485
top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] PoastRotato@lemmy.world 91 points 1 year ago

The gay former transportation secretary

What on earth does his sexuality have to do with this topic? Why bother mentioning it?

[-] tonytins@pawb.social 63 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Advocate focuses on the LGBT community.

[-] PhobosAnomaly@feddit.uk 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I get it, it's still jarring though. I get that an LGBTQI+ mag would want to promote his sexuality to prove visibility of senior civil servants or G-men or whatever the US calls them, but it just feels like a qualifier that shouldn't be necessary.

Happy to learn otherwise though, I'm open to opinions.

[-] P00ptart@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

"federal agents" for future reference. But call them what they are, SA.

[-] Soulg@ani.social 2 points 1 year ago

Not every single person involved with the government is SA.

[-] Xanthobilly@lemmy.world 70 points 1 year ago

Trump rapes children.

[-] StowawayFog@piefed.social 47 points 1 year ago

Why are dems endlessly talking about what messaging they should do? Build a fucking messaging apparatus like Fox News and do it. We shouldn’t even hear about the strategizing, we should just hear the drum beat.

[-] mriswith@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Why are dems endlessly talking about what messaging they should do?

Because it's all about the optics. They don't actually do any of those things, they just want people to think they are.

[-] skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

I get where you're coming from with this, but I'm not convinced that fighting fire with fire is a viable solution here. We need to put some bite back into journalistic integrity laws, not just create an opposing misinformation machine.

[-] TeddE@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

You make a good point. But the issue here is that, the leaders should be leading and not just talking about what leaders should do.

They always seem to get lost in their own noise.

Voices like Bernie, AOC, et al. will often start taking real action and garner positive national attention, but it regularly falls apart because the party as a whole seems uninterested in falling into line.

Nobody is supporting their good ideas because they keep waiting to get together on their perfect ideas, but spoiler that basically never happens. (They can be barely effective if they control the presidency and Congress, with Congress aligning to the president's agenda, but without that perfect environment they are effectively ineffective.)

[-] Soulg@ani.social 2 points 1 year ago

The left can do what fox news does but only talk about the truth and still be just as effective the majority of the time.

[-] skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

Fox News is effective specifically because of their misinformation though.

[-] womjunru@lemmy.cafe 8 points 1 year ago

They canceled Colbert

[-] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 38 points 1 year ago

Never forget Buttigieg is a McKinsey guy. His folksy Howdy Doody shit is an act. He is not on the side of the people.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

During a speech in 2019, Pete Buttigieg, then a presidential candidate, stated that he would have taken a pill to make him straight if it had been available when he was younger

He said this with his husband and newly adopted son in the audience.

Dude is just another Andrew Cuomo / Gavin Newsom waiting to happen.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Exactly. He doesn't "believe" anything per se. He's a cypher. Believes are fungible; having a belief is a transaction for him.

It's the fundamental difference between authentic politicians who have a belief and then seek the power to make that belief a reality, versus wanting power and then adopting whatever beliefs it takes to get you there.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

Yeah, my distaste for Buttigieg stemmed not from him being a centrist, but because he doesn't seem to stand for anything. Like Harris he started the primary in a vague progressive lane and then realized that he wasn't going to complete with Bernie or Warren and decided Biden was weak in the moderate path and shifted there. If there was a communist revolution, Pete would speak the theory and throw his hat into the ring for Chairman.

He's the epitomy of the view that politics is mostly about finely crafting a message and winning the spin game, not policy or action. He may even be right, but I don't trust him to be anything more than a spokesman.

[-] LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

I mean I think trying to say that him saying that is shitty is kinda disingenuous. The guy was born in 1982, grew up in South Bend, Indiana, and probably realized he was gay during the 90s, a time that we, the LGBT community, were still reeling from and dealing with the AIDS crisis. I have no doubt a ton of queer kids back then thought the same as him because they just wanted to be normal and not thought of as monsters.

Plus his parents worked at Notre Dame, a Catholic university. So he was probably around a whole lot of not very accepting Catholics during his childhood.

What the point of that story was at the time was that he had to accept who he was, and that it was okay to be gay. That's a thing a lot of queer people have to go through.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 year ago

Yeah. Matthew Shepard was murdered when he was 15 or 16. There's a reason "Pride" is named "Pride", and it's not because pride and acceptance is the default state for homosexual youths.

[-] meyotch@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 year ago

Yeah, gay men from more prosperous backgrounds have some fucked up coping skills, they get worse as they rise in the world.

It’s more about class sickness than anything about being gay. Being a sexual minority fucks you up in any scenario, it’s just how the fucked upedness plays out at that level.

As a good old fashioned working class male homo who can pass as prosperous due to education and natural perspicuity, I have broad experience seeing how class fucks up gay men specifically.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

it can't be that Buttigeig is just an extreme corporatist who would say anything to get power?

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Being a sexual minority fucks you up in any scenario, it’s just how the fucked upedness plays out at that level.

In my experience, the gay community (at least - the gay male community in Houston that I'm familiar with) is this incredibly tight knit and supportive group of sincere and loving people. The adversity brought this minority group together and bound them into a network of mutual aid and compassion for one another that's so far removed from anything I see among straight peers.

As a good old fashioned working class male homo who can pass as prosperous due to education and natural perspicuity, I have broad experience seeing how class fucks up gay men specifically.

It's one more wedge issue used by the ruling class to divide and conquer.

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

My brother and his husband, both openly gay, stated to me just the other day that in their youth they prayed they were not gay and even shamed themselves for having homoerotic thoughts. What Pete is saying here probably reflects the way a large part of the LGBTQ+ community has felt as they came to grips with the way they feel and identify in contrast to societal expectations.

I don’t see how this somehow makes the guy a bad politician. If anything it shows he is human and normal.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

My brother and his husband, both openly gay, stated to me just the other day that in their youth they prayed they were not gay and even shamed themselves for having homoerotic thoughts.

A public figure saying he's ashamed to be gay during a national debate definitely reinforces the sense of shame and thoughts of self-harm.

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[-] tacosanonymous@mander.xyz 26 points 1 year ago

If they combine that with improving the lives of the working class, sure. Else gtfo

[-] MNByChoice@midwest.social 22 points 1 year ago

Prosecuting pedophiles would help. Make "holy people" mandatory reporters just as therapists and teachers are.

[-] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I hate the term "mandatory reporter". Like, that should be obvious. If a kid confides in you and you don't tell someone, you're just as guilty. You're basically an accomplice or co-conspirator at that point.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago

What if the kid specifically tells you because they think it's confidential and the thing they are seeking is counseling? Reporting wasn't made mandatory for social workers and counselors because they were thinking about the desires of the rapist, it's because they wanted kids to have someone they could trust.

Priests I'm not so sure, as the perpetrator is likely a member of their club.

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 19 points 1 year ago

We didn't know about cointelpro and other clandestine operations until civilians broke into the FBI office and stole files. We won't see the Epstein list unless something similar happens.

[-] BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz 18 points 1 year ago

As a Democrat Strategist that's a BAD Idea! Republicans OBVIOUSLY love Pedophiles like Jeffrey Epstein so we should INSTEAD tell people We ALSO had Sex with Children on Child Rape Island as to NOT Upset Republican voters who will NEVER vote Democrat!

[-] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Oh just crawl back into your snake hole already, James Carville...

[-] wirebeads@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago

Did Trump have issues with his bone spurs when he was raping 12 year old girls, or did the bone spurs only cause an issue when we was shitting his pants to afraid to fight for his country because he’s a cowardly pile of shit?

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Lying his way out of Vietnam so he wouldn't have to rape and kill people was probably the most virtuous thing the man has ever done.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Don't think he got off easy, though. Managing his sex life in the 80s and avoiding STDs was his personal Vietnam, after all....

[-] Xaphanos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Why do you say was? Do you think he had a sudden change of heart the instant Epstein died? From that day to now he's been a straight arrow?

[-] Feyd@programming.dev 13 points 1 year ago

He's right but screw that mealy mouthed two faced establishment democrat

[-] meyotch@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 year ago

Not wrong, he’s just a smug McKinsey asshole.

[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I like Pete and all, but maybe the politicians should stop hoping they should do something and, y'know, just DO something?

[-] jaxxed@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

How 'bout you just do something good for people. All this "he's a scumbag" noise is going to get nothing done, and isn't going to win the midterms. Everybody who doesn't already know he's a scumbag is not going to learn it now.

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What specifically would you like Pete Buttigege, former Transportation secretary and former mayor of South Bend Indiana to do?

As far as I know Pete isn't even employed right now.

[-] jaxxed@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I didn't realize that HN is career had ended.

Seriously though, if he is up to chrping about Epstein, why not chirp about programs that help people, about restoring democratic institutions so that they help people again. As a former mayor and Transport minister, can he not talk about infra that helps people and describe escape making moralism the basis of his platform.

[-] phar@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

Actually he's really good at talking about those things. But you haven't heard it. Which I think proves his point because here you are, talking about this.

[-] Hegar@fedia.io 4 points 1 year ago

I bet he bought that headline from the buttigieg 2028 funds he's already started collecting on the sly.

He's a greedy grasping politician with burning ambition where his ideals should be.

[-] tonytins@pawb.social 5 points 1 year ago

Look, I dunno much about Buttigieg beyond being gay and former transport secretary. That being said, this a niche LGBTQ+ outlet. Of course they're gonna talk about the guy.

[-] notsure@fedia.io 1 points 1 year ago

....so south bend chnged since i left...

this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2025
485 points (98.4% liked)

politics

30994 readers
1936 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS