I'm not sure he would be. If he's as horrible a hypothetical candidate as everyone says he is, then he also is probably just as bad a surrogate for whoever the nominee is.
Being a candidate doesn’t by default make one a bad surrogate. In Buttigeg’s case, he’s just very skilled at communicating (say against pundits and even Fox News) without a sweat. He’s got his arguments well prepared and is sharp.
Showing up at campaign rallies and making speeches isn’t exactly what I was thinking. What I am looking for is someone who can help Stevens and other Democratic candidates running for office to help Democrats beat the GOP at their game.
Progressives who didn't support his Presidential Candidacy, anyone who agrees with the Democratic platform on everything except LGBTQ+rights, possibly minorities (depending who he ultimately endorses-there's a reason he got almost nothing in the South Carolina primary).
Regarding Buttigeg’s performance in SC, I see it was Biden who gained momentum and took the steam away from him. Buttigeg held up well in the NH Primary Election against Sanders but beginning with the NV Caucus, Biden spiked in the percentage of votes vs IA and NH. It was from here that Buttigeg lost steam. Don’t forget that Sanders had been capturing most of the action on the most liberal side of the Democratic Party base. Buttigeg had no chance with this while Sanders ran his campaign.
Buttigeg’s history with working at McKinsey is a problem but I don’t recall Democrats (even the most liberal ones) ever criticizing him for his time as Transportation Secretary. If anything, what Buttigeg would be able to do would be to help Haley Stevens or whoever else as the Democratic Senate Nominee get more traction with the independent and moderate voters.
https://petebuttigieg.substack.com/p/im-not-running-in-2026-but-i-am-getting
Pete Buttigieg's announcement.
Buttigeg would be an asset in helping Rep. Haley Stevens or whoever else ends up being the Democratic Senate nominee.
I'm not sure he would be. If he's as horrible a hypothetical candidate as everyone says he is, then he also is probably just as bad a surrogate for whoever the nominee is.
Being a candidate doesn’t by default make one a bad surrogate. In Buttigeg’s case, he’s just very skilled at communicating (say against pundits and even Fox News) without a sweat. He’s got his arguments well prepared and is sharp.
Showing up at campaign rallies and making speeches isn’t exactly what I was thinking. What I am looking for is someone who can help Stevens and other Democratic candidates running for office to help Democrats beat the GOP at their game.
No, but you could make the argument that his presence supporting our nominee will cost whoever that is critical votes.
How? I’m not sold on how it could be a possibility.
Who would Buttigeg turn off if he spoke?
Progressives who didn't support his Presidential Candidacy, anyone who agrees with the Democratic platform on everything except LGBTQ+rights, possibly minorities (depending who he ultimately endorses-there's a reason he got almost nothing in the South Carolina primary).
Regarding Buttigeg’s performance in SC, I see it was Biden who gained momentum and took the steam away from him. Buttigeg held up well in the NH Primary Election against Sanders but beginning with the NV Caucus, Biden spiked in the percentage of votes vs IA and NH. It was from here that Buttigeg lost steam. Don’t forget that Sanders had been capturing most of the action on the most liberal side of the Democratic Party base. Buttigeg had no chance with this while Sanders ran his campaign.
Buttigeg’s history with working at McKinsey is a problem but I don’t recall Democrats (even the most liberal ones) ever criticizing him for his time as Transportation Secretary. If anything, what Buttigeg would be able to do would be to help Haley Stevens or whoever else as the Democratic Senate Nominee get more traction with the independent and moderate voters.
I don't hear anyone calling him a horrible candidate. Most have a problem with him either because
1. He's gay
2. A gay would not be electable
3. He's not progressive enough.