Pete Buttigieg Makes His Case to 25 Undecided Michigan Voters in Tense Jubilee Discussion

Enjoying this? Share it with someone who needs to see it.

Up Next

Charlie Kirk and Isabel Brown on How TikTok Made Gen Z Conservative and Trump's Potential to Save It

Charlie Kirk and Isabel Brown on How TikTok Made Gen Z Conservative and Trump's Potential to Save It

7:56

Amanda Seales Debates 20 Black Conservatives on Reparations, Systemic Racism, and Black-on-Black Crime in America

Amanda Seales Debates 20 Black Conservatives on Reparations, Systemic Racism, and Black-on-Black Crime in America

1:31:43

Barack and Michelle Obama Rally Democrats at DNC Night Two with Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Senator Laphonza Butler

Barack and Michelle Obama Rally Democrats at DNC Night Two with Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Senator Laphonza Butler

1:05:35

Pete Buttigieg Makes His Case to 25 Undecided Michigan Voters in Tense Jubilee Discussion

Pete Buttigieg sat down with 25 undecided voters in Michigan, a critical swing state, to make the case for Kamala Harris over Donald Trump. The former presidential candidate and current Transportation Secretary faced tough questions about the economy, manufacturing, personal freedoms, crime rates, and the two-party system itself. From concerned environmentalists considering third-party votes to skeptical Republicans questioning Harris's policy specifics, Buttigieg defended the administration's record while acknowledging voter frustrations. The conversations reveal the complex motivations of undecided voters in a state where every single vote could determine the outcome. Some left convinced to vote for Harris, others remained torn between abstaining and voting third party, and a few reaffirmed their commitment to Trump. This raw, unscripted exchange captures the real challenges facing campaigns trying to win over persuadable voters in America's most contested battlegrounds.

Categories: Liberal Opinions
November 4, 2024

The Setup: Making the Case in Michigan

Pete Buttigieg walked into a room with 25 undecided voters in Michigan, one of the most critical swing states in the election. His mission was clear: convince skeptical voters that Kamala Harris deserves their vote over Donald Trump. What followed was a series of intense, unscripted conversations that laid bare the real concerns of American voters who haven't made up their minds.

Buttigieg opened by introducing himself as a father of two, a veteran of the Afghanistan war, former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and current Michigan resident. He presented four main claims he intended to defend: that Donald Trump is running for president only for himself while Kamala Harris is running to make voters' lives better, that the economy will be stronger under Harris, that Americans will have more rights and freedoms under a Harris-Walz administration, and that crime will continue to decline if voters elect a career prosecutor over a convicted criminal.

Economic Anxiety and the Debt Question

One of the first voters to challenge Buttigieg expressed agreement that Trump is selfish but raised concerns about the national debt of $35.7 trillion. She argued that decisions about spending money should have broader American consensus, especially when citizens are still struggling while money goes to other countries. Buttigieg acknowledged the frustration but pushed back on the idea that all debt is created equal, arguing that Trump's debt primarily came from tax cuts for the wealthy, while Biden-Harris investments were more like taking out a mortgage for infrastructure that benefits everyone.

The conversation highlighted a central tension: voters might agree Trump is self-serving, but that doesn't automatically translate into support for Harris if they're frustrated with the current state of affairs. Buttigieg emphasized that elections are about what happens next, not just about problems that exist today.

The Third-Party Temptation

Sailor, a self-described hardcore environmentalist and amateur entomologist who worked on the American Climate Corps, presented one of Buttigieg's toughest challenges. She wasn't considering Trump at all—her dilemma was between Kamala Harris and Green Party candidate Jill Stein. She had lost faith in the two-party system after working as a Democrat on Alyssa Slotkin's campaign and wanted to see fundamental change.

Buttigieg acknowledged her frustration but made a pragmatic argument: Jill Stein will not become president, but either Donald Trump or Kamala Harris will. He pointed out that all the environmental progress achieved under Biden-Harris—the Inflation Reduction Act, climate investments, EV battery factories—would be demolished if Trump returns to office. When Sailor pressed him on protecting Michigan's lakes and the Line 5 pipeline issue rather than just talking about EVs and solar panels, Buttigieg argued that Harris would enforce the Clean Water Act while Trump would tear it up, pointing to his gutting of the EPA during his first term.

The exchange revealed the challenge of convincing ideologically motivated voters that incremental progress is better than risking complete reversal by sitting out or voting third party in a swing state.

Manufacturing and Specifics

Another voter challenged Buttigieg on manufacturing, noting that while Harris talks about housing and tax credits, Trump constantly discusses bringing manufacturing back. The voter wanted specific plans for Michigan's manufacturing sector. Buttigieg countered with results, pointing out that there's more investment in building factories in the United States than any time in the last 50 years, with manufacturing recession under Trump even before COVID, and that the United Auto Workers endorsed Harris after making her work for it.

When pressed on why Harris's manufacturing message isn't getting through, Buttigieg blamed the constant noise of Trump's distractions—fighting about McDonald's, Taylor Swift, and other controversies instead of policy. He explained that the Inflation Reduction Act includes tax structures encouraging domestic investment, which is why manufacturing is happening now.

Affordability and the Real Economy

One voter cut through economic statistics to focus on what matters to regular people: affordability. He argued that jobs and growth don't matter if people can't afford basic necessities, criticized soft monopolies strangling consumers, and questioned why the government spends $90,000 on a bag of washers for military equipment. Buttigieg agreed that the stock market hitting all-time highs doesn't determine whether people are living well, but argued the choice is between Trump's tariffs (which would add $4,000 per family in costs) and Harris's plans to make things more affordable through child tax credits and building more housing to increase supply.

The Powers of the Presidency

A thoughtful exchange emerged when a voter asked what a president can actually do to affect the economy when Congress holds so much power. The voter referenced Obama's struggles with a resistant Congress and questioned what would be different for Harris. Buttigieg made several arguments: that bipartisan achievements are possible (pointing to the infrastructure bill), that presidential appointments to agencies like the National Labor Relations Board make enormous differences for workers, and that personnel is policy—the people Harris appoints will be worker-friendly while Trump's will be pro-corporate.

When asked about the weight of political appointees versus career civil servants, Buttigieg emphasized that decisions about how laws are interpreted and what regulations take effect depend heavily on whether appointees have a pro-corporate or pro-worker tilt.

Rights, Freedoms, and Free Speech

Grace delivered one of the sharpest challenges, expressing shock at Buttigieg's claim that Americans would have more rights and freedoms under Harris. She immediately zeroed in on freedom of speech. Buttigieg responded by pointing to Trump's statements about wanting to revoke broadcast licenses of television networks that air coverage he disagrees with, calling it a direct attack on free speech. He also referenced his personal stake in the issue—his marriage to his husband Chasten—noting that Trump ran on a platform opposing marriage equality and appointed Supreme Court justices who already took away abortion rights and don't seem interested in protecting marriage equality.

Grace pushed back hard, noting that Obama campaigned in 2007 on passing the Freedom of Choice Act as his first priority but once elected called it "not my highest legislative priority." She argued that Democrats have had multiple opportunities over decades to enshrine reproductive rights into national law but didn't do it, and that campaigning on reproductive freedom in Michigan where it's already in the state constitution is manipulation of voters.

Buttigieg defended the importance of national rights, asking why civil rights should disappear at state lines. He used his own family as an example: he doesn't want his marriage to evaporate when he crosses from Michigan into Indiana to take his kids to their first Notre Dame game. The exchange also touched on social media and misinformation, with Grace suggesting the Harris-Walz campaign wants to make misinformation illegal. Buttigieg called this an extreme simplification, arguing that nobody has made more statements about using government powers to shut down critics than Donald Trump.

Understanding DEI

A voter who had just learned about DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) a few days earlier asked Buttigieg to explain what it actually is and how it could possibly be perceived as bad. Buttigieg directed him to a Jubilee debate with Ben Shapiro for the clearest expression of the case against DEI, which he strongly disagrees with. He then broke down the acronym, asking what the opposite of diversity, equity, and inclusion would be: uniformity, inequity, and exclusion—things nobody actually wants more of.

He explained that concerns about fairness are legitimate, but DEI is about making sure everyone gets a seat at the table, especially when there have been systematic ways of keeping people out based on race, religion, income, sexuality, and other factors. Using redlining as an example, he explained how black families kept out of certain neighborhoods 50 years ago have less wealth today because they missed out on property value growth, and their children are living with those consequences. The point, he argued, is that while nobody alive today may be responsible for past injustices, all of us are responsible for doing something about their ongoing effects.

The Authenticity Question

Tim delivered perhaps the most personal challenge, telling Buttigieg he would have voted for him in 2020 and would vote for him now, but can't understand why Kamala Harris can't answer questions the way Buttigieg can. He said when he listens to Harris, he doesn't get the genuine interest and feeling he hears in Buttigieg's voice, and that he knew what Buttigieg wanted when he was running but doesn't get that sense from Harris, especially after the CNN town hall.

Buttigieg acknowledged that Harris faces constraints he doesn't—she's a sitting vice president, which creates certain limitations, and the advice nominees get about being careful, especially given the historic nature of her nomination, can make it more challenging. He argued that she's good at things he's not, that everyone has different strengths, but what matters is she'll be really good at being president. He praised her achievement in bringing the fractious Democratic Party together in a matter of hours and bringing more Republicans into the fold than any Democratic nominee he's seen, without pretending to be something she's not.

When Tim suggested the party unity might be more about panic over Biden's poor debate performance than about Harris herself, Buttigieg pushed back, arguing that making difficult things look easy is a sign of skill, and that he's watched Democrats blow important moments where they couldn't get it together. He shared that he and Chasten stayed to watch her convention speech and he was genuinely moved by it, encouraging people to take time to watch it.

Crime Statistics and Reality

On the issue of crime, a voter noted that Republican advertising claims crime is out of control and immigrants are causing problems, while statistics clearly show crime trending downward. He expressed frustration at seeing very little pushback from the Harris side. Buttigieg acknowledged that people now live in an environment where they don't just have their own opinions but their own facts, depending on which TV networks and social media feeds they follow. He said one reason he goes on Fox News frequently is that their viewers might have literally no idea that crime is down.

He made an important caveat: if you've just been victimized by a crime, you don't care what the statistics are—for you it's a crime wave, and we have to respect that. But the facts show the homicide rate went up when Trump was in power and went down after he was beaten. Violent crime is way lower than it was in the 1990s when Buttigieg was growing up, and this appears to be continuing in just about every major city.

The Roots of Crime Prevention

A more philosophical discussion emerged about how to actually reduce crime. The voter outlined three approaches: disincentivizing motives to commit crimes, making weapons less accessible, and changing what's considered illegal in the first place (using border crossings as an example). On firearms, Buttigieg pointed to widespread support for background checks—80-90% of Republicans support them—yet it still hasn't happened because of political blockages that Trump doesn't want to overcome. He discussed assault weapons in mass shootings, arguing that everyone understands you have to draw a line somewhere between slingshots and nuclear weapons when it comes to the Second Amendment.

On changing what's illegal, Buttigieg pointed to rescheduling marijuana as a meaningful example of criminal justice reform. On disincentivizing crime through social conditions, he argued that if people's basic needs are met, they're safe and healthy, and they find belonging regardless of whether they're born rich or poor or their racial background, communities will be safer. He cited child tax credits that cut child poverty almost in half (blocked from extension by Republicans) and even water infrastructure—specifically replacing lead pipes, since research shows strong correlation between childhood lead exposure and higher crime rates 15 years later.

The Final Appeal

Buttigieg concluded by acknowledging he was speaking simultaneously to people from different perspectives: some more conservative deciding whether to go for Trump, others more leftist deciding whether to vote third party or vote at all. He urged them to consider that one of two things will happen, and in a state as close as Michigan, voters in the room are at the center of the political universe. He made his case not just for blocking bad outcomes but building good ones—cleaner water, safer communities, and perhaps most appealing to undecided voters, getting politics out of our faces a little bit so we can have a normal Republican Party debating issues on a normal basis with the Democratic Party.

His final plea: if you're skeptical of Trump and willing to give Harris a chance, don't just withhold your vote from him—use your power to make sure she becomes the next president.

The Verdicts

The reactions were mixed and revealing. One voter who planned to abstain said Buttigieg gave clarity and answered questions, making her lean toward voting, though more to keep Trump out than enthusiasm for Harris. Sailor maintained her commitment to voting for Jill Stein, saying major change doesn't come from doing the same thing over and over. Another voter switched from planning not to vote at all to feeling confident about voting for Harris after hearing Buttigieg speak.

One voter who originally planned to vote for Trump said he's now leaning toward third party after productive conversations with a lifelong Republican who won't vote for Trump. Another committed to voting for Harris based on personal rights as a woman and for her children and grandchildren. Tim, who praised Buttigieg throughout, summarized the challenge perfectly: "Pete did a really great job kind of making me not want to vote for Trump, but he didn't do a great job making me want to vote for his candidate."

Buttigieg found it encouraging that these were undecided voters who are very well-informed—not undecided because they haven't been paying attention, but because there are many things they care about and they're working out how that informs their decision. He hoped he helped move some people off the fence or cleared up questions and doubts, and found the experience informative for hearing where voters actually are in their decision-making process.

Video Transcript

Link copied to clipboard!