Sen. John Fetterman is the best Democratic candidate for 2028, IMHO.....

[selmaborntidefan]

The guy votes with Democrats more than 90% of the time. Do I disagree with him sometimes? Sure (Bondi confirmation is one easy example), Is he better than any possible Republican option? A million times yes.

Thing is, you're being PRACTICAL.

I don't even mind intra-party squabbles, but they better be careful. The Dems deep-sixed a Democrat who PROBABLY would have been there for many years back in 2010, Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas. I watched her early career, and she was one of the slickest politicians I've ever seen. But the unions in the North got mad at her and attempted to primary her. She won the primary but was so bloodied by the combat, she was easy pickings for John Boozman, who is now in his third term.



It's gonna be REAL interesting if they try to destroy Fetterman but line up behind the Nazi in Maine.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Really? He would have fared far better than Harris did in 2024.

Mike Shula running as the Democratic nominee would have performed better than Harris did in 2024.
Her game plan looked a lot like one of his.

 

[Crimson1967]

I see on other platforms that the far left wants to primary him with a progressive. I guess if you want to gift wrap the seat to the GOP for the next six years go right ahead.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I see on other platforms that the far left wants to primary him with a progressive. I guess if you want to gift wrap the seat to the GOP for the next six years go right ahead.

I think there needs to be some basic practicality to it all.

If the argument can be made that a person "does not represent their constituency" that's one thing. That was an insane argument regarding Sinema just as it is with Fetterman but the problem with political partisans is that once they get the taste of blood in their mouths with success, they always ignore all of the failures.

Fetterman for all of his flaws is still 9/10 on their side. There is a serious risk if you target this guy that the end result is going to be a Senator who OPPOSES you 90% of the time.

But it's a lot like the bombs falling on Iran right now - raging euphoria at the beginning with no thought of the later consequences. It didn't work in Arizona because it was smart, it worked because Kari Lake and the party GOP is quite a bit dumber than the state's Democrats.

 

[Huckleberry]

I think there needs to be some basic practicality to it all.

If the argument can be made that a person "does not represent their constituency" that's one thing. That was an insane argument regarding Sinema just as it is with Fetterman but the problem with political partisans is that once they get the taste of blood in their mouths with success, they always ignore all of the failures.

Fetterman for all of his flaws is still 9/10 on their side. There is a serious risk if you target this guy that the end result is going to be a Senator who OPPOSES you 90% of the time.

But it's a lot like the bombs falling on Iran right now - raging euphoria at the beginning with no thought of the later consequences. It didn't work in Arizona because it was smart, it worked because Kari Lake and the party GOP is quite a bit dumber than the state's Democrats.

Nothing is more important now than Democrats reigning in Trump’s agenda. Taking the House and making gains in the Senate is pretty much the way for that to happen. The only litmus for Fetterman (or any other electable Democrat) is will they vote against Trump’s craziness most of the time, especially when the most likely option is another Republican sycophant assuming office. Liberal partisans who can’t see that need to be ignored.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Nothing is more important now than Democrats reigning in Trump’s agenda. Taking the House and making gains in the Senate is pretty much the way for that to happen. The only litmus for Fetterman (or any other electable Democrat) is will they vote against Trump’s craziness most of the time, especially when the most likely option is another Republican sycophant assuming office. Liberal partisans who can’t see that need to be ignored.

This - to me - is smart politics:

In 1980, the Republican nominee for Senate in Colorado, Mary Estill Buchanan, lost in a very close election. I was surprised when a Republican friend told me that he had not voted for her. I asked why. He replied, "She was wrong on abortion." As a result, we got 6 more years of Gary Hart, who was wrong on everything. I can understand people feeling strongly about special issues such as abortion, gun control, and ERA. But they should always step back and consider the alternative. Sometimes it is necessary to make a painful decision to support a candidate who may be wrong on your pet issue but right on most others. I have always believed that sticking to principles is not only the best statesmanship but also the best politics. However, this is a far cry from the approach of some politicians who are unable to see the difference between principle and prejudice.

(Richard Nixon, "In the Arena," p 336)

 

[Bazza]

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Penn., joins NewsNation to discuss how the U.S. should act moving forward in its conflict with Iran.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

I agree that someone like Fetterman would be a great option for the Democrats. But it can't be Fetterman. He's just not mentally stable enough to be in that chair.

A Senator can spend weeks in the hospital on suicide watch, unable to function. Which he's done at least twice. A President simply can't do that.

Plus, I think the stress of the job would compound the vulnerability.

And for the record, I know Trump is mentally unstable. That doesn't mean it's a good idea to replace an unhinged person with an unstable one.

 

[Bazza]

 

[Huckleberry]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2034057402807443465

Fetterman:
83% of Americans agree on voter ID.

71% of Democrats agree on voter ID.

Keep it basic: PHOTO ID to vote.

Stop turning this into a Christmas list and attacking vote-by-mail.

If GOP wants real reform over a show vote––put out a clean, standalone bill and I’m AYE.

 

[Huckleberry]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2034303400569942323

David Friedberg: "Who do you think leads the Democratic party today?"

JOHN FETTERMAN: "We don't have one ... Right now our party is governed by the TDS."





I'm not enamored with the current Democratic leadership, but I don't use nonsensical MAGA terms to describe them. This could have come straight from Trump's mouth.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

David Friedberg: "Who do you think leads the Democratic party today?"

JOHN FETTERMAN: "We don't have one ... Right now our party is governed by the TDS."

I'm not enamored with the current Democratic leadership, but I don't use nonsensical MAGA terms to describe them. This could have come straight from Trump's mouth.