Friday, July 26, 2019

Mayor Pete in Portland


Up close at a Portland fundraiser.


Pete Buttigieg can raise money.  He has a donor constituency.


He startled political observers with his fundraising, announcing shortly after the June 30 end to the second quarter that he had raised $24.8 million. He announced immediately after the quarter ended, and it set a standard. Everyone else raised less. 

That repositioned Pete Buttigieg in the credibility horse race of the campaign. It makes him "top tier," along with Biden, Sanders, Warren, and Harris. He doesn't poll as well, but he raises money better. 

Put it together, it makes him a contender.

I drove to Portland to watch how he does it, and participate. My wife and I each donated $500, getting the last two of the $500 tickets, the cheapest available when attempted to register.

I only learned about the event by happy accident. A local Democratic activist emailed me to ask if I were going to Portland for the Mayor Pete fundraiser. I said I had not heard about it. He forwarded the email invitation he had received, and I responded promptly. 

Early attendees.
The campaign apparently did not use public lists filed with the Federal Election Commission of donors to Jeff Merkley, Ron Wyden, or Kate Brown, where my name would have appeared as a donor. The invitation distribution was apparently hit-or-miss,--sent to friends of friends--but that appears to have been more than adequate, since the event location was filled to capacity. A bigger venue would have drawn more people.

As is now common practice in political fundraisers of statewide and national candidates, invitations to fundraising events tell one the city and time, but not the exact address, with the exact address coming only two days prior to the actual event. I presume this is intended to confound opposition protesters.

The event took place at a large beautiful home in Northwest Portland, with overlooking a view of the Willamette River. It was owned by a male attorney and his husband. I counted about 150 people in attendance. 

Attendees were urged to come dressed in "business casual attire" and to take a Lyft or Uber to the event, since street parking would be scarce. 
About 150 attendees

There was no media inside the event, but a camera crew from the Portland ABC affiliate, Channel 2, was outside the event, hoping to get some video comments from Buttigieg after the event. 

The email communication from the campaign was signed by people using the titles "West Coast Investment Director" and "Deputy West Coast Investment Director."  Pete Buttigieg, in  his opening remarks, thanked and introduced his "National Investment Director" and pointed to the man shown here, who appears to be no older than 30.  The torch is being passed to a new generation. 

I had never heard the term "investment director" used to describe a fundraiser, but that is the Buttigieg campaign usage.

Calling political donations "investments," seems very modern and Silicon Valley tech, to my ear, but I am 69 and am fading into irrelevancy.

It was a multi-tiered event, by which I mean that people like myself, who donated less than the maximum $2,800 per person, stood on the lovely lawn and visited with others while Buttigieg met privately with the maximum-donors inside the house. Typically people would have photos taken with the candidate, and I am guessing that happened. He was alone with them for about a half hour. 

National Fundraising Chief
Buttigieg came outside, spoke for fifteen minutes. He acknowledged Kate Brown, Oregon Governor, and Tobias Reed, Oregon State Treasurer, who were in attendance, along with a dozen or so other elected officials.

He spoke for about fifteen minutes and then answered exactly four questions, and then circulated with the crowd. Many people were using their video recorders to record his planned remarks. 

The homeowner-host asked people to stop recording during the question/answer portion. This request is unique in my experience, and I have watched about 35 different presidential candidates, Democrat and Republican, in two presidential cycles and in over a hundred events, and never have people been asked to stop recording for a Q & A, until now. 

By this point in the campaign candidates are ready to answer any question with deft self assurance. There are no surprise questions, and in any case there are certainly no surprise answers

Candidates answer the question they want to answer, picking up a word or two in any question, and responding to the subject area of that word. No matter how the question is phrased, if it mentions "health care," the candidate is ready with a response on his or her health care position. The word "veterans" elicits the prepared veteran policy. And so on. Candidates don't get tripped up. They don't answer spontaneous questions. They respond to key words. 

Audiences don't seem to notice or mind.

Post speech photos
Mayor Pete has a Portland support group up and running, the people who prepared the lawn signs and buttons that were available to pick up at the event.  The photo to the right is my wife Debra and me, each wearing such a button. A group leader told me the group attends Farmers Markets and other open air gatherings, to distribute signs and buttons and generally to show support for Buttigieg. 

Group members were very much in appearance in the audience at this gathering. I guess/presume that many members of the group identify as male and homosexual. 

Buttigieg spoke smoothly and with confidence. People who have seen him on TV had no surprises. He is calm. He seems reasonable. He seems emotionally mature. He speaks in complete sentences in a matter of fact manner. 

People in this crowd of prosperous professional people seemed very happy with him. The post event chatter was very positive.

The Medicare for All policy debate is currently dividing Democratic voters. Buttigieg reiterated his position: "Medicare for all who want it." He said he thought that taking private health insurance from people who were happy with their current situation would make this politically impossible. He said he thought it likely that over time health care delivery would trend toward Medicare for All, and "Medicare for those who want it" was a transition.

A question from the audience related to black Americans, so the question triggered Buttigieg's current response to the issue. 

We need to do more and better to address the concerns of black Americans, he said, in a tone that was earnest but unapologetic, acknowledging and owning a problem, but not acting defensive. The tone and manner are reminiscent of the Dukakis campaign, practical and technocratic rather than ideological. Government is supposed to do good, and problems are not a matter of moral blame so much as issues to be examined and fixed. Buttigieg is warmer and more empathetic than Dukakis, but there is some of the same businesslike, roll-up-ones-sleeves matter of factness to him.
Post speech greetings

His clothes express that. In Portland, as in New Hampshire, he is dressed in dark slacks, brown shoes, white shirt with sleeves rolled up, and a necktie. Mayors deal with real problems he said in his talk, and he is presenting himself as someone serious about solving them.

I could not count the number of people in the $2,800 room, but the outside crowd swelled when Buttigieg exited, from which I would guess there were 75 people who donated at that level and who had been inside, and another 75 who donated less, an average of $500. That would imply that the event raised perhaps $200,000.

A campaign staffer told he he is spending 20% of his time in Iowa, 20% in New Hampshire, meeting people in Town Halls, and that he is drawing big crowds. So far, his polling is less impressive than his fundraising, but the early indication is that Buttigieg's campaign will not falter because of lack of money.

He has a donor base.





CLICK: Two minute video clip

10 comments:

Jeanne Chouard said...

Thank you for giving us a window of what these big donor fundraisers are like. Mayor Pete seems like a nice guy without a clear platform. Big donors may feel very comfortable with him, but it doesn’t seem like he has the platform or charisma to spark enthusiastic grass roots support—once the big donors max out on donations, who will support him? For Democrats who don’t want another four years of Trump and aren’t comfortable with real progress forward, he may be attractive and a better choice than Biden.

Art Baden said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Art Baden said...

I happen to have just spent a week in semi-rural Michigan. Lots of Trump signs. One read: “TRUMP 2020 STOP THE BULLSHIT.” Got me thinking that the “woke-left” focus on identity politics, legalizing psilocybin, abolishing ICE, reparations etc, may all be worthy goals but aren’t going to win back middle class voters in the states we need - MI, WI, PA, OH, MN.

The woke left’s approach to Presidential politics reminds me of playing Scrabble with someone who focuses on putting the longest word on the board, but pays no attention to the double and triple word and letter squares. They may have the best vocabulary, but aren’t paying attention to the rules of the game. To paraphrase James Carville: “It’s the electoral college, stupid.”

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Cha-ching.
Technocratic: how's that hopey changy thing working out for ya?

Passionate Morgen said...

This is exactly the kind of reporting and commentary I enjoy see from Mr. Sage; seems grounded in reality!

Ed Cooper said...

Should he gain the nomination, I will support him wholeheartedly. But I would much rather he were running for a Senate seat, and saving his presidential ambitions for a few years down the road.

Anonymous said...

Re: no Q&A recording

Thanks for an excellent write-up.

Recall what happened during Romney's 2012 campaign:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2013/03/04/why-mitt-romneys-47-percent-comment-was-so-bad/

Roy Scarbrough said...

Good post, but I hope I don't have to vote for a guy with no legislative voting record for me to look at we. Mayor of city in Indiana? Give me a break.