Pete Buttigieg Surges in Latest Iowa Poll

Politico and USA Today have stories on the latest Iowa poll which has Pete Buttigieg now in third place:

A new Iowa survey of the 2020 Democratic presidential contest shows Pete Buttigieg surging in the first-in-the-nation caucus state, locked in a three-way race with frontrunners Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren.

The current standings:

  • Biden: 18%
  • Warren 17%
  • Buttigieg 13%


From USA Today:

Those standings reflect significant changes since the Suffolk/USA TODAY poll taken in Iowa at the end of June, when Biden led Warren by double digits and Buttigieg trailed at a distant 6%. California Sen. Kamala Harris, who was then in second place after a strong showing in the first Democratic debate, has plummeted 13 percentage points and is now in a three-way tie for sixth. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders earned 9% support, the same number as in the June poll.

I'm not sure this means much since Iowa's primary is still months away. Still, it's good to see someone under 70 make it into the top tier. I'm also glad Ms. Prosecutor (Kamala Harris) is "plummeting".

< Trump Insists He Captured ISIS | Monday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Mayor Pete accepted campaign staff recommendations (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by hilts on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 02:52:45 PM EST
    from Mark Zuckerberg


    Given all of Facebook's misdeeds, accepting any advice from Mark Zuckerberg should be an automatic disqualification for a presidential candidate.

    Climbing in the polls (none / 0) (#6)
    by KeysDan on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 04:12:26 PM EST
    will bring additional scrutiny.  While Buttigieg has the right to hire any qualified person that fits the campaign needs, it seems to have been less than good judgment in this instance given the toxicity of Zuckerberg. And, an opponent, Senator Warren's, analysis of FB.

    The campaign spokesperson, Lis Smith, did not help matters by brushing off criticism based on sincere concerns by those who may be Buttigieg supporters, or are still open to a candidate.

    I do not agree that the hiring of staff based on Zuckerbeg's recommendation is automatically disqualifying.  However, the Buttigieg campaign needs to be more cautious.

    The need for the Campaign to cancel a fundraiser to be co-hosted by the former Chicago City Attorney, Steve Patton, who tried to block release of the dashboard video of Laquan McDonald's killing, should be a further warning.

    Mayor Pete's debate attack on Senator Warren over Medicare For All, apparently, helped to move him up in the Iowa polls.  And, with that comes the responsibility to not only find fault with other's plans, but also, to flesh out his own Medicare For all, who want it.


    Facebook (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by jmacWA on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 06:02:06 AM EST
    and all social media are a big reason we are where we are today - IMO.  Social Media have been co-opted by a group that wants to control the minds of the majority.  The internet and marketing science make it possible.  I don't see how we get rid of it, so unfortunately social media is here to stay.  Mayor Pete is young, he has not really lived (as an adult) in a time when social media and the internet have not been widespread.  I can cut him some slack on that, and hopefully he will be vigilant and watch these campaign aides to ensure they are not just Zuckerberg's tools.  

    Medicare for those who want it??? (5.00 / 4) (#60)
    by MO Blue on Sat Oct 26, 2019 at 03:47:23 PM EST
    Seems very reminiscent of "if you like your insurance, you can keep it" and IIRC we went down the Public Option meme before. How did that work out the last time around? The last version being considered by the House was designed to fail due to the extremely limited size of the insurance pool and the adverse selection aspects of the plan. Even that was much change to pass.

    I, also, find the argument of "How are you going to get a "Medicare For All" plan passed in the Senate if McConnell still controls the Senate, more than  a little disingenuous. Somehow McConnell is going to pass a more moderate DEMOCRATIC plan? Give me a break. Please remind me how many Senate Republicans voted for the Affordable Care Act.


    A lot of angst (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by CST on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 03:56:50 PM EST
    About whether or not Pete is a modern or a progressive and whether he's too cozy with big donors or not.

    IMO none of that matters to me, what matters to me is that as a mayor of a small city he is totally unqualified for the job and the fact that he doesn't realize that requires a level of hubris that I'm just not cool with.

    Oops (none / 0) (#3)
    by CST on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 03:57:08 PM EST
    Moderate not modern

    Mebbe, mebbe not (none / 0) (#4)
    by MKS on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 03:58:58 PM EST
    Being a "Modern" sounded like a good thing, and different.

    Modern definitely works too (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by CST on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 04:19:22 PM EST
    I get that young and good looking are not bad traits in a candidate.

    But if those are the criteria I can think of some Senators and former cabinet members who fit the bill a lot better than Pete.  People with real resumes.


    I do agree (none / 0) (#5)
    by MKS on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 04:00:49 PM EST
    about Mayor Pete. Very talented.  

    But too, too young imo.  Armando thinks he is an empty suit.


    I would disagree (none / 0) (#8)
    by KeysDan on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 04:32:55 PM EST
    with Armando.  I believe he  fills out a suit, at least when he is not in shirt sleeves. And, it may be an audacious campaign, but so was that of Senator Obama. Indeed, I recall Armando arguing at that time, when contrasting candidacies, that experience did not matter.

    As I commented in the debate thread, Mayor Pete's confrontational pivot diminished his well-earned observation as being calm, steady, and thoughtful. He had shown an ability to say the right thing, in the right manner.  Attributes of appeal and of contrast to Trump. Apparently, I was off-base on this since his forced aggressiveness found favor among some Iowa Democrats.

    But this could be short-lived, If his plan is to be the young Hickenlooper, his fate may go the way of the old one.


    Armando (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 05:30:07 PM EST
    ... the sum total of Abraham Lincoln's experience in political office was a single two-year term served as an Illinois congressman a dozen years prior (1847-48). Just sayin'.

    In many cases, whether or not a presidency is ultimately successful rests not upon political experience, but by the often intangible personal qualities which a candidate brings to the table, such as sound analytical skills and good judgment.

    Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon were both top-flight politicians with sterling resumes, yet their years of experience didn't preclude either of them from presiding over what are arguably the two biggest disasters in 20th century American history, the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal.

    My concerns about Pete Buttigieg have nothing to do with his political experience, or lack thereof. Rather, it's my growing impression that there's really nothing which differentiates him from his fellow moderate Democratic incrementalists, Reps. Tim Ryan and Seth Moulton, other than the fact that he's gay and they're not. (Let's remember that earlier this year, Ryan and Moulton both wanted to ditch Nancy Pelosi as House Democratic leader and Speaker. Thank heavens they failed.)

    In that regard, despite his initially strong and relatively impressive start, Buttigieg has since tapered off markedly to become just another run-of-the-mill white moderate pol, and that's disappointed me. This time around, I'm looking for leadership that's bold and pro-active, not passive-aggressive.



    Been a big booster (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 06:21:39 PM EST
    But my loathing for Zukerberg is very very great.

    Yeah, (none / 0) (#14)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 07:39:54 PM EST
    the mayor of a small city is an issue with me.

    No offense to Pete (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 05:24:51 PM EST
    But I think he is "surging" because the field is weak.

    (Hillary come and save us !!)

    And speaking of Hillary Clinton, ... (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 07:37:53 PM EST
    ... stories about her emails while serving as Secretary of State repeatedly plastered the front pages of the New York Times for the better part of the 2016 campaign. But where did that paper place Friday's story about the final investigative report which basically cleared everyone of wrongdoing? On page 16, of course.

    Another reminder that it's never too late to cancel your subscription.


    Truly (none / 0) (#15)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 07:41:57 PM EST
    it really is a weak field. And I hate to say that. I keep waiting for someone to rise but none so far. The fact that Biden is polling on top says a lot to me.

    Amy seems to be (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 08:35:19 PM EST
    Staying alive and in it.  I still think of the bunch she would be the best candidate.

    Yes, I agree that Klobouchar would be (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 08:59:40 PM EST
    "the best candidate." Which I keep reminding myself is not the same as "the person I would most like to see become President."

    Peter what do you make of this (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 09:14:02 PM EST
    What they're saying: Brian Benczkowski, the head of the Justice Department's Criminal Division, and other top Justice Department officials met with Giuliani before the pair was charged to discuss a fraud case "in which he and other attorneys were representing the defendants," per the Times.

    "When Mr. Benczkowski and fraud section lawyers met with Mr. Giuliani, they were not aware of any investigation of Mr. Giuliani's associates in the Southern District of New York and would not have met with him had they known."
    -- Carr's statement to the NYT

    There has been a lot of shade thrown at this.  As in how could they possibly not know.  He was only the head of the criminal justice division.

    But I wonder.  I wonder if the SDNY was keeping it from Barr and they really did not know.

    Ive seen speculation that they think the guys were headed out with one way tickets because they were givin a heads up by Rudy.


    Rudy (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 09:16:19 PM EST
    Who was himself given a heads up by DOJ buddies.

    I wonder what else they are not telling Barr.


    Also noted as strange about that (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 21, 2019 at 09:30:22 PM EST
    Is that his associates being under investigation should not prevent a meeting by itself.  But only if he was under investigation himself.  So this is an implicit admission Rudy is under investigation himself.

    This should be in the open sorry


    I do agree that in a case with such a (none / 0) (#33)
    by Peter G on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 02:33:12 PM EST
    high potential for national attention and a connection to a high-level quasi-public official, normal protocol would be for the SDNY (or any other local USAO) to advise Main Justice, either the Asst AG for the Crim Div, or one of his/her top deputies in the appropriate section (subdivision) (e.g., public integrity, national security, organized crime, narcotics, or whatever). In the case of close associates of a close friend or associate of the President, the advisement might even go the AG himself. Whether as a result they would freeze that person (i.e., Giuliani) out of interacting with Main Justice in his private capacity as an atty, I couldn't say, having never been a high-ranking DoJ mahoff nor familiar with any equivalent case in the past.

    Politico playbook (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 07:10:21 AM EST
    "Another Obama administration official who weighed a campaign at the start of the year, former Attorney General Eric Holder, is considering a last-minute entry but has conceded it may be too late, according to a Democrat familiar with his thinking. [Sen. Sherrod] Brown, who nearly entered the race earlier this year, said the pressure on him to reconsider from labor leaders, Democratic officials and donors has `become more frequent.'

    Ooooo Gonna get flamed (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 10:32:31 AM EST
    I think Eric Holder could blow the whole thing up.

    You want a prosecutor?

    I would donate.


    I wouldn't (none / 0) (#24)
    by CST on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 10:35:47 AM EST
    Isn't 20 enough?

    I get that a lot of people don't love the front runners but the problem is not a lack of viable alternatives, the problem is a lot of people DO like the front runners so they're sucking up all the oxygen from everyone else.  Eric Holder would be the third prosecutor in the race.  Hard to see how that changes anything.


    He's a black man (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 10:38:02 AM EST
    Who brings the mythical "Obama Coalition" with him.

    I don't actually think he will do it.

    But IMFHO he should


    One word (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 10:46:08 AM EST

    Well (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 12:36:05 PM EST
    if a black man can deliver the "Obama Coalition" then Booker should be doing better. I don't think Holder would get very far.

    The truth is there is no Obama Coalition IMO. It's more or less people that voted for Obama but will abandon the party in a heartbeat and that's not what I would define as a coalition. A coalition is formed around policies and issues not a person or personality like the FDR coalition that lasted for decades long after FDR had passed away.


    I did not actually mean (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 02:47:17 PM EST
    "A black man" could do this.  The truth is Holder can run as Obama's right hand man as Biden has been trying to do but never will.  And Booker never could.

    Please, Bloomberg?  Yeah, let's run another NY billionaire.  Hillary, I can't tell if you are joking.

    IMO Holder is in a singular position.


    The (none / 0) (#35)
    by FlJoe on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 03:04:03 PM EST
    problem with Holder is his recent baggage as AG.

    We will hear the words fast and furious a million. times.

    He was cited for contempt of congress. No matter what Barr has done/will do Holder will always be worse.

    The media will of course play along of course.


    Sure (none / 0) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 03:10:10 PM EST
    But if this was the rule Obama would never have been the nominee.

    Fast and furious
    Hunter Biden

    It will be "something" no matter who it is.   They have a half billion bucks.

    We need to think about motivating our people.  If he ran, which he probably will not, I think Holder might do this in a way no current candidates can.


    I'm gonna (none / 0) (#38)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 07:54:21 PM EST
    agree with Howdy on this. Baggage is something everybody has and if they don't the GOP will make something up. Holder I don't think has ever run for office and that would be a great weakness.

    And one more thing (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 10:41:17 AM EST
    I have been thinking for MONTHS none of these people can beat Trump.

    Of the top 4
    Are you serious?

    Ok, if Trump continues to set himself on fire, maybe.  But FYI they have raised almost a half billion dollars to help.  And it's 13 months till the election.


    I agree that the top 4 (none / 0) (#28)
    by CST on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 11:00:05 AM EST
    Are not necessarily the most "electable" but the rest of the field has been making that case for months and it's not working.  I don't see Holder bringing anything new to the table.

    I'm an on the record Amy fan (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 11:01:25 AM EST
    I do not think Amy will make it.



    They definitely (none / 0) (#31)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 12:38:58 PM EST
    all have issues. Warren has decided to unilaterally disarm for the GE. Biden has a mind that is slipping. Maybe you could argue for Pete. I don't know. And Bernie is in no shape to go up against Trump. Bernie makes Trump look like a spring chicken and that's the last thing we need to be running is an elderly cardiac patient.

    Yes, all of the Democratic (none / 0) (#32)
    by KeysDan on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 01:26:52 PM EST
    contenders have issues, and discernment among these candidates and their issues is the purpose and product of the primary process. While a way off until the first primary election/caucus, the large field of candidates has winnowed. It does not seem, to me, that those who have left the race have been a tragic electoral loss.

    The idea of some savior entering the race at this point, such as Michael Bloomberg, does not seem realistic.  More like I didn't get my top choice, or those that have bubbled to the top are too....liberal or too.. something not to my liking.

    The leg up Hillary would bring to a late entry may make for a viable candidacy in the primary, but that would bring its own set of issues. It was interesting to note that the viewers of the Colbert Show surpassed the combined viewership of all competing late night hosts (e.g., Kimmel and Fallon), when Secretary Clinton and Chelsea were guests.

    I remain optimistic that Biden or Warren can beat Trump.  Although each does have issues.  The concerns I have are more the trickery and deceit of Trump, Republicans,and Russians. If that is not enough, I fear Bernie supporters taking their marbles and going home.  Not "rigged" this time as an excuse, but probably hard to get their heads around the fact that the fates of health have interceded.


    Maybe someone (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 22, 2019 at 07:53:18 PM EST
    will break out of the pack. I have honestly felt the same way during or before primaries in the past but then a candidate "hooks" me during a debate or some other event.

    Hillary could run circles around this group of candidates but she's not running. And then there's the press. The press will do everything in their power to defeat her if she decided to run. Even just her talking on a podcast about Russian interference made the usual suspects rush to defend a possible Russian asset. Do these people ever think before writing or do they just knee jerk because Hillary said it. I do like this no F's to give Hillary though.

    I am more optimistic about Warren being able to beat Trump than Biden. Biden seems to have these senior moments but maybe against Trump that wouldn't matter but it might matter if Pence is the one running because while greasy slick evangelispeak is his thing he does not seem to have a mind that slips. Warren's mind is sharp but I'm not sure she's gonna be able to make the foreign policy case to the voters or maybe it won't matter about that running against the GOP. If Pence is the nominee a woman candidate would be a great contrast to him and his gross views on women.


    Amy is really trying (none / 0) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 23, 2019 at 08:58:56 AM EST
    She's doing interviews everywhere.  Clearly she think this new questioning is a possible opening for her.

    I hope so.  The more I hear her the more I think she would be a very good candidate.


    I want AL FRANKEN! (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Oct 23, 2019 at 10:28:17 AM EST
    The only true statesmen of the lot of them.

    Oh, lord no. (none / 0) (#43)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 23, 2019 at 06:27:41 PM EST
    Woman number 9 just came forward a few weeks ago. It would be a parade of women telling their stories.

    Yeah, (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 23, 2019 at 06:29:25 PM EST
    she does seem to see an opening. I guess it will either materialize or not for her.

    The interesting thing is the NYT screwing up yet another Hillary story showed exactly who knows how to handle nonsense press stories and who doesn't. Amy appeared to handle it well.


    I hope you are not (none / 0) (#41)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Oct 23, 2019 at 10:40:40 AM EST
    advocating for HRC to run. She was an absolutely horrible candidate. And she is, like or not, extremely divisive. I don't understand the absolute hatred of her, but it's there. She is THE reason many voted for orange jesus. I've talked to people that are not orange jesus supporters. Don't particularly like him, but they just would not vote for Clinton.

    No (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 23, 2019 at 06:26:07 PM EST
    I said she is not running but she would run circles around this bunch. Those ones that voted for Cheeto would not vote for any woman. Just wait and they'll tell you the same thing about Warren or Amy or any other female candidate. I really don't care about those voters and what their opinions are. Everything she said has come to pass and she was right about everything when it came to Trump. The whole horrible candidate thing was a press narrative not anything based in reality just like the whole email stuff was a nothingburger that the press made into something. The press will never let her be president and she knows it. They will repeat the lie and that she is a terrible candidate over and over until people believe it. Look no further than how Bernie is treated in 2016 versus now for more evidence of all that. He's treated like he's a socialist loser now when in 2016 he treated like some honest broker of all things.

    My horrible candidate comment (none / 0) (#45)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Oct 23, 2019 at 06:58:18 PM EST
    was from my own observations. Not the media. Same with with voters. These were not no woman no how people. There is just a visceral dislike of HRC.

    You don't (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 23, 2019 at 07:05:30 PM EST
    think the media had any influence on their opinions? I talked to too many people who repeated emails or some other media regurgitated talking point.

    Of course it did (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 24, 2019 at 06:19:18 AM EST
    Hillary was right that Trump is Putin's puppet and she was right about many other things including the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

    Hillary was a long term project of the right because they, rightly, feared her.  It was sadly made easier for them because she was a she.

    We were wrong to not see more clearly how much she was hated.  Because she was.  

    They can throw the kitchen sink at Biden and they will never be able to vilify him the way they did her.  

    They may make him look feckless and clueless but sadly and ironically that is far less threatening than a smart qualified fierce woman.

    Now, Warren, that's more slippery.  I think Warren could win.  But see above.

    Unfortunately that's how I see it.


    Not a Biden endorsement (none / 0) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 24, 2019 at 07:00:13 AM EST
    To be clear.

    On that subject (none / 0) (#49)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 24, 2019 at 12:29:56 PM EST
    I have recently heard ..... things.  About Warren from people who I had seen as smart and progressive.  Things like,

    I don't trust her.  (That one really made me cringe)

    I don't like her voice.

    She is too "professorial" or she makes me feel like I'm in class  or one of a few other describes transferred from the Obama era.

    When this happens I usually try to push back but I get the feeling I'm speaking to pure unfiltered id.

    I find this worrying but no idea what to do about it.


    Well, there are (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by KeysDan on Thu Oct 24, 2019 at 01:01:24 PM EST
    still a few that can be taken from the old Hillary playbook.  She is over-prepared. She is shrill.  The pizza parlor one may not fit, but surely there are more from Republican talking points that such progressives can latch onto.  I am wondering it the real issue is that Elizabeth does not have a penIs.

    Oh and (none / 0) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 24, 2019 at 12:30:57 PM EST
    Every time I see her I want cross my legs.  

    Yep (none / 0) (#52)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 24, 2019 at 07:20:13 PM EST
    ironically the same people who didn't push back against the misogyny with Hillary seem flummoxed at some of the problems Warren has in the same area. Warren is the "hectoring school marm". You and I knew it was coming. If misogyny worked in 2016 which it did it's no surprise that many people are going back to drink at the very same well. So far I haven't seen it directed at Kamala or Amy but should one of them rise to the top in the pools I expect the same to happen.

    On that account (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 24, 2019 at 07:24:22 PM EST
    what is wrong with America? I mean every other nation even Muslim nations have had women leaders. The only thing I can think of is fundamentalist Christianity.

    I just love this phrase (none / 0) (#53)
    by MKS on Thu Oct 24, 2019 at 07:23:44 PM EST
    "greasy slick evangelispeak."

    Too many (none / 0) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 24, 2019 at 07:28:30 PM EST
    years of living in the south I guess. I have been dealing with these people my entire life.

    The difference between meeting (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Oct 25, 2019 at 09:08:26 AM EST
    a person in PA vs a person in GA. GA: "Where do y'all go to church?" PA: "What school district do you live in?"



    Almost (none / 0) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 25, 2019 at 09:58:57 AM EST
    a lot of GA it is questions about church first but in metro Atlanta it is where do you work first and then questions about where you attend church 2nd. :)

    New yesterday (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 25, 2019 at 08:25:24 AM EST

    Buttigieg jumps to second in Iowa State University/Civiqs poll

    The lead that headline buries is Biden in 4th

    If Biden (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 25, 2019 at 10:01:13 AM EST
    ends up being 4th in Iowa I would say he is probably done. Sanders being 3rd would mean he is done. Looking at polling I don't see how Sanders is viable after NH. He's down in polling in both IA and NH and then when it turns south he has no voting base. Of course, he will stay in even if he keeps losing and will be screaming about how the primary was rigged against him.