ListNook

Financial-Desk-669 Mar 29, 2026 +1192

(In New Hampshire)

1192

DeanOnFire Mar 30, 2026 +400

Obviously we need to ask the people of South Carolina since somehow that decided the 2020 primaries for us.

400

CruelKind78 Mar 30, 2026 +48

Exactly

48

DingerSinger2016 Mar 30, 2026 +1

I still don't understand why we just can't hold all the primaries on the same day.

1

Iamapieceofsh1t2020 Mar 30, 2026 +1

Then the primary will always go to the ones with more name recognition and preventing lesser known candidates from presenting themselves to voters.

1

Mistrblank Mar 30, 2026 +1

But it just does that anyway as people get name recognition from whoever wins the first states. By the end, no one cares because everything has kind of already been decided for them.

1

fuzzywuzzybeer Mar 30, 2026 +1

The idea is that lesser known candidates can concentrate their resources in a few smaller states and make their appeal to the state. If they can persuade a smaller state that they are a great candidate then they will get support and gain momentum. Then they stand a chance at a larger race. By having to win all the states at once they could not defeat someone with a larger war chest. It is why Bernie had a great chance at 2016. People loved him and he gained momentum the more people heard from him.

1

LunaticLucio Mar 30, 2026 +1

Yeah.. I'll never ever let that go. Bernie would have saved America from itself.

1

RaisonDetritus Mar 30, 2026 +1

I hold these two opinions simultaneously: Hillary Clinton would have been a phenomenal president, and she was absolutely the wrong choice of candidate at the wrong time.

1

beforeitcloy Mar 30, 2026 +1

Then they should at least decide the first round of states with a l******, instead of keeping one order that always distorts the electorate in the same way.

1

TheJointDoc Mar 30, 2026 +1

I think it would be better to rotate states and have a diverse mix in the early states before broadening. Get a series of monthly primaries with 5, 10, 15, 20, rotate which states get scheduled into which groups, with maybe each of the first five being in a different grouping of states like NE, Midwest/Plains, South(east), W Coast, Mountain/SW/Texas? Heck the first five could even be staggered by lot onto separate 1-2 week cycles too so they can focus on one or two areas if they need too. That way you get a sort of regional representation, can see how different groups of constituents feel about specific politicians and their policies in specific issues, allow for a slow buildup for candidates with less recognition, but don’t steamroll it while still condensing the timeline.

1

ButtEatingContest Mar 30, 2026 +63

Yeah, we have them to thank for Merrick Garland, and a second Trump administration. Why wouldn't they throw in a McKinsey corporatist who argues that AIPAC doesn't count as foreign lobbying since it is made up of Americans?

63

gorginhanson Mar 30, 2026 +132

So let me get this straight, Democrats took 2 massive losses to realize that Americans won't elect a woman, and their solution is to assume they'll elect a gay person? One who got 1% of the vote the last time he ran?

132

facw00 Mar 30, 2026 +47

To be fair, a whole lot of people didn't think America would elect a Black man in 2008. Honestly I think the most important thing is the party sees who can actually run a good campaign and appeal to people. Obviously the person who appeals most to the Democratic primary might not always be the best general election candidate, but campaigning skills are going to be very important regardless.

47

User-NetOfInter Mar 30, 2026 +79

If you think the black or Hispanic vote is coming out for a gay white guy, you need to share the brand of glue you’ve been sniffing, because I had a bad week and I could use some nonsense

79

25point4cm Mar 30, 2026 +1

Hate to say it, but you’re right. And you can forget any GOP flipping

1

civil_set Mar 30, 2026 +1

I wouldn’t put it in these terms but it’s true, unfortunately. A gay man on the ticket will not get out the vote. And honestly…. Pete is my own favorite by far.

1

MadRaymer Mar 30, 2026 +47

I'm not a big fan of Pete, but I would absolutely believe America would elect an openly gay man before electing a woman.

47

digihippie Mar 30, 2026 +1

I think you underestimate Christian Nationalism

1

gorginhanson Mar 30, 2026 +24

There's a large contingent of people who think being gay is a sin. No one thinks that about women.

24

MadRaymer Mar 30, 2026 +27

There isn't a large contingent of people that think sins disqualify people from leadership positions. If there were, the current POTUS would not have been elected twice. But there's *definitely* a large contingent of people that think women shouldn't be in leadership positions.

27

Conscious-Demand-594 Mar 30, 2026 +24

Somehow, in today's America, being a pedo is less controversial than being gay.

24

gorginhanson Mar 30, 2026 +6

If you were correct about that then the religious people wouldn't be referring to him as someone sent by jesus You can't rationalize the way they think as consistent.

6

martinsonsean1 Mar 30, 2026 +1

You need to check tiktok, pretty sure one of the tenets of christianity is that women ate the apple and are therefore inherently sinful. At least, according to some random chuds.

1

SyrianChristian Mar 30, 2026 +1

Ill never forget the videos that came out of the Iowa caucuses where voters who voted for Pete in the caucus learned he was gay (idk how they figured it out then) but then freaked out and asked if they could invalidate their vote

1

stars9r9in9the9past Mar 30, 2026 +1

Are you kidding? The same people who think being gay is a sin think being a woman is a sin. That's why they advocate for men being the dominant figure in a household and why they say women have no claim to bodily autonomy. I mean it should go without saying, the same people who think "sin" is even real, are already mentally ill. And yes, I can say that word, because these are the same people who got corporations to permit use of the term again, against marginalized people particularly. Only difference here is, marginalized people tend to think less that some man-god in the sky invented half a species from a McRib.

1

Deto Mar 30, 2026 +7

I think people should just vote for whoever they feel is best in the primary. That's how we get candidates with that X factor of drawing people in. If we were overly worried about demographics we never would have nominated a certain Barack Hussein Obama

7

IllustriousRange226 Mar 29, 2026 +970

Great! but it’s too early to talk about a front runner. We have the midterms first.

970

BlindWillieJohnson Mar 29, 2026 +139

These are name ID polls at this stage

139

Prior_Coyote_4376 Mar 30, 2026 +18

Name ID + time Sometimes voters get burnt out or bored on a candidate but rediscover them later, so there’s no point in taking polls seriously while we’re in that revolving door of candidates testing the spotlight because even high name recognition can hurt if people want something fresh or start expecting more results

18

StephanXX Mar 29, 2026 +142

Newsweek doesn't care about Democracy, just ad clicks. That said, I'd like to think that the eventual Democratic nominee was pushing for high midterm turnout & fighting for all voters to have their votes counted, and not just trying to elevate their own national profile.

142

Dottsterisk Mar 30, 2026 +10

Buttigieg didn’t run these polls. He just got named in them.

10

MontyAtWork Mar 30, 2026 +14

We also need a Primary, and then to see who's getting more votes, before we talk about a Frontrunner lol.

14

JaydedXoX Mar 30, 2026 +28

Pete would guarantee another Republican w*****.

28

JurisDoctor Mar 30, 2026 +22

It's not great. He would be a terrible choice to win the presidency. Democrats need to field someone that can win independents, minorities and swing states. That's not Pete.

22

greiton Mar 30, 2026 +1

I like pritzker. he has done an amazing job balancing the Illinois budget while preserving many social programs.

1

Sptsjunkie Mar 30, 2026 +3

Agree, but the poll is literally just New Hampshire, where Pete campaigned heavily before and they know him.

3

AntoniaFauci Mar 30, 2026 +34

Mistake. The game has changed. The Dems have zero leaders and no message for the last 17 months is why they have their lowest approval rate ever. Having a focal point mouthpiece who lazy media can turn to 6 times a day for pre-written stories is how a fringe cult has “succeeded” and currently runs the world. Even the blue micro election wins being touted here and there are *in spite of* the Democratic Party, not *because of* it. If we the people pull it off this year, we’ll do so dragging the Dem Party on our backs. We need a loudmouth, unapologetic leader. We need a message of credible and powerful justice and reform. That includes immediate impeachment and removal of the entire Trump crime family administration, including the psycho pathic cabinet members. Make that the contract between the electorate and the new leader, then Let the voters and media make it happen. They’ve done it before, with the low IQ rapist dumpster fire starter. They can do it for a good cause too. And no, milquetoast Pete Buttigieg is not it. Does anyone actually want to win, or are we just doing that moral victory bullshit again? Does anyone actually want to know how to win?

34

RetroHiztory Mar 30, 2026 +881

The dude polls at -10% with anybody not white. It’s time to stop pretending this guy has a chance.

881

knoxknight Mar 30, 2026 +324

In 2028 we will nominate a highly qualified white woman, person of color, or gay person, and then proceed to once again get crushed in the general election because the rest of the country isn't there yet. It is the way of our people.

324

RoscoeSantangelo Mar 30, 2026 +208

More likely: that woman, poc, or gay person will emphatically say that they won't divest from Israel, cut funding for ICE, or pursue charges against the previous administration and lose the faith of half of the voter base and then act shocked when the party that caters to stupid people (who never run out) wins

208

AgustinCB Mar 30, 2026 +67

And then spend the next four years blaming their voters and saying they were the lesser evil. Just not being evil at all is not in the plan apparently.

67

RetroHiztory Mar 30, 2026 +127

More likely we nominate someone who is a mealy mouthed centrist who blows it again.

127

boot2skull Mar 30, 2026 +53

Centrists lock the ratchet so it can turn further right on the next president.

53

nWhm99 Mar 30, 2026 +1

Last time Dems nominated a white straight male centrist, he won.

1

thegreatlizard99 Mar 30, 2026 +1

Because a new virus that shut down the world and made it easier for Americans who historically don’t vote to go out and vote. Had Covid not been a thing Trump would have won again.

1

crowhops Mar 30, 2026 +1

Every voting person I knew voted biden and not a single one of them was happy about it

1

Dp04 Mar 30, 2026 +1

It’s great when you can make giant sweeping statements that have zero way to verify.

1

Crisis-Counselor Mar 30, 2026 +13

But ain’t Pete gay? I think the country is less ready for that. We’ve at least already voted for a black man

13

knoxknight Mar 30, 2026 +17

We voted for a black man... and have endured 15 years of reactionary antidemocracy insanity in part because 30% of the country was enraged by the very idea of that black man.

17

ButtEatingContest Mar 30, 2026 +23

I know like that one time we nominated a black guy, the Obama dude.

23

KontraEpsilon Mar 30, 2026 +13

It took eight consecutive years of an increasingly unpopular president (minus his post 9/11 bump) and the biggest financial crises of the modern era. It’s true, he was popular and McCain never had a chance. But it was an entirely different situation. Unemployment was something like 7% that year and was clear it was only going to get worse (and it did). And personally, Pete would be my top choice. I’ll probably vote for him in the primary when it comes around if he’s in it. But his support with minorities is practically zero.

13

User-NetOfInter Mar 30, 2026 +13

His support with minorities is negative.

13

Nighthawk700 Mar 30, 2026 +7

That was 15 years ago. Almost 20 the first time it happened. We're in a different world and at least two national elections have shown that's not working

7

KellyJin17 Mar 30, 2026 +1

A perfect, straight, highly charismatic and charming black male candidate could win as Obama proved, otherwise I agree with your point.

1

rammo123 Mar 30, 2026 +1

The right wing propaganda apparatus wasn't nearly as sophisticated in 2008 as it is today. Even if such a candidate appeared from aether, it would only be a matter of time before the fairweather voters "found" a reason not to like him.

1

deadscreensky Mar 30, 2026 +1

White supremacy is also more in the open. Obama activated a large part of the population that was previously apathetic about politics. (Not his fault, of course.) I don't think they're going to allow that kind of win again.

1

antici________potato Mar 30, 2026 +1

I was afraid of this in the Democratic Senate primary in Texas. Talarico and Crockett going against each other, and both definitely deserve a place in government. Talarico is better to face off against either Paxton or Cornyn solely because Texas isn't ready to vote a black woman into that high of an office.

1

PresentBabble Mar 30, 2026 +67

Yea polls at 0

67

Spiralofourdiv Mar 30, 2026 +12

Democrats have a weird boner for thinking some random white center-left man is gonna totally upend party politics and shatter the electoral college status quo because “wow, they are just so charming, how could anybody not love them?!” Every f****** cycle we pretend that Texas might flip for Christ’s sake. We’ve lost touch with reality and are losing elections as a result. Democrats are so confident with their moves in a game they clearly do not understand. Constantly pushing people like Buttigieg is a clear example of that. I have nothing against Buttigieg, but he failed to even win the primary last time he tried a presidential bid; what exactly has changed? What makes him suddenly a slam dunk candidate? We can’t just keep putting forth these boring, moderate candidates liberals vote for begrudgingly (or will just not vote at all because of) while the GOP is popping off with full-on cult of personality fascists; it’s a losing strategy and we’re already losing fast. We need somebody truly exciting and truly liberal or even a bit leftist. Take Mamdami as an example: Establishment democrats refused to support him because he was too radical, but my god look how fired up people get for that guy; I get excited when I hear him speak and I don’t even live in New York! By contrast, I have met SO many moderates and even conservatives that say they would have happily voted for Bernie Sanders, but democrats refused to put him forth as a candidate because he was saying things politicians and the people that fund their campaigns don’t like, and look where that got us. Tear it down, if we don’t the world will do it for us eventually. The “great experiment” of America has failed, and it’s time to entirely reevaluate our systems before we go the route of Nazi Germany and get royally fucked up in WW3. I’m sad to say I don’t think we will actually do that, so… sinners get ready, etc.

12

themza912 Mar 30, 2026 +21

Because he’s a terrible candidate. No idea how anyone sees this guy as their top candidate

21

Scott5114 Mar 30, 2026 +43

The case for Pete Buttigieg is that he is pretty good at communicating Democratic positions when under pressure from Republicans. He regularly goes on Fox and not only avoids their anchors' attempts to box him in but runs circles around them. Is that important enough to make him President? I don't really think so—his positions in 2020 were so milquetoast I never even considered voting for him—but given that Democrats' biggest stumbling block for the last forever has been communication, it's not _nothing_.

43

Olaf4586 Mar 30, 2026 +24

Have you listened to him speak? I think he's incredible. I'm always surprised about how negative people are about this guy

24

MrScribblesChess Mar 30, 2026 +1

He's a great speaker for sure, very eloquent. But any politician who hasn't come around on universal healthcare yet is right-of-center at best. He can keep going on Fox News, that's great, but we can do much better for president.

1

Boise_Ben Mar 30, 2026 +14

He is very intelligent, but very few real beliefs and almost no charisma. Great for a McKinsey consultant, not the person we need right now.

14

No_Boat3031 Mar 30, 2026 +7

Anything but actually giving people a candidate who will work for them instead of donors

7

Complex_Anteater6528 Mar 29, 2026 +146

The #1 thing campaign promise I will need in a possible candidate is one who is determined to push for SEVERE punishment for the criminals, pedophiles and murderers.

146

DantifA Mar 29, 2026 +71

The #2 thing is Medicare for All

71

thedrizzle126 Mar 30, 2026 +1

That's #1

1

HomoProfessionalis Mar 30, 2026 +1

To be fair there are quite a few #1s at the moment.

1

treehouse4life Mar 30, 2026 +1

What is the president supposed to do? That’s for courts to decide. How is the president supposed to make criminal sentences harsher?

1

wombat-in-a-bikini Mar 30, 2026 +6

Is there a Project 2025 for the left wing?

6

twolvesfan217 Mar 30, 2026 +1

There a Project 2029 being worked on but I know nothing about the individuals involved nor their influence https://www.project2029.me/policies

1

simpleflavors1 Mar 29, 2026 +73

Lol good luck with that

73

maybeinoregon Mar 29, 2026 +388

I doubt the same people that wouldn’t vote for a woman for President, are progressive enough to vote for him.

388

SniffDsNutz Mar 29, 2026 +142

Agreed. The Democrats need to think about WINNING. They fall for it every time. There are too many voting Americans that are too stupid to be progressive. Edit: Lol all I’m saying is, don’t let the f****** idiot Republican win. Like last time. I think Pete hurts those chances. That’s it.

142

toiletting Mar 30, 2026 +48

???? democrats refuse to be progressive. being a woman or a gay man are not signs of a progressive candidate

48

Still_Mix9311 Mar 29, 2026 +73

You are NOT implying that Pete Buttigieg is progressive right now. Him being a shockingly right leaning dem is his entire thing.

73

TheVirginVibes Mar 30, 2026 +70

He wouldn’t even endorse Mamdani. He’s a centrist corporate dem, through and through.

70

Richard_Sauce Mar 30, 2026 +19

I mean, center right, not shockingly right. Dude is just a younger version of our current gerontocracy of corporate third way Dems. But, because many Democratic voters automatically associate young/(POC/Woman/LGTBQ) with progressive, they assume he's more left leaning than he is. And, yeah, he's not. And look, I like the guy, honestly. He's smart, a very effective communicator, highly competent....but he's a milquetoast corporate Dem positionally speaking. And yeah, for the elect-ability hawks, it sucks, but being gay is starting us a disadvantage. It sucks. I don't like living in that reality, but I'd really rather not lose. Maybe if he was my dream candidate, or an actual progressive, I'd fight that battle, but yeah, I'm especially not doing it for a neoliberal candidate.

19

Peppersnoop Mar 30, 2026 +13

He has one too many husbands to win votes from most political identities to the right of progressive (in the US)

13

SweetAlyssumm Mar 30, 2026 +6

Exactly. I think people will recognize that in time but never overestimate Democrats.

6

WalrusOwn4518 Mar 30, 2026 +36

They’ve never actually ran a progressive. Pete also surely isn’t one.

36

Choice_Warning6456 Mar 30, 2026 +1

Well, FDR. But that was a while ago.

1

seriousofficialname Mar 29, 2026 +69

Maybe if he runs on popular policies rather than against them

69

Chewym4a3 Mar 29, 2026 +44

Literally impossible. Maybe he could instead try and form a big tent by trying to persuade "centrists" by blaming immigrants and saying he's only a gay man 3-days out of the week?

44

thehildabeast Mar 29, 2026 +25

He’s a corporate stooge that absolutely won’t happen

25

blozout Mar 30, 2026 +4

The unfortunate truth. A good portion of black and Hispanic voters will not vote for a gay man because of strong cultural aversions. I’m not sure if there enough voters to pick up from the right to off set those potential losses.

4

Kelor Mar 29, 2026 +29

I know this has been said a lot previously but I don’t buy that it’s impossible for a woman to win the presidency. Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris while qualified were poor candidates with regards to platform and what the electorate was looking for at the time.

29

spazz720 Mar 29, 2026 +26

The first woman to win the presidency will be a Republican

26

asiagomelt Mar 30, 2026 +3

I'd put money on this as well. ETA: I also give 50/50 odds to the Republicans getting the first gay president, though I think that's probably farther in the future.

3

Dineology Mar 29, 2026 +39

They also both looked at an American electorate that is easily the most polarized in living memory and instead of trying to galvanize the base and focus on turnout like the Republicans do, they tried and failed to appeal to the mythical middle and in the process alienated and demotivated their own voters. They were absolutely terrible candidates who ran garbage fire campaigns and the DNC are chief among those pushing the narrative that they lost because their women. Same would have happened to Joe Biden if his election hadn’t occurred during a once in a generation pandemic, and even then he only won by the skin of his teeth.

39

EchoLocation8 Mar 29, 2026 +26

There was like, 20 minutes where Kamala/Walz had a winning strategy with the "Weird" thing that they super abruptly stopped when it was clearly being effective.

26

mojitz Mar 29, 2026 +23

It wasn't just the weird thing. Harris was soaring highest when everyone expected her to run a way more ambitious, campaign with real progressive/left-populist policy ideas. Her anti-price gouging plan was one of the first things she came out with, but her advisors convinced her to back off.

23

a_talking_face Mar 29, 2026 +22

Because the democratic party is totally married to consultants feeding them middle of the road garbage. Where did Buttigieg work again?

22

mojitz Mar 29, 2026 +18

Yeah I'm with ya there. Dude's 100% an establishment hack.

18

walkallover1991 Mar 30, 2026 +13

This. A lot of people don't realize that if you put the final Harris 2024 campaign against Biden's 2020 campaign, Harris was actually running to the right of Biden. She was further to the right than Biden on healthcare, climate change, immigration, criminal justice, economic policy, and just overall political tone. Biden campaigned ***hard*** with Bernie and AOC in 2020, whereas Harris had a much more centrist, right-leaning coalition (hello Liz Cheney, are you there?).

13

Sufficient_Steak_839 Mar 30, 2026 +9

Walz had that strategy and Kamala’s moron strategists evidently made him quiet it down after he accepted the VP nod. These fucks need to stop listening to the well paid consultants who don’t seem to have a single clue what non boomer democrats want.

9

ilcasdy Mar 29, 2026 +18

Hillary also won the popular vote. To say that it was impossible for her to win, or any woman, is just dumb.

18

Kelor Mar 29, 2026 +10

Exactly. I don’t doubt that sexism and in Harris’ case racism played a role in their losses, I just don’t believe it was as large a factor as they and their platforms were. I remember in 2008 when a huge number of people were saying it had to be Hillary Clinton because people would never vote for a black man to be president and then eh won by what will probably be the largest electoral victory of my lifetime.

10

Mr_P3anutbutter Mar 30, 2026 +7

Or perhaps he’s not progressive enough for what people actually want? He’s articulate and intelligent and has some good positions on key issues but he is also too friendly to the donors and corporations that have bought our elections. His rise to prominence in 2020 was backed by lobbyists and major corporate backers: https://publicintegrity.org/politics/pete-buttigieg-mayor-indiana-money-lobbyists/ Plus working for McKinsey, corporate America’s favorite hatchet men, is not great. People don’t want that. People are fed up. Ro Khanna seems like the better choice imo.

7

TheLongshanks Mar 30, 2026 +5

He himself isn’t progressive enough. He’s another milquetoast centrist sucking up to corporate big interests and singing cumbaya with fascists.

5

RelevantNothing2692 Mar 29, 2026 +12

Definitely would destroy the black vote.

12

mattxb Mar 30, 2026 +1

I agree. I think he’s an impressive guy but I think dems need to either play it actually safe or get a candidate that would truly energize the young vote and he doesn’t check either box.

1

newtoredditcom Mar 29, 2026 +246

No more corporate Democrats.

246

olivicmic Mar 29, 2026 +21

It’s New Hampshire so demographically not representative of the country, but it gets boosted because of stupid traditions.

21

6beerkdawg Mar 29, 2026 +56

Vote in the primary and get everyone you know to as well. Thats how progressives win

56

Still_Mix9311 Mar 29, 2026 +10

Cannot agree more.

10

space_manatee Mar 30, 2026 +11

Until the rest of the DNC conspires against that candidate so they can put their corporate suit in there.

11

Skill_Issuer Mar 30, 2026 +1

But I’d rather not vote then complain when my preferred candidate loses

1

nowhereman136 Mar 30, 2026 +58

I like him more than Newsom or Harris, but he still has a few issues that keep me from being an early supporter. I'll happily vote for him in the general if he makes it that far, but I need to see the whole field before I vote for him in the Primary

58

CravingNature Mar 30, 2026 +38

I won't vote for Pete, Harris or Newsome in a primary

38

janethefish Mar 30, 2026 +14

The problem with Buttigieg comes from one primary factor and two aggravating factors. 1) the American voters. This is his primary factor. 2) the first four letters of his name 3) His husband He would make a fine president if elected.

14

-AnythingGoes- Mar 30, 2026 +11

His ***HUSBAND***!? A First ***Gentleman***!? What about family values? Think of the children! I'd feel safer voting for Trump 3: Return of The King than force a First Gentleman and his *questionable* values on my kid/s

11

Free_Dome_Lover Mar 30, 2026 +5

Yeah we'd all much prefer a child rapist For the kids of course I mean it's no fun raping gay kids

5

HomoProfessionalis Mar 30, 2026 +1

I can hear Champ Kind now: "Its first LADY not first MAN and that is a fact!"

1

CobraPony67 Mar 30, 2026 +1

4. He isn't over 6' tall. It seems we have a height discrimination in this country. Pretty much every elected male is over 6' tall. They call Marco Rubio 'little' even though he is about average height (5' 9") and also slightly taller than Pete (5' 8").

1

LunchyDude101 Mar 30, 2026 +1

I really like Pritzker, though. He’s a fine speech giver. I still don’t think enough left-leaning GOPers are ready for Pete yet for him to win, and the h******* GOP will absolutely embrace ultra-homophobic attack ads to smear him.

1

InimitableMissS Mar 30, 2026 +1

The left leaning GOP will eat Pritkzer up with a spoon. I deeply hope he’s our nominee. He’s not all sunshine and roses, but he’s the type of brash candidate that the country needs right now and at least his viewpoint points to rebuilding rather than status quo.

1

LunchyDude101 Mar 30, 2026 +1

Yeah, his Chicago-tough would fare much better than Newsom-slickness. I think Pritzker/Shapiro ticket would be cool, or perhaps Pritzker/Talarico if the next two years are good for the latter. (The Dems probably want Talaruco to stay right where he is if he gets that hard-won Senate seat, though.)

1

Now-Thats-Podracing Mar 29, 2026 +38

lol no

38

HeadOfMax Mar 30, 2026 +1

The dem primaries need to go ranked choice in every state for any real progress to be made. That being said if he makes it all the way I will vote for him. He seems like a decent human being who knows way more about the world than I do.

1

OneGreatEgg Mar 29, 2026 +235

Wow. Yet another Milquetoast, do-nothing, centrist candidate to act as a voter-repellant for the working and lower middle class at the polls. Yawn.

235

Healthy_Intention_92 Mar 29, 2026 +130

But he's also gay- So when he crash-and-burns for being a centrist, at least the DNC establishment will have an attribute of his personality to scapegoat! *He clearly lost because he's gay- Throw em all under the bus!*

130

Cranyx Mar 30, 2026 +28

Almost everyone in this thread is already blaming the fact that Kamala lost on her being a woman, despite the fact that she polled significantly better than straight white man Joe Biden.

28

ELVEVERX Mar 30, 2026 +1

exactly. Ultimately, Kamala lost because she was close to Joe Biden, who was deeply unpopular and said she'd do nothing different. If she had been a straight white man she'd still have lost.

1

OneGreatEgg Mar 29, 2026 +19

No, no, no... the DNC does not work like that. It's more like, *"See, they are clearly too bigoted to vote for a gay man. They should all vote Republican!"* Meanwhile, his policy proposals include lots of half-assed tax gifts to the upper middle/upper class that won't generally vote for him anyway.

19

CoachDT Mar 29, 2026 +35

Can you even explain his policy platform? I normally try to leave comments short but i'm bored at work so.... Things Pete supports: * Singe payer healthcare * Free tuition for working class families and massively expanding grants for those that don't qualify * A pathway to citizenship for the undocumented * Anti-discriminatory LGBT legislation * Universal background check for guns * Increasing the minimum wage to at least 15 an hour * Universal childcare and pre-k until age 5 * Ending the electoral college * Restoring voting rights to felons who have completed their sentencing * Expanding the supreme court * Statehood for DC and Puerto Rico * National maternity and paternity leave * Expunging the records for marajuana related sentencing and freeing those incarcerated * Pushes for the green new deal This was his platform the last time he ran for office. So I guess I have to ask, what are you talking about? In what world is this a centrist policy platform?

35

MountNevermind Mar 29, 2026 +45

The differences between Pete B's healthcare proposal and single-payer: https://pnhp.org/news/only-a-single-payer-system-would-fix-our-health-care-troubles/ It's not single payer. Means testing! He pursued a different green plan which he said was more "achievable" than the green new deal. He's also AIPAC money taking. He's also not great with regard to dark money. This is not a candidate for taking the Democrats down the path that didn't find us where we currently find ourselves. Money's influence in politics is probably the single biggest issue we face...and not where Pete shines.

45

Surge_Lv1 Mar 30, 2026 +9

Oh no! Don’t let the “X candidate has no policy” crowd see this!

9

Still_Mix9311 Mar 29, 2026 +2

We definitely need to be more aggressive about folks who actively hurt people than calling them milquetoast

2

lazydracula Mar 29, 2026 +36

Love Pete think he would be a great president. However, google him and black support and you realize why it isn’t happening

36

TheITMan52 Mar 30, 2026 +41

Why do people think he's great? He's just a corporate dem.

41

kranzberry Mar 30, 2026 +11

These people are low information voters. They hear him speak clearly and professionally, and that’s enough for them. Most of them don’t bother to actually do any sort of deep dive on most of the candidates in the race.

11

Hot-Philosophy-7671 Mar 30, 2026 +14

I worked for him at DOT. He was big on promises but not that interested in the mechanics of delivering on them. He also hired some of the absolute worst political appointees I've ever seen. Almost all of them were craven political door-knockers who stomped around accusing career feds of being stupid. If he made it through the primary, I'd hold my nose, but he's not my favorite.

14

Attjack Mar 30, 2026 +1

If America won't elect a woman against the most flawed, incompetent, corrupt, felon candidate they won't elect a gay man either.

1

Pretend_Meet_88 Mar 30, 2026 +1

Too bad Jon Stewart is too old. Kidding Jon you're not too old, just look like it

1

mhtom Mar 30, 2026 +1

I like him. He's qualified, but he's not electable.

1

fender123 Mar 30, 2026 +1

100% agree.

1

meganthem Mar 30, 2026 +1

> He's qualified I'm not sure he is. Presidency is the domain of former senators and governors, not the former mayor of a city most of america never knew existed. The biggest problem in the past three presidential elections is running people with limited profiles and limited success and experience winning actually contested elections over a wide population. Pete isn't a Obama level speaker, and even Obama had a bigger tenure and profile than him having at least served in the Federal Senate.

1

JojenCopyPaste Mar 29, 2026 +20

Over newsome and harris sure. But I'm sure there'll be other candidates in the primary that I'd much rather vote for. But it's so far away, I'm not even thinking about that yet

20

solarplexus7 Mar 30, 2026 +1

A reminder that Pete’s problem is not his sexuality but that he’s a corruptable brown noser with no real principles or policies. He follows the suggestions of donors and power. He masks this with eloquence.

1

sedatedlife Mar 29, 2026 +71

Another pro Israel centrist Democrat no thanks.

71

HoodieGalore Mar 30, 2026 +15

Nope!

15

TheBalzy Mar 29, 2026 +35

That's pretty bleak.

35

CakeKing777 Mar 30, 2026 +7

As a gay man I love that Pete has the power he does but if I learned anything since trumps two terms in office is that America is not ready for a woman president and definitely not ready for a gay man as president.

7

Tall-Topic-2578 Mar 29, 2026 +43

Lmfao what a joke

43

OuterSpaceBootyHole Mar 29, 2026 +38

Lmfao glad to see McKinsey got back on their feet after Mamdani gave them the boot. No way he is even close to winning when Newsom and Pritzker are the forerunners.

38

Still_Mix9311 Mar 30, 2026 +17

Hell no to Newsom

17

BrundellFly Mar 30, 2026 +1

The next democratic to reside in the White House will either be Tom Hanks or AI-Obama

1

Vassortflam Mar 30, 2026 +1

The black woman didn’t work, let’s try the gay this time 👍

1

howrunowgoodnyou Mar 30, 2026 +1

Please no. I like him but we need a straight dude to beat maga; a woman or a gay guy is not gonna work.

1

Killer-Iguana Mar 30, 2026 +1

To all of the people happy about this, no. Pete has shown time and time again he, like all establishment democrats, have almost no real stances they're committed to and that morality is flexible based on where the funding comes from.

1

Faeriewren Mar 29, 2026 +17

They wanna lose again

17

whycarbon Mar 29, 2026 +50

we're never gonna have universal healthcare, are we? please can we not have a former insurance lobbyist as president. going to take great joy in voting against him in the primary.

50

jerrytwosides Mar 30, 2026 +7

That’s crazy Democrats wants to lose again.

7

IDKsecurity Mar 30, 2026 +7

Nope. Pick someone else.

7

pillbox_purgatory Mar 30, 2026 +1

If Dems run Pete…it’s because they want to lose and let the Right stay in power

1

DeepspaceDigital Mar 30, 2026 +3

Is this good news?

3

letsseeitmore Mar 30, 2026 +4

Great guy and very smart but his chances of winning are slim.

4

Thorteris Mar 30, 2026 +1

Any democrat that polls as bad as he does with black voters in dead on arrival

1

GarlicSnot Mar 30, 2026 +1

Black people wont vote for him. He was polling at 0% last time

1

lingeringneutrophil Mar 29, 2026 +7

Not a chance

7

CrustyTh3Punk Mar 29, 2026 +7

Hard pass. Waiting for primaries. Anybody thrown in my face as “the frontrunner” right now is getting laughed at and not even considered.

7

space_manatee Mar 30, 2026 +8

Oh for fucks sake not this again

8

Brighterdank Mar 30, 2026 +8

I want Ocasio-Cortez

8

romefitforbattle Mar 30, 2026 +9

Please stop trying to make this corpo a thing...

9

CrawlerSiegfriend Mar 29, 2026 +8

I'm starting to think Democrats like to let Republicans win so that they can have something to be enraged about.

8

kranzberry Mar 29, 2026 +5

*something to fundraise about

5

Chaemyerelis Mar 29, 2026 +8

Barf. Enough of this corporate consultant class.

8

FlowofOd Mar 30, 2026 +7

Gross….

7

Constant-Brief3410 Mar 29, 2026 +2

Maybe he should've been vp last year I would like to hope people don't just make gay jokes

2

clam-caravan Mar 29, 2026 +2

Love Pete but a proper Democratic primary will sort all of this out.

2

ljp388 Mar 30, 2026 +2

This is one state, NH where he came in second in 2020. For those who cannot actually read it and can only react to the headline.

2

Impervious_Rex Mar 30, 2026 +2

Nope.

2

MidThoughts-5 Mar 30, 2026 +2

Bruh ain’t no way he getting elected in this country.

2

FraGZombie Mar 30, 2026 +2

Please no more corporate democrats

2

rangerfan123 Mar 30, 2026 +2

Please no

2

AbleDanger12 Mar 30, 2026 +2

Sigh. As much as I’d like to see that happen, I’d America won’t elect a white woman - Hillary - they definitely won’t elect a gay guy.

2

originalbraindonut Mar 30, 2026 +2

Cool, so we want to lose again. Cool cool cool cool

2

DJMagicHandz Mar 30, 2026 +2

No thanks

2

jackiefashion24 Mar 30, 2026 +2

Oh god please no. I would only vote for him in a primary if he was Newsom's main challenger

2

mattyGOAT1996 Mar 30, 2026 +2

A reminder to not trust polls

2

haribobosses Mar 30, 2026 +2

Bernie Sanders is the most popular politician in america.

2

SedativeComet Mar 30, 2026 +1

I’d vote for him in a heartbeat. He actually has a brain and an apparent desire to use it for people

1

iritchie001 Mar 30, 2026 +1

America's Mayor. He is a peach. A nice person. Brite, well spoken, a veteran, ethical, humane, fair, inclusive, and cares deeply about a better future for us all.

1

wichopunkass Mar 30, 2026 +1

Got my vote 💯

1

Fun-Ocelot-5220 Mar 30, 2026 +1

my choice!

1

Crispynipps Mar 30, 2026 +1

Good. I’d much rather see Pete than newsom.

1

Retinoid634 Mar 30, 2026 +1

He’d be very good at the job.

1

The-Kang-Master Mar 30, 2026 +1

Bad idea for multiple reasons

1

WraithSama Mar 30, 2026 +1

Pete is an outstanding speaker, incredibly sharp and quick on his feet. A bit too centrist for my taste, but there's no doubting his intelligence or ability to speak persuasively, even off the cuff. But while a majority of Americans are at least okay or ambivalent with gay marriage these days, I don't think a majority of Americans are ready for a gay president, unfortunately. I just can't possibly see him winning a general election.

1

bufftbone Mar 30, 2026 +1

Will America vote for a gay President? They wouldn’t vote for a woman twice. Personally I see nothing wrong with it and I believe Pete would make a great 2 term President, but does the rest of this country agree?

1

indri2 Mar 30, 2026 +1

According to polls he's one of the most liked politicians in the US. One poll had him at Obama's level. Maybe him being Pete is more important than him being gay.

1

GreatGojira Mar 30, 2026 +5

Please no. I unfortunately don't think he can win

5

GiraffeRaps Mar 29, 2026 +12

No f****** thanks. He’s great, but not what we need right now.

12

dungulousssy Mar 29, 2026 +4

Booo

4

gwsth Mar 30, 2026 +4

Regardless of what you think of Buttigieg personally or politically, the American people have repeatedly made it pretty loud and clear that they have absolutely no interest in him running for elected office, at least not at a national level. Regardless of what that reason is, the voters have definitively said that even if they believe in the message he's delivering, they do not want him to be the one delivering it. Could be because he's gay. Or he's too centrist. Or he's got all the personality of cabbage. Or policy issues. Or all of the above. Doesn't matter. The voters simply aren't interested.

4

kummer5peck Mar 30, 2026 +4

I love Pete and believe he will be a mainstay in any democratic administration for decades to come. I don’t think he would be a good pick for a nominee though.

4

Pete Buttigieg Leading Potential 2028 Democratic Candidates in New Poll

💬 Send a Message

199 Comments