silly. There are (virtually) no management consulting “clients” of an Associate in their early to mid 20s. There are clients of the firm and/or a Partner with vastly more experience. Buttigieg would have simply been working on whatever projects his managing partner told him to work on.
82
Silly? Not if it proves he’s a corporatist establishment investment for increasing oligarchy, exactly what we don’t need and probably can’t survive more of...
4
@Lilly McKinsey has many practices that work with public sector clients.
Oh, were you referring to governments? Then yes, McKinsey is helping to entrench power among the elite at the city, state, and national levels.
1
Know a man by the bundlers he keeps. Who Buttigieg surrounds himself with now is the best predictor of his policies in the future. During his 2008 campaign, Obama was a darling of Wall Street and even delegated a Citibank exec to choose his cabinet. How he treated Wall Street after the meltdown could have been easily foretold a couple of years in advance, despite his soaring rhetoric. We don't need another youthful, eloquent plutocratic Trojan Horse in the White House.
25
@stan continople
I think Obama should be cut some slack for not hammering the banksters harder, because unintended consequences can be really bad and 2008 was really bad. The world money system is a fragile myth, that if destroyed would be catastrophic.
Now 2010 on, that was the time to do some criminal investigations, but the GOP was on board and wouldn't allow anything like that.
3
@stan continople
Agreed. It’s extremely obvious and confirmed by the wealthy moderates on here supporting him.
2
Warren should release her pre 2008 tax statements; she was in politics then andscrubbed all embarrassment since then. Given her moralistic tone, time to see whether she paid her staff properly and above the table so they could get Social Security and EIC credit; whether she contributed to charity at the levels she; whether she paid all employment and disability taxes and what deductions she claimed when she and her husband were in the upper income earning scale, dual career model.
What is sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose.
11
Trump should release his tax returns. From now back to 2008 would be a good start.
10
She has released them. She had no staff pre-2008.
He’s calculated, manipulative, narcissistic, and insincere. For all his intellectual “honors,” he knows nothing about how to use government to improve society at all levels. He’s tone deaf but a very good actor. It looks like he’s listening and caring. Clearly, many are fooled. Many others, I suspect, are just out to keep Elizabeth Warren’s hands off their accumulated wealth.
31
@Karen
I agree totally! I was a Pete supporter early on when he was talking a much more progressive game, but the scales fell from my eyes after his veer to the right and his nasty and disingenuous attacks on Warren. His whole persona is entirely calculated and he is totally in the pocket of big money and corporate interests.
15
@Karen Clearly you don’t like him personally but do you have any facts to back up your claims? I don’t find Warren appealing, but I focus my critiques on her policies, not her personality or personal affect.
14
@Teagirl Questioning Warren’s policies and explaining why his are better is not “attacking” Warren. It’s what primaries are for. It’s Warren who was attacking Pete by insinuating nefarious personal corruption because she has been losing the policy argument and her momentum as a result.
15
It will be interesting to see if Buttigieg now comes up with a different excuse not to release the information (just as trump has done with his tax returns.)
5
@Ted
Pete has already expressed his desire to share more, and now that he has been released from his NDA (at his request!) I expect he'll do exactly that.
7
So basically, an untrustworthy politician (Buttigieg) asks a former employer, McKinsey, themselves untrustworthy, to engage in the untrustworthy act of violating a valid, purposeful non-disclosure agreement, all to the potential detriment of McKinsey clients, yet for the benefit of both Buttigieg and McKinsey. And that’s ok, why?
13
@Milton & Rose Friedman (dec.)
McKinsey apparently sought and received permission to do so from those clients. They wouldn't have released Pete from his NDA without having done so.
12
@Milton & Rose Friedman (dec.)
because they all agreed to it
5
This kid's got good political chops.
The best since Obama '08.
54
@Ken B, he’s one of McKinsey’s whiz kids, what do you expect? Why not just consult the White House out to them.
3
It’s absolutely ridiculous Pete’s history in consulting is facing any scrutiny whatsoever. The guy worked there two years in a staff capacity. He was probably little more than a grunt to burn hours, with no greater decision making power.
33
So, what is the harm? NDA is lifted, he can now disclose what he was doing there, allowing us to judge based on facts not his claims.
1
"significant concession" by Buttigieg?
It was up to McKisey to release Buttigieg from the NDA. He'd always said he'd be candid about his work provided his former employers allowed him to.
I don't know where the NY Times comes from, but the planet where I grew up has contracts that people agree to.
If you make a legal commitment, it's unethical to ignore it just because a Times reporter is having a hissy fit and wants to know.
102
Contracts aren’t suicide pacts. They can be broken and routinely are. No one was going to sue Sneaky Pete over this. It was a made up excuse.
2
Nice going Times, this will prove to be a huge mistake. Now those clients/ businesses will have to answer questions regarding their thoughts on Pete. I firmly believe the Times prefers another 4 years of Trump related as revenue. Seriously.
21
I am truly disappointed in the New York Times for creating such a fuss over a completely non issue. I'm not saying that the Times should not pay attention or investigate when necessary. But the pejorative language that the Times has used is regretful. Secretive? Accusing Buttigieg of being secretive? You've done him a disservice. I'm not even supporting him, but I find your disparaging treatment of him disturbing. The NYT owes him an apology.
14
You should blame Buttigieg. He can not expect to avoid scrutiny while he scrutinized everybody else.
2
Coverage of this issue in the Times has created confusion for this reader. My impression was that it was McKinsey, not Mr.Buttigieg, that stood in the way of releasing names of clients with whom he worked during his tenure there. Yet the Times, in an editorial and again in this piece, conveys that it was Buttigieg refusing to release information and that now he has agreed to do so. My understanding is that it is McKinsey that has now permitted the release. Mr. Butttigieg never had authority to do so. but now does. I've been unable to understand how, if he was committed to a non-disclosure agreement, he deserves criticism for not releasing names of clients sought by the Times.
86
According to the LA Times, Buttigieg’s first project for McKinsey involved working for a nonprofit health insurance provider, “... performing analytical work as part of a team identifying savings in administration and overhead costs.”
Even if you don't know anything about McKinsey, it's hard to read that as anything other than devising strategies to cut costs through layoffs, restructuring, and denial of health coverage to those in need. If you do know anything about McKinsey it's inescapable.
13
@Matt
Maybe that's why after 3 years he wanted to go into public service?
3
It may, so now we can here from him - how he helped, and what feelings he had.
2
@Matt What part of "non-profit" do you not understand? Savings in administration and overhead costs has nothing to do with denial of health coverage to those in need.
2
This was the right way to handle Buttigieg's non-disclosure agreement. The wrong was was for Democrats to demand that he violate his non-disclosure promise. I swear to God that we Democrats are our own worst enemies.
80
That was just convenient excuse, which allowed him to demand transparency from other candidates while he is staying in shadow. I am wondering if he has NDA with his donors, because he was not eager to reveal their names either.
1
“How McKinsey Has Helped Raise the Stature of Authoritarian Governments”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/15/world/asia/mckinsey-china-russia.html
“About four miles from where the McKinsey consultants discussed their work, which includes advising some of China’s most important state-owned companies, a sprawling internment camp had sprung up to hold thousands of ethnic Uighurs — part of a vast archipelago of indoctrination camps where the Chinese government has locked up as many as one million people.”
“Its clients have included Saudi Arabia’s absolute monarchy, Turkey under the autocratic leadership of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and corruption-plagued governments in countries like South Africa.”
“Inside Russia itself, McKinsey has worked with Kremlin-linked companies that have been placed under sanctions by Western governments — companies that the firm helped build up over the years and, in some cases, continues to advise.”
5
Buttigieg knew that the public pressure and bad press for McKinsey would force the company to allow him to disclose the clients' names.
This way, he did not need to break his word. He kept his cool.
30
It's insane that people are slagging Mayor Pete for taking a job at McKinsey straight out of college. It's an extremely prestigious and lucrative job that ANYONE graduating college would bend over backwards to get. He was there less than 3 years, at the bottom of the corporate ladder, with no say on which clients the company worked with. He was a number-crunching analyst. The NYTimes made a big deal out of nothing because they have a grudge against management consulting.
184
@Blarp
When management consulting earns $20 mill telling Trump/ICE how to harm immigrants more so, yeah we got an issue.
When the consulting firm is implicated in criminal fraud in South Africa, or that its work for the Saudi government resulted in the persecution of Twitter dissidents that McKinsey identified, or that a contract in Mongolia served as a vehicle for three officials to take illegal payments; yeah, we got an issue.
McKinsey took our gov. organizations that were pretty competent, namely the CIA, NSA, and other intelligence, and made them worse off.
McKinsey helped restructure the country’s spying bureaucracy to our detriment. According to nearly a dozen current and former officials who either witnessed the restructuring firsthand or are familiar with the project, the multimillion dollar overhaul left many within the country’s intelligence agencies demoralized, less effective and fired.
McKinsey is under a federal criminal investigation over the way it advises bankrupt companies.
Prosecutors looked into whether McKinsey put its profits ahead of clients’ best interest and used its influence over the companies in violation of Chapter 11 bankruptcy rules, according to the Department of Justice. They were fined $15 million; a hand slap.
The firm’s managing director, Rajat K. Gupta, was convicted of insider trading charges.
The list goes on.
Calling McKinsey prestigious is...your opinion.
As for Pete...he made the choice.
Pete gets a hard primary PASS~!
1
Great, now he can tell us all about that.
2
McKinsey and the corporate clients on whose matters Mayor Pete worked just did him a favor. Does he now owe them one in return?
7
@Charlie
Oh for Pete's sake. Would you make the same quid pro quo allegation about Warren and her clients? Does she owe them favors?
Warren chose her clients and the work she did for them. Pete was a low level analyst who had no say in who the clients were.
And I'd vote for either of them in a heart beat.
12
Why shouldn’t this be on the front page. It would be if he had refused to even ask or say that he’d disclose the info after the audit
4
Maybe Mayor Pete will tell us who he was representing when he wrote this NY Times opinion piece on Somaliland in 2008.
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/31/opinion/31iht-edmyers.1.14914273.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
3
Entering a transparency war with Warren was an uncharacteristically dumb move by the Buttigieg campaign. They thought better of it very quickly.
5
@Chris Actually the opposite is true. Some embarrassing work in her law firms has just been revealed, and everything we know so far about his consulting work has been either neutral or quite admirable. Warren is definitely getting the shorter end of this battle.
11
@Michael Cameron Actually, the article you’re commenting on acknowledges that this move was made to avoid that conflict. Let’s see how polling looks over the next few weeks.
1
Warren’s legal work is old news and none of it is in any way problematic. She took cases very selectively because they related to important bankruptcy policy issues.
1
Thanks, but . . .
1
Why does the Times call this move by Buttigieg a "concession?" Buttigieg was correct to ask his former employer to release him from his non-disclosure agreement before revealing any information he previously agreed not to share. Shouldn't he be praised for following proper legal channels?
It's only in this hyper-fast, hyper-critical world we suddenly live in that a candidate's relatively swift due diligence could somehow be cast as a victory for his opponents.
142
@AK The NYTimes calls it a concession because Buttigieg refused for days to release the names of clients and to allow the press into this closed-door meetings with wealthy donors.
This weekend, student activist Greg Chung asked Buttigieg: "I wanted to ask if you think that taking big money out of politics includes not taking money off of billionaires and closed-door fundraisers.” Buttigieg responded, "No" and then walked away.
2
So we have Mr Buttigieg honoring his NDA with McKinsey. An honorable thing to have done. This says a lot about the personal integrity of this man. He honors his agreements. We should all be so honorable. This is a man our children can look up to and emulate.
He's got my support & my vote!
136
The criticism of him is absurd. He was right out of school taking assignments from others and he was only there for a few years at a time when the firm was not considered controversial.
123
Sad if all candidates present and future must pass some type of "client purity test" to contend for office. Everyone has to make a living, and clients who aren't 100 percent woke-approved are part of the real world.
400
@PABlue Yes, is is so so very sad, that out of 321 million United States citizens that we try and pick from the top of the pile, not the bottom. So, yes, we can find a handful of pure candidates--unlike the pig Republicans who are getting arrested right and left for breaking the laws they purport to want to write. Yawn.
13
So you disagreeing is necessary to do due diligence, vetting and holding our elected official to the highest office in the land to a higher standard? Got it.
11
Yes, vet them. But there's no reason to treat them like criminals because they worked at a low level management consulting job right out of college.
33
This weekend, student activist Greg Chung asked Buttigieg: "I wanted to ask if you think that taking big money out of politics includes not taking money off of billionaires and closed-door fundraisers.” Buttigieg responded: "No." Then walked away. Buttigieg has previously called small donor money “pocket change.”
Buttigieg has raised money from corporate executives in the pharmaceutical and insurance industry. His list of donors includes executives from Aetna, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer and Indiana's Eli Lilly & Co. He's also held fundraisers with their executives.
Many people overlook campaign bundling.The term refers to a form of fundraising in which one person convinces their wealthy friends, co-workers and/or employees to write checks to their preferred candidate. Bundlers raise hundreds of millions of dollars and usually receive special treatment in return for their work.
Buttigieg has run $2 million in TV ads in Iowa with the message of preserving health care "choice." At the same time, the Partnership for America's Health Care Future, a coalition of insurers, bought half of all political advertising in Iowa with the same message. They spent $300,000 on targeted ads on Facebook. They have been writing opinion pieces for Republicans AND Democrats.
27
@Ed
That's why Steve Bullock should have gotten more exposure. His main focus has been election reform, not to mention having a track record of progressive policies in a deep red state by focusing on common beliefs and goals.
Eyes on the prize...Get rid of Trump. I doubt he will take on the big money, but someone who believes in rule of law will be a critical improvement.
5
The release by McKinsey of Buttigieg from his non-disclosure agreement is a tacit endorsement of his candidacy, at least in relative terms. McKinsey would become a Wall Street pariah if its decision to enforce a non-disclosure agreement against Buttigieg were to be seen as providing campaign ammunition to Elizabeth Warren.
6
@woofer
Oh goodness, Woofer. The Times demands that Buttigieg disclose his client list; the drumbeat pounds into a roar; Warren and Sanders chime in from the sidelines, too; McKinsey agrees to release the information: and now, that's a "tacit endorsement" of Buttigieg?
Come on. Buttigieg answered the demands put to him.
Find another scandal to scare up.
19
I hope when the list of McKinsey clients comes out and nothing nefarious is found there will be some apologies from those who have been hysterically pushing the notion that Buttigieg is somehow corrupt. Hope Warren will argue policy with her competitors instead of smearing their good names by innuendo. That is a sure sign that she’s losing the policy argument.
52
That Warren "could have earned"? I believe she was earning those consulting fees from the corporations while she was also working at those universities.
16
Which the law schools permit and in fact encourage.
1
This article has inspired me. I just donated money to Buttigieg, McGrath and Harrison. May the force be with us.
25
I’m not impressed by this guy, but to say this is a concession by him is unfair.
The concession was by McKinsey, which released him from the NDA.
256
The timing does seem a bit convenient, though. Clearly Pete wasn’t concerned about this transparency until it became a political liability.
11
Actually, McKinsey only now chooses to release Pete from the confidentiality agreement, but he asked them to release him a long time ago.
42
@Chris What makes you think that? He's been asking for the release for some time, and so far the information we know about his consulting is actually quite admirable.
29
If Mayor Pete has to disclose details regarding his work as a McKinsey analyst early in his career, should Senator Warren do the same for her work as a junior law firm associate at Cadwalader and as a sole practitioner from way back when?
34
This weekend, student activist Greg Chung asked Buttigieg: "I wanted to ask if you think that taking big money out of politics includes not taking money off of billionaires and closed-door fundraisers," Chung asked. Buttigieg responded: "No." Then walked away. Buttigieg has previously called small donor money “pocket change.”
Buttigieg abandoned his support for single-payer healthcare in favor of an incremental half-measure after realizing he could raise tons of cash from corporate executives in the pharmaceutical and insurance industry. His list of donors includes executives from Aetna, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer and Indiana's Eli Lilly & Co. He's also held fundraisers with their executives.
Many people overlook campaign bundling. The term refers to a form of fundraising in which one person convinces their wealthy friends, co-workers and/or employees to write checks to their preferred candidate. Bundlers raise hundreds of millions of dollars and usually receive special treatment in return for their work.
Buttigieg has run $2 million in TV ads in Iowa with the message of preserving health care "choice." At the same time, the Partnership for America's Health Care Future, a coalition of insurers, bought half of all political advertising in Iowa with the same message. They spent $300,000 on targeted ads on Facebook. They have been writing opinion pieces for both Republicans and Democrats.
13
@Ed
Obama had his legion of bundlers, too. I suppose everyone but Warren and Sanders at this point doesn't raise money this way.
I suppose, Ed, your point is that the practice should be abandoned. Ordinarily, I'd agree...after this election cycle and Trump's out of office. Because Republicans are bundling hand over foot and will spend every dollar they collect on media to gin up Trump's base and turn them out at the polls.
16
@Jackie Exactly, Obama did have his bundlers and they came from the fossil-fuel industry. They bank-rolled his first campaign for the Senate. He then voted for Cheney's energy bill, which among many things, paved the way for hydraulic fracturing in this country. The bill exempted fracking from water safety, air pollution and superfund rules. As a Senator, Obama had a score of 67 out of 100 from the League of Conservation Voters. It was his administration that the lease for BP's Horizon oil drilling venture which led to the greatest catastrophic oil spill in recent memory. We do not need another Obama. It's 2020 and Climate Change is an existential threat. Our next President should not be beholden to special interests.
5
I’m looking forward to seeing who his big donors are. Pharma, financial cos perhaps? In some ways it doesn’t matter. As a point of principle, candidates should only take money from individual donors. Those 90M voters who stayed home last election are NOT reflected in the views of big corporate donors. But the small individual donors do more to reflect the true potential come voting day of a campaign. That’s why I’m starting to lean towards Bernie or Elizabeth as having the most potential.
5
@Nikki
I have good news for you:
Buttigieg only takes money from individual donors.
12
@Nikki: Um, you do understand that the non-disclosure agreement has absolutely nothing to do with donors don't you?
7
Pete is being opaque to hide that he’s being invested in as the establishment, corporatist candidate. Exactly what we, as a country already recognized by the UN, MIT and Princeton studies as an oligarchy, needs more of. Bernie2020
5
I hope we can now move on from this McKinsey and "high-dollar"donor non-issue. Individual donors are limited to $2800. Hardly enough to "buy" anything from a candidate. By law donors must list their employers. News flash: lots of people work for corporations in this country. Now that McKinsey will allow Pete Buttigieg to release a list of his clients, I hope we can put that to rest as well. The notion that the candidate with the lowest net worth ($100K), who excelled at everything he endeavored to do and could have been a billionaire but chose a life of public service and service to his country, is somehow a corporate stooge making unseemly promises behind closed doors is laughable. Pete Buttigieg is the real deal, and we are lucky to have him in our corner.
434
@Beanish Except that no one on the list was his client. As a junior Analyst, MP would have worked for a McKinsey client. He did not have his own client base. This was a non-issue from the start.
31
You don’t get how bundling works. Yes it’s still $2,800 per donor, but the checks are gathered buy one bundler, say a Goldman Sachs managing partner who gathers checks from lots of Goldman employees and then presents them all—say 1000 checks each for $2,800. That’s $2.8 million coming in through one individual. You’d better believe that the bundler expects favors for his network.
9
@Beanish
Your statement that Pete Buttigieg could have been a billionaire' is pure fantasy.
There is nothing in Buttigieg's background to indicate he had the drive or even the desire to ascend to such wealth. Which is probably why he got out of McKinsey after just three years.
I know we may disparage billionaires freely these day (many rightfully so) but to actually earn or, even more so, create that amount of worth through a business enterprise is still pretty extraordinary.
5
What is wrong with the media that it is desperate to search for meaningless micro-transgressions from long ago so it can try to cancel people?
There is no reason to care about what a junior employee did for a few years a long time ago. All they do is create spreadsheets and other such nothingness.
News has been completely taken over by entertainment. A big loss.
240
@Polaris
"News has been completely taken over by entertainment."
Which is, I fear, why we are stuck in this Trump nightmare for the foreseeable future.
4
@Polaris Also, am I the only one feeling acute vertigo hearing the press and pundits urging a presidential candidate to break the law while our current President is apparently getting impeached for breaking the law?
2
I don't understand why the word 'concession' is used. It's not a sign of weakness to release this info. He needed to wait until he was released from the NDA - which he now is - so he can talk about his clients. And he's opening his fund raising events to the press - not a concession, it's an 'action'. Thats all.
270
NYT, thank you for pointing out that it was Mayor Buttigieg who started this fight back in September. I feel that is something that is either glossed over or not mentioned when discussing the tensions between the Senator and the Mayor.
I've found that all too often a female candidate is accused of being aggressive or attacking another candidate when she is simply just retaliating.
23
Transparency is good for Democrats, good for voters, bad for candidates who refuse to release any truthful and verifiable personal information whatsoever (i.e, Trump).
I'm glad the Dem candidates are pressuring each other to be forthcoming. It can only benefit whomever becomes the Dem candidate opposing Trump.
And Warren's earnings consulting while a professor are modest indeed. She's still my #1 candidate.
14
The more open candidates about their past the less hassle when one becomes the nominee.
Good for Pete.
173
@cherrylog754
Get on Pete's band wagon. He seems to have the least "dirt" of all of them. He also has the intellect and compassion.
29
@Heysus.
My wife has been sold on Pete for some time now. I'm close, but continue to look at Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klochubar.
If Pete wins Iowa though, I'm all in.
18
@Heysus
I’ve been on Pete’s bandwagon since before he officially became a candidate. This country is lucky to have him. I truly believe he woud be one of the best presidents ever. Thoughtful, intelligent, deliberate and with a moral backbone.
12
Once again Pete is showing excellent political instincts.
This 'release the fundraiser names and open the doors to the press' refrain could have stuck to him like mud. Instead, he releases the names and opens the doors and walks away with no mud on on his political pants.
Hilary Clinton was a terrible candidate in part because she would NEVER have given in to criticism from the press or an opponent.
159
@John
Why didn't he do it from the beginning. The public is sick and tired of these cute antics just do what you are suppose to do and lets move on. Between the draft dodger and the candidates we are all tired of the insults and this show. Take care of the American people not yourself mayor Pete.
4
@John Instincts... he had to be pressed by reporters and hounded by voters until he agreed to open up his fundraisers. If you want good political instincts, consider not holding big-money fundraisers in the first place. Then you might even garner the people's trust!
6
@John
Trump has excellent political instincts. He could teach Pete a thing or two about nondisclosure agreements.
1
"Mr. Buttigieg said last week that he was “disgusted” by revelations of some of McKinsey’s work that took place after he left the firm"
Many are "disgusted" by some of McKinsey's work before and during Buttigieg's tenure at the firm.
41
@mlb4ever
Well, maybe that's part of the reason why he left.
He could have remained there and made boatloads of money rather than run for mayor of one of "America's Dying Cities". He shouldn't be given credit for leaving the gravy train and devoting his life to public service?
He worked 8 years serving his community, so the two and a half years at McKinsey drawing up power points and excel spreadsheets straight out of college should hardly be disqualifying
33
@Jennifer
"maybe"...that's the rub.
By the by, they say no one ever "leaves" McKinsey. They are doing a decent job of backing Pete so far.
4
@Dobbys sock
So now you're a mind reader? Wow!!!
They sneered at President Obama for leaving the corporate world to become a "community organizer", when in the past we admired those who served the public rather than themselves and their wallets.
Now they sneer at Pete Buttigieg, claiming he joined the military as a stepping stone to the presidency, even though one astute commenter in a past article stated Pete could as just as easily come home in a body bag. He's now being held accountable for things his former employer has done since he left their employ. I guess we're all responsible for any nefarious work a former employer does for the rest of our lives. Good to know.
Your hero Bernie also has some very recent history you should delve into;
per several news articles, this from MSNBC Jul 11 2019- "Antiwar candidate Bernie Sanders faces backlash over the $1.2 trillion war machine he brought to Vermont. The jets are rumored to be nuclear-capable, and citizen groups, companies and environmental activists want the program removed from the state. Vermont is home to a rapidly growing $2 billion aerospace and aviation industry, with more than 250 small- and medium-sized enterprises that act as a supply chain hub for global aerospace and defense companies. Estimates from Lockheed Martin indicate there are three suppliers located in Vermont for the F-35 Lightning II that provide 1,610 direct and indirect jobs, with an economic impact of $222 million."
Where's your outrage?
He has no experience. Period!
37
And Trump does?
8
@jk
"He is too young. Period!"
"He is gay. Period!"
He will be President of the United States of America.
Period.
24
As opposed to Donald Trump?
5
Warren is trying so hard to change the subject from medicare for all to what ever. This is so stupid. Candidates must talk about issues. Warren is so wrong to press this.
77
@Zee
Buttigieg already pivoted from Medicare for all to the centrist public option platform of Klobuchar and Biden. Warren can, too. She'll have to. And she'll have to stop playing to Bernie. It was toxic for Clinton in 2016, just as Sanders hoped, then as now.
7
@Zee "Mr. Buttigieg started the dispute with Ms. Warren with television ads in September and a series of speeches that suggested, without naming her, that Ms. Warren was too extreme for the general electorate. Ms. Warren responded for the first time last month [...]"
I don't know about you, but if someone had been attacking me for months I would eventually start fighting back. If Mayor Buttigieg wants throw shade then he better be prepared to recieve it as well. This wasnt unprovoked.
16
@Zee
Only the women for the last year have been brave to step up and address issues. The men have yet to stand up and be counted.
We all deserve health care, and Mayor Pete should be proud of his first job after college and talk about it. I fear the men just aren't on the right side of history. while the women are.
8
In 2019 I think a good way to get to know who the candidates are is by looking at YouTube videos from their official campaign accounts. Are they explaining their positions? How do they relate to people? Are they more interested in whose winning and losing in the polls or the issues that matter to voters? Pete’s campaign has put out a huge number of videos leading mostly with people other than Pete telling their story. And that in itself tells me a lot about his character. More funding transparency is a positive step.
33
Honestly, given that a gay candidate has to work twice has hard to be taken seriously as a potential president, maybe he needed to allow provide fundraising in order to draw the type of donors that make it possible to launch a candidate in our broken, money-infused system. I wish we had a public financing system like Canada or European nations. Given that we don’t, I’m also not going to pin some crackpot nefarious plot on Buttigieg for not having had public fundraisers in the past. Warren certainly used private fundraising before as well.
111
@IntentReader Not 1 article from the NYT on homophobia in america and how that effects potential elected officials. It's absolutely incredible.
10
@IntentReader
Yes and so did Trump, Perry, Rudi and the list is endless, what is your point? Mayor Pete was doing all the whining and accursing Warren. Maybe Mayor Pete should of started campaigning tow years ago and people would know who he is. Minorities like President Obama had to prove their citizenship to the white man so what is Mayor Pete complaining for?
2
@IntentReader - stop it, he is working no harder than other candidate he is filling in blanks in his own professional background. It is remarkable how little his being gay is even brought up.
5
The Pete campaign is one of the best , hard-working organizations, I have witnessed in this, and any campaign. I get e-mails every day informing me of their platforms and activities..and yes with a request for donations, starting with asking for $3.00. So it's possible he is getting corporate donations, however for Warren and Bernie to claim he is now in the pockets of "Billionaire" donors is just an extension of both their arm-waving tirades against the "rich",
I would like to see Pete's and their breakdown of the sources ,private vs. corporate, before they claim, he is beholden to donors.
155
@Norma Lee
Just for the record, I get e-mails every day from at least three other Dem presidential candidates "informing me of their platforms and activities...and yes, with a request for donations, starting with asking for $3.00...." I'm not opining on Mayor Pete as a candidate, but what you're getting from him sounds fairly routine.
1
Pete's only doing the right thing about money when he's forced to. This isn't the first fundraising incident. He's had to give back cash a couple times, once when he claimed he didn't know that the two attorneys who HOSTED a DC for him had strong right-wing ties. For a bright guy like Pete, that's a real stretch.
He may be the youngest candidate, but he's an old-school, big-money politician. And these days, that's exactly what we don't need in a Democratic candidate. It doesn't differentiate us from the other party, it just means we march to the tune of different big donors.
47
@allseriousnessaside "Pete's only doing the right thing "? "He's an old-school, big money poitician"? Let's all just face the fact that the most-left supporters of Sanders and Warren--whose candidacies are threatened by Buttigieg's rise--are going to attack him no matter what he does. If he worked in development for the Sierra Club they'd say the non-profit organization is funded by millionaires and billionaires and he should be working for the local shelter which can barely make ends meet. If he worked for the Human Rights Watch they'd say the HRW has never done any work in Borneo. Alas. What Bernie Sanders has wrought in Democratic politics.
40
@allseriousnessaside Nonsense. Pete represents a new generation of leaders and is the most impressive political talent to appear on the national stage since Obama. The man is brilliant, empathic, charismatic and full of integrity. He’s running a fantastic campaign. Expect him to keep gaining ground as more and more voters get to know him.
41
@Annie
Good comment!
8
Warren's criticism of Buttigieg's billionaire donors rings a bit hollow since she was more than happy to raise from high-dollar donors in her senate elections. The Times reported that in 2017-2018 she received approximately $6 million from big-money fundraisers. She's since stopped attending those fundraisers, but to my knowledge, she hasn't returned that money.
281
@ACC
Senator Warren not only solicited funds from wealthy donors and did not return them, but according to the NYTimes she even transferred that big money to her presidential campaign. Once again she is a model of mendacious, self-righteous hypocrisy. See https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/09/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-2020.html
102
@ACC Not only that, she stockpiled that cash from her Senate campaign and transferred it to her presidential campaign when she was low on funds this spring.
48
@ACC Warren's past being private lawyer is very murky. She is just projecting
23