The Case for Pete Buttigieg
This piece was scheduled to be published as part of NPR’s Boston affiliate’s (WBUR) Cognoscenti series called “The Case for the Candidates” on Monday, March 3, 2020. Pete Buttigieg suspended his campaign on the evening of Sunday, March 2, but I decided it was worth sharing my thoughts for those who may be interested.
The Case for Pete Buttigieg
by Robert C. Bordone
Pete Buttigieg shouldn’t be my first choice for the Democratic nomination. According to the Washington Post’s “issues quiz,” he should be my third. Pete nonetheless earned my vote, because policy positions are only part of my decision-making calculus. Throughout this nomination process, I’ve relied on three questions to guide me:
1. Who demonstrates the best judgement, and a willingness to listen and learn?
Even the most tuned-in citizen is unable to be fully informed on all the critical issues of the day. That means that in voting for a president, identifying the candidate in whose judgment I feel most secure is paramount.
Pete doesn't set out to be the smartest person in the room. More than other candidates, he listens. That’s true when it comes to his policy formation process, which is driven by conversations with subject matter experts and community engagement, as well as in personal interactions on the campaign trail. When I first met Pete the day after he formally announced his bid for the Presidency, I watched with admiration as he listened intently, answering questions from citizens with refreshing frankness & humanity. Days before the NH Primary, I asked him my own question on how he’d unify the Democratic Party after his nomination. Again, I was struck how, despite 10 months of grueling interviews & town hall meetings, he engaged me with sustained eye contact, offering a fulsome and specific response that made me feel as if we were in a one-on-one conversation together, not in a room with hundreds of strangers watching.
Precisely because no one person can be universally expert on all the decisions they will need to make in the Oval Office, I am compelled by a leader who actively solicits and takes under advisement both the expert voices and the ordinary stories that are essential ingredients for enlightened, wise, and compassionate decision-making. Pete is that leader.
2. Who is most committed to healing our nation, while cultivating the best qualities of my fellow Americans?
Speaking in his first debate, Mike Bloomberg said of the Presidency, “Listen, this is a management job.”
I couldn’t disagree more.
Of course, being an effective President means having executive experience.
But the Presidency is about so much more than management: It’s about leadership, calling fellow citizens to be the best version of themselves despite living in a broken world.
Pete’s singular message of belonging does not downplay differences. Rather, it views them as the very wellspring of national vitality when galvanized toward a shared purpose. Through both policy proposals and personal conduct on the campaign trail, Pete has made the case for healing, belonging, and a progressive majority that includes all Americans.
Much of my professional life and personal passion is dedicated to helping bridge seemingly intractable differences, to transforming moments of demonization into opportunities for mutual discovery. Time and again I’ve marveled at Pete’s ability to build these bridges and engage conversations on the national stage. Consider his response to an Iowa voter who sought to change her decision and vote for someone else after learning Pete was gay: “I’m running to be her President too,” he said with an earnestness and empathy that, if you’ve had the chance to meet him as I have, you recognize as neither studied nor rehearsed.
Another example? His invitation to Grinnell College students trying to disrupt a town hall to join him on stage to share their concerns with him publicly. These are but two of countless examples where, rather than responding with snark and defensiveness or simply avoiding and staying silent, Pete adeptly turns confrontation into dialogue. In so doing, he sets an example, sorely needed in this moment of national polarization, to nurture our shared humanity and resist the allure of divisive tribalism.
3. Who can beat Donald Trump?
When I teach negotiation strategies, I advise that rather than play their opponent’s game, great negotiators master their own. Trump is most potent when he lures opponents into his game of anger and name-calling. Some Democratic candidates have demonstrated their proclivity to join in these tactics. By yelling at us more loudly from the debate stage, they hope to convince us they will vanquish the President at his own game.
Pete is the anti-Trump, providing a stark contrast both in his style of political engagement and in his personal narrative and character.
The primary debates have demonstrated Pete’s leadership without resorting to shouting. His strong & measured approach will confound the President and the contrast will yield support from Americans who are ready for a steady and compassionate hand.
He’s a war veteran, not a draft dodger; a servant-leader from a new generation, not someone in his 70s, whose life has been predicated on self-aggrandizement.
In the past sixty years – from Kennedy through Obama -- Democrats have won the Oval Office when they select an inspiring leader from a new generation.
At this pivotal moment in our history – trust in a candidate’s judgement, a heart to heal a divided nation, and an ability to draw a stark & compelling contrast to President Trump are the factors that make Pete Buttigieg the best choice for voters this Tuesday.
I believe in Pete for America.