Blog Credo

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H.L. Mencken

Tuesday, November 26, 2019

Mayor Pete

One of the more surprising developments of the Democratic primary has been Pete Buttigieg's rise.  I've tried to figure out some of why he's so appealing.  The nearest historical analogy I can come up with is Jimmy Carter.

Carter's appeal was a basic decency ("I'll never lie to you."), an open and easy Christian faith and a very thin resume on which to attack him.  He was a largely moderate governor, fairly liberal on race for 1976, noticeably intelligent and generally inoffensive.  Nixon's crimes made a figure like Carter appealing. Carter was the anti-Nixon, and road that to upset wins in Iowa that he carried on to narrow wins in Oklahoma and New Hampshire.  Democrats had been burned four years earlier with McGovern and they sought a safe candidate.  His strongest challenger was (gulp) George Wallace who ran strongly in the Southern states.  Jerry Brown made a late entry to represent the left wing of the party, although maybe Mo Udall fit some of that space.

What's striking about 2020 is that - having been burned by the bizarre and fluky victory of Trump - the Democrats have decided not to play it safe.  Perhaps they HAVE, because Biden still leads most polls.  While I don't think Biden is a "safe" candidate, because he's never been a very adroit politician, he would appear that way to a lot of primary voters. It's telling that African Americans voters are his core support. Again, I think that's because they are the most strategic and safe in their voting.  They don't trust white voters not to fuck things up again.  I remember in 2008, several African Americans said to me something along the lines of "They aren't going to let Obama win."  The "they" was undefined, but I think Biden's support is rooted in the "safe" candidate tag. Compared to Warren and Sanders, there might be some truth to that.  I am convinced Biden would've beaten Trump in 2016, for instance.  It's not 2016, however.

Buttigieg is basically competing with Biden for the voters who don't want to risk nominating a women, a person of color or a Socialist.  Bloomberg and others are trying to seize that space, but I just don't see that there's enough oxygen in that space.  The fact that Buttigieg is gay allows him to be a little "outside the box" but not so threateningly so. 

What's interesting is that homophobia remains an issue with older Christians, and while most accounts of evangelicals refers to whites, African Americans are among the most religious Americans.  And frankly, they probably still have a problem with gays, especially in a state like South Carolina. It's not a case that Buttigieg is polling 0% with black voters because they are all voting for Harris or Booker.  They aren't.  They are supporting Biden, because...safe. I don't think Buttigieg looks "safe" to black voters, whereas the white, college educated demographic likes him, because they don't see the sexual orientation as being as risky.

A strategic voting choice between Buttigieg and Biden comes down to what your electoral strategy is.  Do you want to claw back some working class white votes?  Biden makes some sense there.  Some.  Do you want to run up the score in the suburbs?  Buttigieg is a better bet there.

A Buttigieg-Warren choice is fascinating, and it would be interesting to see where African American votes land.  Regardless, getting black voters to the ballot box is going to be critical in 2020.  Will they rally around Buttigieg, if he wins the nomination?

No comments: