Connect with us

Politics

A Bearded Pete Buttigieg Drops Into Iowa for a Pitch to Veterans

Published

on

A Bearded Pete Buttigieg Drops Into Iowa for a Pitch to Veterans

He has a new, carefully groomed beard. He bantered with bros for hours on an irreverent comedy podcast. And on Tuesday, he criticized the Trump administration through an appeal to patriotism in a state early on the presidential nominating calendar.

Pete Buttigieg is inching back into the Democrats’ spotlight this spring with a series of appearances that have prompted speculation about how one of the party’s most evidently ambitious politicians might spend the lead-up to 2028.

With Democrats still searching for a direction and a standard-bearer after November’s loss to President Trump, supporters of Mr. Buttigieg, a smooth-talking former mayor from Indiana who served as the transportation secretary in the Biden administration, hope he might take up that mantle.

Without ever uttering Mr. Trump’s name, Mr. Buttigieg, in front of a veteran-heavy crowd of more than 1,600 in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, assailed the president’s efforts to cut the Department of Veterans Affairs and his broader handling of the country. He implored attendees to exert “peaceful but energetic” pressure on their representatives to block cuts to federal agencies and tax breaks for the wealthy. And he expressed optimism that people would resist Mr. Trump and restore faith in democracy.

“There is a parade of horribles emanating from this White House,” said Mr. Buttigieg, 43. But, he added, “the American people bow to no king.”

Advertisement

Mr. Buttigieg’s town hall in Iowa, sponsored by VoteVets, a progressive veterans group, was his most notable involvement yet in the Democratic shadow primary race, with prominent governors and members of Congress competing for attention as they weigh 2028 presidential bids.

They have been busy: Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, the party’s 2024 vice-presidential nominee, held a town hall in Iowa in March and plans to attend state party conventions this month in California and South Carolina, which is expected to host an early primary. Gov. JB Pritzker of Illinois ramped up 2028 speculation with a fiery speech last month in New Hampshire, another state traditionally at the front of the primary calendar. Senator Ruben Gallego of Arizona held an event last week in Pennsylvania, a top battleground state.

And Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, who has been less obvious about 2028 signaling but is seen as a possible contender, has been traveling the country alongside Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont to rally supporters against the influence of big money in politics.

VoteVets is an ally of Mr. Buttigieg, a former Naval intelligence officer who deployed to Afghanistan, but the group is also close with other potential 2028 contenders with military experience, including Mr. Walz and Mr. Gallego.

Mr. Buttigieg, for his part, has shown particular interest in how Democrats can win back the overlapping mix of working-class voters, men and disenchanted Americans who gravitated to Mr. Trump’s vision of upending the establishment last November.

Advertisement

At the town hall in Iowa, he offered no hints as to his ultimate political aspirations, though he did remind attendees of his past success in the Hawkeye State.

During one previous trip, “I was sort of winning the Iowa caucus,” he said casually, scratching his head as though reluctant to brag. “Run again!” someone yelled from the crowd. Mr. Buttigieg just chuckled.

Whether Mr. Buttigieg can successfully reach beyond the highly engaged voters who tune into MSNBC and read traditional news — the people who would attend a midweek political event in a non-election year — could determine whether he stands out in what is expected to be a crowded primary field.

Mr. Buttigieg has been explicit about his goal of reaching the apolitical voters who have said they feel the Democratic Party has become too focused on elites. Fielding questions from attendees on Tuesday about how the party could regain voters’ trust, he suggested it needed to have “some tough conversations.”

Democrats, Mr. Buttigieg said, must devise more proactive policy plans, rather than just defining themselves in opposition to Mr. Trump. And the party needed to “connect everything we believe, everything we say, everything we do, to everyday life,” he said.

Advertisement

Mr. Buttigieg also acknowledged his party had done a poor job last year by insisting that the economy was doing well by traditional metrics even as voters were consistently expressing financial frustration, comparing it to minimizing the angst of an angry spouse. “How does that go over?” he asked.

Speaking with reporters after the event, Mr. Buttigieg was less definitive about whether Democrats had erred in supporting President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in the re-election bid that he ultimately abandoned over concerns about his age.

Asked whether he had seen Mr. Biden experience cognitive decline last year — something Mr. Biden has pushed back against in recent interviews — Mr. Buttigieg did not answer directly. He did say that when he and Mr. Biden dealt with a bridge collapse in Baltimore last spring, “the same president that the world saw addressing that was the president that I was in the Oval with.”

Would the party have been better off if Mr. Biden had not run for re-election?

“Maybe,” Mr. Buttigieg allowed. “Right now, with the benefit of hindsight, I think most people would agree that that’s the case.”

Advertisement

Zach Wahls, a Democratic state senator in Iowa who is considering a run for U.S. Senate, said Mr. Buttigieg was “trying to meet voters where they are, and I think that is one of the most important things for the Democratic Party to do going forward.”

“His ability to communicate in an authentic, in-depth way is what really gets through to people who may not otherwise be superpolitical or who are frustrated with both parties,” Mr. Wahls added.

That was a sentiment echoed by attendees on Tuesday, who said they appreciated Mr. Buttigieg’s straightforward way of speaking.

“He doesn’t talk that political speech,” said Chris Bzdill, 55, of Cedar Rapids. “He understands that not everybody may agree with his view, but he’s going to give people an idea of where he stands. He’s not going to sit on the fence.”

The Iowa Republican Party had a different perspective on Mr. Buttigieg’s event. In a statement, it said Mr. Trump was improving access to health care for veterans while cutting wasteful spending at the Department of Veterans Affairs, and offered a contrasting take on Democrats from local veterans themselves.

Advertisement

“Mayor Buttigieg and Democrats want to rewrite history, but veterans across Iowa know the truth: President Trump put them first,” Wayne Kreutner, an Air Force veteran in the Cedar Rapids area, said in the statement. “Joe Biden and the Democrats put politics first.”

Mr. Buttigieg first burst onto the national scene in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary as the little-known mayor of South Bend, Ind., population 100,000. He quickly gained acclaim for his sharp debate lines and cogent communication skills, but ultimately faded as Mr. Biden consolidated his support.

Lately, Mr. Buttigieg has been more visible, addressing college students at the University of California, Santa Barbara; getting laughs with Stephen Colbert on his late-night show; and appearing on the “Flagrant” comedy podcast, which bills itself as delivering “unruly hot takes” and opposing political correctness.

Mr. Buttigieg, who now lives in Michigan with his husband and two children, was considered a contender for the open Senate and governor races there, but he bowed out of both contests in March, fueling more speculation about a presidential run.

Mr. Wahls, a friend of Mr. Buttigieg’s who attended the town hall, said before the event that he was eager to see Mr. Buttigieg’s new beard in person. “Beard looks good!” he wrote in a text.

Advertisement

But did he think it could be some sort of careful political calculation, planned to better appeal to the everyman voter? “I don’t know,” Mr. Wahls replied. “Every man’s relationship with his facial hair is a little different; I won’t speculate.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Video: The Efforts to Erase Black History

Published

on

Video: The Efforts to Erase Black History

President Trump’s executive orders have sought to reframe the history of race and culture in America. Erica L. Green, a White House correspondent for The New York Times, describes how the orders have led to the erasing of history of the Black experience.

Continue Reading

Politics

Judge Boasberg orders Rubio to refer Trump officials' Signal messages to DOJ to ensure preservation

Published

on

Judge Boasberg orders Rubio to refer Trump officials' Signal messages to DOJ to ensure preservation

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A federal judge on Friday ordered Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is also serving as the acting archivist, to collect any Signal messages belonging to top Trump officials that could be at risk of deletion and to refer those messages to the Department of Justice for further review.

Judge James Boasberg said his hands were tied beyond that and that he could not do anything about Signal messages that had already been deleted.

Boasberg’s order came in response to a watchdog group suing five of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet members, including Rubio, after the Atlantic published a story revealing their Signal chat discussing imminent plans to conduct airstrikes against the Houthis in Yemen.

Boasberg, who has become one of Trump’s top judicial nemeses because of his rulings in an unrelated immigration case, said the court record shows that the five Trump officials “have thus far neglected to fulfill their duties” under the Federal Records Act.

Advertisement

JUDGE IN CROSSHAIRS OF TRUMP DEPORTATION CASE ORDERS PRESERVATION OF SIGNAL MESSAGES

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced new policies surrounding visas. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

The judge said American Oversight, the left-leaning watchdog that brought the lawsuit, made a strong case that the Cabinet officials have used Signal, an encrypted messaging app, to communicate for work purposes and that they have allowed the messages to auto-delete, likely rendering them permanently lost.

But in the context of the Federal Records Act, Boasberg said he had limited options to address American Oversight’s allegations aside from demanding that Rubio ask Attorney General Pam Bondi to ensure compliance with the law for existing Signal messages that were at risk of deletion.

Chioma Chukwu, executive director of American Oversight, indicated in a statement that the group’s lawsuit was over for now but that it was “fully prepared” to sue again if it found the Trump administration failed to comply with Boabsberg’s order.

Advertisement

JUDGE TELLS GOVERNMENT WATCHDOGS FIRED BY TRUMP THERE’S NOT MUCH SHE CAN DO FOR THEM

Hegseth and Signal app

“It should never have required court intervention to compel the acting Archivist and other agency heads to perform their basic legal duties, let alone to refer the matter to the Attorney General for enforcement,” Chukwu said.

The explosive Signal incident involved Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and others communicating about their attack plans in a chat group after then-National Security Adviser Mike Waltz apparently accidentally added an Atlantic journalist to the chat.

 

The Trump administration denied wrongdoing and insisted the communication was not “classified.” Bondi dodged a question during a press conference about investigating the incident and instead doubled down on the White House’s claims that the chat was merely “sensitive” and not “classified.”

The Pentagon inspector general launched an investigation into the incident in April in response to a bipartisan request from the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

Supreme Court joins Trump and GOP in targeting California's emission standards

Published

on

Supreme Court joins Trump and GOP in targeting California's emission standards

The Supreme Court on Friday joined President Trump and congressional Republicans in siding with the oil and gas industry in its challenge to California’s drive for electric vehicles.

In a 7-2 decision, the justices revived the industry’s lawsuit and ruled that fuel makers had standing to sue over California’s strict emissions standards.

The suit argued that California and the Environmental Protection Agency under President Biden were abusing their power by relying on the 1970s-era rule for fighting smog as a means of combating climate change in the 21st century.

California’s new emissions standards “did not target a local California air-quality problem — as they say is required by the Clean Air Act — but instead were designed to address global climate change,” Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote, using italics to described the industry’s position.

The court did not rule on the suit itself but he said the fuel makers had standing to sue because they would be injured by the state’s rule.

Advertisement

“The fuel producers make money by selling fuel. Therefore, the decrease in purchases of gasoline and other liquid fuels resulting from the California regulations hurts their bottom line,” Kavanaugh said.

Only Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson disagreed.

Jackson questioned why the court would “revive a fuel-industry lawsuit that all agree will soon be moot (and is largely moot already). … This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this Court than ordinary citizens.”

But the outcome was overshadowed by the recent actions of Trump and congressional Republicans.

With Trump’s backing, the House and Senate adopted measures disapproving regulations adopted by the Biden administration that would have allowed California to enforce broad new regulations to require “zero emissions” cars and trucks.

Advertisement

Trump said the new rules adopted by Congress were designed to displace California as the nation’s leader in fighting air pollution and greenhouse gases.

In a bill-signing ceremony at the White House, he said the disapproval measures “will prevent California’s attempt to impose a nationwide electric vehicle mandate and to regulate national fuel economy by regulating carbon emissions.”

“Our Constitution does not allow one state special status to create standards that limit consumer choice and impose an electric vehicle mandate upon the entire nation,” he said.

In response to Friday’s decision, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said “the fight for fight for clean air is far from over. While we are disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision to allow this case to go forward in the lower court, we will continue to vigorously defend California’s authority under the Clean Air Act.”

Some environmentalists said the decision greenlights future lawsuits from industry and polluters.

Advertisement

“This is a dangerous precedent from a court hellbent on protecting corporate interests,” said David Pettit, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute. “This decision opens the door to more oil industry lawsuits attacking states’ ability to protect their residents and wildlife from climate change.”

Times staff writer Tony Briscoe, in Los Angeles, contributed to this report.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending