Pete Buttigieg. Really.

Buttigieg

He is a matter of curiosity and amazement. Who is this guy?

He is a rare talent with an improbable biography.  He is using it to get the priceless thing in a presidential campaign: public attention.

It is working.

By now readers know the essential elements of the "Mayor Pete" story. He is 37, a Harvard graduate, a Rhodes Scholar, he knows 7 languages, he is gay and married to a man, he is the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, he is running for president and he says that someone like him is exactly what the country needs right now.

I saw him up close for an hour at the Stonyfield Yogurt factory just outside Manchester, New Hampshire on Friday. If readers have seen him on TV they know some of what he says. 

The reality is that presidential candidates say the same things again and again. They are best understood as actors playing a role, reciting with faux spontaneity things they have said repeatedly. This becomes apparent the second or third time one sees a candidate. I cite this not as criticism of Buttigieg or any other of the candidates, but as a simple fact that they are constantly seeing different audiences, all of whom want to know essentially the same thing: who are you and how do you feel about the issues of the day. They don't have different answers to different audiences. 

In the moment of presentation they are actors reciting lines, but prior to this they were the executive producer, producer, and script writer. They are actors playing the role of themselves--or at least the most presentable, electable self they can create.

Mayor Pete does this, too. What is extraordinary about him, and which comes across both on TV and in person, is that he seems quite content with who he is. He is self possessed. He is OK. He is authentic. He has a back story to explain that. He used to be closeted, now he isn't, and it feels great, he says. He is married and loves his husband, and that feels great, too.

Mayor Pete's public presentation focuses on character and values, not policies. He talks about himself--which works in part because people are interested in this unusual guy. He talks about his faith--liberal Matthew 25 type Christianity. He talks about the values of freedom.

He does something which he has been writing about since back when he wrote editorials at the Harvard Crimson: the need for Democrats to communicate a narrative to underlie and justify their policies, a narrative based on values. Buttigieg communicates that his values are very traditional: hard work, a respectful son, patriotic duty, Christian faith, loyal and loving husband, community service. He calls these Midwestern Values. 

His method is to demonstrate that his policies are rooted in his values, the traditional values that are widely accepted by Democrats and Republicans, by old and young, by the religious and secular, by urban and rural. It is the current version of Obama's no-red-states-or-blue-states.

Example: Buttigieg supports universal health care, and roots that policy in his values. It is not a political value of wanting to smash capitalism or upset the political order. Instead, he says it is because of his faith which calls on him to respect others and because of his belief in freedom because Americans are not truly free to make choices about their lives unless they know that they can get medical care if they need it.  Faith and freedom are considered the bedrock values of conservatives, not secular urban coastal liberals.  

Buttigieg creates a say-what? dissonance. 

Somehow, he seems oddly conservative, made especially so since his manner and emotion are 180 degrees opposite from Bernie Sanders or Beto O'Rourke, even thought they have about the same policy prescription. Bernie and Beto project anger and outrage. The system is broken. There are crimes and corruption apparent and unchecked. Buttigieg speaks calmly, earnestly. No outrage.

Voters will make a choice.  Maybe Democrats have been driven by Trump to be a party that demands an angry tone, but Buttigieg says not to counter anger with anger, but to move beyond it. You counter it by making it irrelevant, not by fighting it. 

That is the theory.

Buttigieg would match up against Trump in a classic example of asymmetric conflict. Trump is Goliath, Mayor Pete is David. Goliath has a sword, David a sling. 

Shortly, the moment of truth. I expect Trump to try out an insulting name for Buttigieg. 

Maybe: "little gay boy." Or, "pup." Or "little show-off."  Or "nice little boy." Or "butt-boy."  

Whether Buttigieg is a legitimate candidate will depend on how he deals with that insult. If Buttigieg can stand up to Trump and make Trump look weak for the attack (the way Buttigieg parried the hecklers three days ago) then Buttigieg will have shown he can do something Pocahontas and Lyin' Ted and Little Marco and Low Energy Ted could not do. Win a shoving match with Trump.

Americans won't accept a Commander in Chief who can be pushed around by a schoolyard bully. I expect Trump to make his move within the next week, and we will get our answer. Either Mayor Pete is real, or he isn't.

Below, some clips, so readers can see him for themselves, as well as a glimpse of the venue.

Buttigieg on the role of mayor:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldmk71ykusI

Buttigied on Midwest values:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fa_7U-GI7ps

Buttigieg on political messaging, rooting policy in values:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hADpmNcrC90

Buttigieg on 21st Century defense:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWBDb1TvUWQ