Disaster Pete Buttigieg will be the next president. Here’s why. - All hail President Faggot.


The 2028 presidential election is a long way away. Right now, most of us are stressing about the midterms, especially in the wake of the recent Supreme Court ruling dismantling part of the Voting Rights Act.

But when we’re looking for hope under Donald Trump, it’s good to look at the long term. Despite it being so far away, short of any shocking revelations I’ve failed to predict, I feel like I’m already ready to call the 2028 presidential election for Pete Buttigieg.

Now that isn’t necessarily an endorsement of him over every other candidate. But I do think that Buttigieg is the most likely person to win the 2028 election in a time when politics has become so much about us and them, fighting tooth and nail, and throwing any care for the truth out of the window.

Of course, Buttigieg hasn’t announced that he’s running for president yet. But he’s made it pretty clear that he plans to, including getting caught out when trying to avoid the question from Stephen Colbert.

Buttigieg manages to represent a good middle of the road, but also somehow seems to encompass the whole road. When he ran in 2019, he was more conservative on economic policy and his approach to the military than some of us might have liked.

In the last seven years, Buttigieg has had plenty of time and experience to evolve and has slightly more radical approaches to some of those issues. In that time, he’s worked in the White House alongside former President Joe Biden, and Trump has shown us all a truly horrific vision for America.

Speaking about his experience over the last few years on Colbert recently, he said: “I feel that I’m a moderate ideologically, but it’s kind of radicalized me about the condition of our institutions.” That “moderate ideology” might mean he’s not an ideal candidate for the far left, but with some of his more active ideas and his move to call out the Democratic party for inaction, it’s believable they’d hold their nose and vote for him.

But the crucial element of Buttigieg’s potential to win the presidency comes from how he has reached into the homes of hardcore Republican voters and held his own through his countless Fox News interviews. At a time when political division rules and having reasonable discourse seems impossible, he’s managed to do just that. Buttigieg hasn’t held back about Trump, but in a way that means he has the chance to really pull over some swing voters and even lifelong Republicans who are tired of Trump and his MAGA cult.

But it’s not just that Buttigieg is a strong candidate in his own right. It’s that the rest of the field just doesn’t hold many strong contenders to take him on.

On the Republican side of the aisle, the idea of any of them winning the presidency in 2028 after Trump has tanked the economy and gone to war with Iran just doesn’t hold up to reasonable scrutiny. Anti-trans fearmongering isn’t going to win him enough votes (the erosion of the Voting Rights Act and his attempts to suppress large swathes of the electorate aside).

If Trump tries to run for a third term, constitutionalist Republicans aren’t going to put up with that. Trump has driven his own approval ratings down the toilet, and his machinations over the last decade have left the Republican Party light on people ready to stand up with conviction.

Nobody likes JD Vance. Coming off the cult of Trump, it seems unlikely that someone as milquetoast as Mike Pence could mount any sort of reasonable campaign (it didn’t work well in 2024).

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is retiring. Former Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) will be in his 80s. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Secretary of State Marco Rubio might make swings for it, but they don’t have a good track record when it comes to presidential elections and aren’t helped by the way that Trump has gone after each of them in the past.

After that, you start looking at Trump’s Cabinet of former Fox News hosts, and if they even make it to the end of his term, it’s hard to imagine them making a serious bid for the presidency.

On top of that, anyone who tries to run for the presidency on a Republican ticket after Trump will have to deal with the curse of the MAGA cult. They’ll either have to court Trump’s old base while the rest of the Republican Party is fed up with them and Trump’s old tactics. Or they have to disavow that base and have the MAGA crowd – and its pundits – mad at them in return. Balancing the two sides of that coin doesn’t seem feasible.

The Democrats have a similar problem, though. There are more options for a primary, but I suspect Buttigieg still has a lead. A lot of the old contenders are closer to retirement than running for president. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is looking to effect change behind the scenes rather than run. Sen. Corey Booker (D-NJ) “hasn’t dismissed” a 2028 bid, and his record-breaking filibuster might make him a good contender, but he hasn’t put in the same work that Buttigieg seems to have been laying down for the last few years.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has made a name for himself lately, especially with a social media team that has emulated Trump’s posting style to mock him. But that has likely alienated a lot of swing voters who don’t want to see more of the same, and he’s overly centrist and less likely to pull in the far-left vote.

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has quietly shown her strengths, but hasn’t stepped out in the national public eye much to make headway ahead of a bid. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz seems hesitant about stepping back into that fray. And the idea of former Vice President Kamala Harris running again after 2024 seems unlikely.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has been a lot of people’s dream candidate since long before she was old enough to run. While she has a good social media game, her more direct approach to many issues has made her too easy a target for Republicans, and the pundits are too well-practiced at painting a target on her and making viewers believe that she’s an extremist.

That’s why Buttigieg’s Fox News appearances have been so crucial to his chances. Just like how it’ll be hard to convince voters that the economy is great when they can’t afford groceries and gas, it’ll be hard to convince them that Buttigieg is a radical leftist extremist when he’s appeared on their TV regularly and made some great points in the face of hostile Republican questions.

Buttigieg’s push to play the wider field hasn’t always worked. Last year, he slipped on trans sports participation, and that was a big disappointment. He needs to do better on things like that. As a candidate, he’ll get asked about trans people in the next election, and he needs to be unequivocal once the campaign starts. But he’s the sort of communicator who can probably excel at highlighting the nonsense that underlies so many of those questions when the time comes.

When it comes to electability, Buttigieg is a military vet with a family, and compared to Trump, his character must be effectively unimpeachable. The only thing that Republicans might hold against him is his sexuality, so we just have to hope that by 2028, America is ready to elect an out gay man.
 
I'll give this nonsense more critique than it deserves.

But the crucial element of Buttigieg’s potential to win the presidency comes from how he has reached into the homes of hardcore Republican voters and held his own through his countless Fox News interviews.
Really? They think GOP voters are so mindless they'll vote for the artificial gay incompetent because they saw him go on TV without collapsing?
Man, Biden really scarred these fools deep. This is a remarkable amount of projection even for a side well known for it.

If Trump tries to run for a third term,
Lol, they fell for the meme again. This makes an unbroken 10 year record of retarded leftists not understanding a single thing Trump says.

Nobody likes JD Vance.
Everybody on the right likes JD Vance, or at least is mildly favorable due to his MAGA loyalty. The biggest marks against him are the race of his wife, and the fact that he let Kamala Harris off easy in the one debate he crushed her in. Nobody on the left likes Vance, but they don't like any Republican now that John McCain died, so why would their opinion matter?

The question is whether the independents and low info voters would like Vance, and they likely would. Put him up against Buttigieg and he looks even better.

I've noticed this article has absolutely no stand-alone positives for Buttigieg. This is the most articulate they get about his policies:
Buttigieg manages to represent a good middle of the road, but also somehow seems to encompass the whole road.
Put down the bong, buddy.

When he ran in 2019, he was more conservative on economic policy and his approach to the military than some of us might have liked.
Yeah, I'm sure that will be a rock-solid position he will hold against the entire screeching horde of the left wing crazies he needs to make up his numbers.

Just admit it, no leftist has any policies other than "the opposite of Trump". Bernie may have been the last person to articulate an identifiable economic policy, and he's a non-stop disaster. Buttigieg's position is "whatever the polls say will get me +3%", and historically that has not been a path to glory.
 
Imagine what a relief it would be to have a president who can give inspiring speeches that make you feel anything other than utter despair that we have a mentally stunted eight year old running the country.

And he'll probably tell Israel to politely fuck off, too.
 
Imagine what a relief it would be to have a president who can give inspiring speeches that make you feel anything other than utter despair that we have a mentally stunted eight year old running the country.

And he'll probably tell Israel to politely fuck off, too.
Why do retards think the party that over represents Jews, that has embraced Jewish policies/philosophy to its core, and that has voted for Israel defense spending for decades would ever turn on Israel?
 
Última edición:
Is that true? He’s just sort of ignored by the new here. They like to froth about trump, but I don’t see much about Vance and the impression I got was he’s reasonably popular. Americans - opinion?
He's relatively young, charismatic and has easily shaken off the attempts by the lefty press to smear him because the usual Boomer angles? Too old (he isn't). , too out-of-touch (he grew up in the meth belt of Appalachia) or too behind-the-times (he knows how to meme) don't stick, resulting in them embarrassing themselves by trying to start up bonkers rumors like how he allegedly has sex with house furniture....
 
Is that true? He’s just sort of ignored by the new here. They like to froth about trump, but I don’t see much about Vance and the impression I got was he’s reasonably popular. Americans - opinion?
same here in continental europe, vance is almost never mentioned
last time the media paid attention to him was when he gave a speech at some international security conference (in munich i believe) which made them all doom and gloom about how his speech was evidence of america turning to fascism, after that event the coverage of american politics went right back to 24/7 outrage about orange man
 
Is that true? He’s just sort of ignored by the new here. They like to froth about trump, but I don’t see much about Vance and the impression I got was he’s reasonably popular. Americans - opinion?
I think he's a good off-ramp from Trump, who was/is great but something we really should only take in small doses. Vance has the good parts of Trump in a form that's more traditionally "presidential" and a good base for the GOP long term.

I think that's a common enough perspective for people on the right in the US.

The left ignores him because he is harder to villainize. They'll start villainizing him when Trump's gone, but no need to break into that just yet.
 
blacks in the south vote as an ethnic block and they largely determine which democratic candidate is selected because of the timing of their primary elections. If an article doesn't explain how to overcome that, then they aren't serious about democratic politics and it is more like an advertisement for a candidate than anything else. The blacks like Kamala, if she runs that is who will get the nomination. She isn't mentioned in the article even though she has the best shot. Biden was preferred by blacks for being Obama adjacent. Southern blacks do not like gays and buttigieg's galaxy brain move of adopting black children isn't going to play out the way he is hoping, lol
Is that true? He’s just sort of ignored by the new here. They like to froth about trump, but I don’t see much about Vance and the impression I got was he’s reasonably popular. Americans - opinion?
Your impression is correct
 
Is that true? He’s just sort of ignored by the new here. They like to froth about trump, but I don’t see much about Vance and the impression I got was he’s reasonably popular. Americans - opinion?
He's good. The fact the left isn't scared of what he is and represents shows how short sighted they are. Take the reasonable policy positions Trump has and put them into a killer of a statesman instead of a bull in a china shop.
 
He has ZERO support from all blacks.

Ver archivo adjunto 8979624

Literally none.
Wrong, chud :smug:
see-black-people-love-pete-v0-5jk6c9qpetvg1.jpeg
 
The nominee will be like...Beshear maybe. He's just about the only truly reddish-purple-state Dem govs at this point. Stein's too Jewish and that's a hot potato in Demland right now. I don't see what choices they have that are viable, truly. Harris is a joke. Buttigieg is a gay joke. Obama was the last young, fresh candidate they had, but because it was "her turn" they stopped preparing anyone for the national stage. Most of the Dem govs are jokes from states with big, big problems.

If the Dems had any actual desire to win, they'd have started propping up Beshear all over the place and gotten him a glowup from their best strategists. But the only candidates they've given any backing to are Newsom and Harris, which tells me that they've figured out losing while calling your opponent a fascist enemy of democracy is better for fundraising.
 
The nominee will be like...Beshear maybe. He's just about the only truly reddish-purple-state Dem govs at this point. Stein's too Jewish and that's a hot potato in Demland right now. I don't see what choices they have that are viable, truly.
this was the kind of field republicans had when trump came out of nowhere and ran on a largely popular but neglected issue (immigration). the bar for entry into the democratic party is a lot higher, so they may prevent an outsider from saving their party.
 
Newsome. Bootyfag isn't exactly an economic genius himself and the whole sucking cocks and fucking ass and taking cum up his asshole is going to hurt him a lot more than Newsome's financial depredations will affect his own campaign. Pritzker is also a contender although I still thing 'shitty governor of California' is worth more than 'shitty governor of Illinois'.

have you been to California recently?
 
even though she has the best shot
Based on what?

Hillary performed better than her in every metric.

Hillary didn't get a second shot.

Kamala got 1% of the vote during the primaries, before she dropped out and got fast tracked to VP.

And turned the designated successor position into the biggest D party loss in 20 years.

In light of this, I again ask, how does this make her the "best shot"?


have you been to California recently?
None of that sticks to the Democrats, Cali has been such a hot mess for so long? Nobody holds its ongoing failure against the Democrats, they just say "imagine how bad it would be if the REPUBLICANS were in charge!" and it infuriatingly works.

The part of LA that burned to the ground years ago is still a vacant lot and nobody says a word about it.

They've successfully reached true Communism in that nebulous "traitors" and "saboteurs" can be blamed for problems despite the fact 99.9% of the state's political power has been captured by a singular party for decades.
 
Última edición:
Based on what?

Hillary performed better than her in every metric.

Hillary didn't get a second shot.

Kamala got 1% of the vote during the primaries, before she dropped out and got fast tracked to VP.

And turned the designated successor position into the biggest D party loss in 20 years.

In light of this, I again ask, how does this make her the "best shot"?



None of that sticks to the Democrats, Cali has been such a hot mess for so long? Nobody holds its ongoing failure against the Democrats, they just say "imagine how bad it would be if the REPUBLICANS were in charge!" and it infuriatingly works.

The part of LA that burned to the ground years ago is still a vacant lot and nobody says a word about it.

They've successfully reached true Communism in that nebulous "traitors" and "saboteurs" can be blamed for problems despite the fact 99.9% of the state's political power has been captured by a singular party for decades.
Hillary did not get the nomination in 2020 because Biden blamed Charlottesville on Hillary and Obama cucking him out of the nomination and that worked to guilt Obama into burning a lot of favors to kill any chance Hillary had to get the nomination again before the primary even started, and to ensure Biden got it by hook or crook.

Also Pete's best chance to win was 2020 when he was still a relative unknown and fag fatigue hadn't set in.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo