CMRivdogs Posted September 13 Share Posted September 13 Just now, gehringer_2 said: Pete has moved to Michigan hasn't he? Eyeing Gretch's gig? Wouldn't be surprised Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motor City Sonics Posted September 13 Share Posted September 13 10 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: Pete has moved to Michigan hasn't he? Eyeing Gretch's gig? Who is in the field for Michigan Governor 2026? Democrats Jocelyn Benson Mike Duggan - It's His if he runs Garlin Gilchrist Pete Buttigieg Mark Hackel Mallory McMorrow - future star **** Mark Hackel. He's not really a Democrat. Got his gig because of his scumbag father. Gilchrist has no shot. I think it's between Duggan and Pete.........and I could see Benson being either one's Running Mate. McMorrow's peak is coming later 2030 or 2034. Republicans John James - he's run for everything else Kristina Karamo - she actually could win the primary because of MAGA. Total nut job. Tudor Dixon - Doesn't matter that she lost big, she'll keep tyring. Justin Amash - He will get blocked by MAGA, but he'll run to try to normalize the party again. Losing battle. Perry Johnson - Because he's got money to spend (looks like the Crypt keeper) John James is the only one who is really "normal" that has a shot -- he has to walk fine line - he tries not to be too MAGA, but he has to be sort of MAGA with the Primaries. I am thinking Duggan vs. James in 2026. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted September 13 Share Posted September 13 51 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said: Sec Pete strikes again OK, this is a smart-sounding take and all, but how does Trump talking about Haitians eating dogs and cats help him achieve a net gain on Kamala, or limit his net loss against her, when it comes to voting? Pete makes it sound like Trump will lose more votes against Kamala if we talk about his record, but to me, a major candidate having a psychotic episode on stage in front of 60+ million viewers would seem to be more damaging when it comes to the net margin, wouldn't it? I mean, that's what we saw in the first debate, isn't it? Highlighting Trump's record won't motivate Democrats to vote more than highlighting his crazy, will it? And isn't the crazy going to hurt him with undecideds and fence-sitters and party-jumpers just as much if not more than his record? And talking about Trump's record isn't going to keep more red hats home than cat- or dog-eating because they reject any disparagement of his record as fake news anyway, don't they? So what am I missing in this analysis? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.TaterSalad Posted September 13 Share Posted September 13 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said: Who is in the field for Michigan Governor 2026? Democrats Jocelyn Benson Mike Duggan - It's His if he runs Garlin Gilchrist Pete Buttigieg Mark Hackel Mallory McMorrow - future star **** Mark Hackel. He's not really a Democrat. Got his gig because of his scumbag father. Gilchrist has no shot. I think it's between Duggan and Pete.........and I could see Benson being either one's Running Mate. McMorrow's peak is coming later 2030 or 2034. It is absolutely not Duggan's if he runs. Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson has outperformed every single Democrat when she's run statewide in 2010, 2018, and 2022. In 2010 when she ran for SOS she lost, but outperformed both the Gubernatorial ticket or Virg Bernero and Brenda Lawrence, as well as the AG candidate in Mark Totton. She out performed Gretchen Whitmer and Garlin Gilchirst both times she ran in 2018 and 2022. Secretary of State Benson will be a formidable candidate and has a shot at starting out as the top candidate. Edited September 13 by Mr.TaterSalad 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted September 13 Author Share Posted September 13 I agree that Pete moved here to pursue a state wide office which was probably a non starter in Indiana. But hes going to have good competition in the primaries. Its also possible Indiana just isnt his preferred place to live. Seems reasonable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted September 13 Share Posted September 13 2 minutes ago, pfife said: I agree that Pete moved here to pursue a state wide office which was probably a non starter in Indiana. But hes going to have good competition in the primaries. Its also possible Indiana just isnt his preferred place to live. Seems reasonable Gary, Indiana is on the same lake as Traverse City... :--) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted September 13 Share Posted September 13 I don’t know if Pete would srlurvive a primary. He’s too “national” and would face a lot of pushback. I love the guy and think he’d be a great governor. But he’s not been involved in MI politics directly. As for why he moved here… it’s traverse city. Why not? Maybe his husband wanted to live here and it’s where they wanted to raise the kids. Simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted September 13 Share Posted September 13 (edited) 44 minutes ago, chasfh said: OK, this is a smart-sounding take and all, but how does Trump talking about Haitians eating dogs and cats help him achieve a net gain on Kamala, or limit his net loss against her, when it comes to voting? Pete makes it sound like Trump will lose more votes against Kamala if we talk about his record, but to me, a major candidate having a psychotic episode on stage in front of 60+ million viewers would seem to be more damaging when it comes to the net margin, wouldn't it? I mean, that's what we saw in the first debate, isn't it? Highlighting Trump's record won't motivate Democrats to vote more than highlighting his crazy, will it? And isn't the crazy going to hurt him with undecideds and fence-sitters and party-jumpers just as much if not more than his record? And talking about Trump's record isn't going to keep more red hats home than cat- or dog-eating because they reject any disparagement of his record as fake news anyway, don't they? So what am I missing in this analysis? Pete’s point is that when MSM does a story to debunk ‘dogs and cats’ Trump knows that all his target audience is going to hear is “20,000 of ‘those’ people in central Ohio God’s country” and have a conniption over it. Edited September 13 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted September 13 Share Posted September 13 7 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: Pete’s point is that when MSM does a story to debunk ‘dogs and cats’ Trump knows that all his target audience is going to hear is “20,000 of ‘those’ people in central Ohio God’s country” and have a conniption over it. How is it getting Trump more votes/less vote loss? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted September 13 Share Posted September 13 Benson outperformed Whitmer. She’s the front runner for governor. Buttigieg is better for a federal seat. He’s a front runner if Peters chooses not to run. Duggan I would like to see challenge Tlaib. He can turn out the black vote and moderate white vote to match Tlaib’s Dearborn advantage. He can also match her in fundraising. I’m going to also predict Karen McDonald will be front runner for attorney general. If Marlinga doesn’t beat James, I wouldn’t mind Hackle taking a shot. He’s not ideal but better than James. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted September 13 Share Posted September 13 Pete will be in the cabinet in Harris admin or she's nuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gilmore Posted Friday at 04:45 PM Share Posted Friday at 04:45 PM 1 hour ago, chasfh said: How is it getting Trump more votes/less vote loss? Voters tend to have short memories. They remember food being cheaper back in the Trump presidency, but may have forgotten much of the chaos (particularly the voters who don’t pay much attention). So saying something we consider obviously crazy doesn’t just inflame the cult members, it points attention towards the nascent racist leanings of some outside the cult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted Friday at 04:50 PM Share Posted Friday at 04:50 PM 2 hours ago, oblong said: I don’t know if Pete would srlurvive a primary. He’s too “national” and would face a lot of pushback. I love the guy and think he’d be a great governor. But he’s not been involved in MI politics directly. As for why he moved here… it’s traverse city. Why not? Maybe his husband wanted to live here and it’s where they wanted to raise the kids. Simple as that. I think his spouse’s parents lived near Traverse City. It was one of the reasons why they moved. Especially to help wit the twins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted Friday at 04:57 PM Share Posted Friday at 04:57 PM If you would have told me after the 2016 election that Hillary Clinton would be out campaigning for the 2024 Dem, I would have cringed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted Friday at 04:58 PM Share Posted Friday at 04:58 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted Friday at 05:06 PM Share Posted Friday at 05:06 PM 19 minutes ago, Dan Gilmore said: Voters tend to have short memories. They remember food being cheaper back in the Trump presidency, but may have forgotten much of the chaos (particularly the voters who don’t pay much attention). So saying something we consider obviously crazy doesn’t just inflame the cult members, it points attention towards the nascent racist leanings of some outside the cult. I know all this, but what is the calculation being made by the Trump campaign that talking about his record will lose him more votes than talking about immigrants eating pets and geese? That's what Pete seems to be suggesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gilmore Posted Friday at 05:34 PM Share Posted Friday at 05:34 PM I think it relates to the “don’t take him literally” BS. Cult members eat it up completely, on the fence voters may not see it as that far out, we see it as totally nuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted Friday at 06:43 PM Share Posted Friday at 06:43 PM (edited) 4 hours ago, chasfh said: How is it getting Trump more votes/less vote loss? Engender more fear, drive more turnout. Maybe you are just as racist as Trump but immigration really isn't that big an issue for you in Springfield SomeotherState. because your town is still snow white. If Trump succeeds in getting a media conversation going that makes you think that your town could be next for 20K people you don't like the look of, you just might get off your John Deere and decide to vote though you normally don't bother. That's what I take from Pete's arg. Edited Friday at 06:45 PM by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted Friday at 06:54 PM Share Posted Friday at 06:54 PM He wants to deport Haitians to Venezuela. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted Friday at 06:54 PM Share Posted Friday at 06:54 PM 5 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: Engender more fear, drive more turnout. Maybe you are just as racist as Trump but immigration really isn't that big an issue for you in Springfield SomeotherState. because your town is still snow white. If Trump succeeds in getting a media conversation going that makes you think that your town could be next for 20K people you don't like the look of, you just might get off your John Deere and decide to vote though you normally don't bother. That's what I take from Pete's arg. Meaning, drive more turnout among red hats? I think that would be offset by an increase in turnout against Trump, maybe even more than. In any event, Pete is implying that Trump is talking crazy instead of talking about his record because his record would dampen turnout among red hats, I guess, once they realize that how badly they're being ****ed by Trump's 1%. That's different from him saying he's talking crazy to goose red hat turnout. Same presumed result, perhaps, but different idea he's putting across. Maybe it all comes down to Pete merely signaling to his own base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted Friday at 06:55 PM Share Posted Friday at 06:55 PM 9 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: Engender more fear, drive more turnout. Maybe you are just as racist as Trump but immigration really isn't that big an issue for you in Springfield SomeotherState. because your town is still snow white. If Trump succeeds in getting a media conversation going that makes you think that your town could be next for 20K people you don't like the look of, you just might get off your John Deere and decide to vote though you normally don't bother. That's what I take from Pete's arg. Funny thing about the change in the dynamic of the race. The fear of Trump winning had a lot of institutions acting like they had to contend with him so they were tempering their behavior with him. Harris in and Biden out appears to have changed that dynamic a lot. People no longer expect and dread the inevitable Trump win. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motor City Sonics Posted Friday at 06:59 PM Share Posted Friday at 06:59 PM 4 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said: He wants to deport Haitians to Venezuela. Plus........why the hell is he in California? that would be like Harris campaigning in Utah. Go ahead - waste the resources (unless he's got another court case there) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted Friday at 07:03 PM Share Posted Friday at 07:03 PM 3 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said: Plus........why the hell is he in California? that would be like Harris campaigning in Utah. Go ahead - waste the resources (unless he's got another court case there) IIRC, GOP still has some House seats in CA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted Friday at 07:08 PM Share Posted Friday at 07:08 PM (edited) 14 minutes ago, chasfh said: Meaning, drive more turnout among red hats? I think that would be offset by an increase in turnout against Trump, maybe even more than. I think this is probably true, but I'm not sure Trump believes it. I think the default assumption by both sides in this election is that the other side is already fully committed. It may not be true on either side. And that is also exactly where polling is pretty useless. Those are the things the pollsters can only guess about until this election is in the can and they can adjust weightings from another real result. Edited Friday at 07:08 PM by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motor City Sonics Posted Friday at 07:12 PM Share Posted Friday at 07:12 PM 8 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: IIRC, GOP still has some House seats in CA. He ain't helping Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.