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

[CrimsonJazz]

This is the sad truth. I really like a LOT of things Fetterman has said recently, but at the end of the day, it’s not about what he says, it’s about what he does. If he doesn’t have the guts to take the lead of his own party, he is not fit to lead a nation.

The Dems need strong leadership to pull them out of the tailspin in which they currently find themselves due to doubling down on unpopular ideology and moronic spending habits (not to mention the guttural corruption that Gabbard and Patel could potentially put an end to.)

 

[Huckleberry]

View attachment 49079
This is the sad truth. I really like a LOT of things Fetterman has said recently, but at the end of the day, it’s not about what he says, it’s about what he does. If he doesn’t have the guts to take the lead of his own party, he is not fit to lead a nation.

The Dems need strong leadership to pull them out of the tailspin in which they currently find themselves due to doubling down on unpopular ideology and moronic spending habits (not to mention the guttural corruption that Gabbard and Patel could potentially put an end to.)

A Democrat can oppose Trump’s nominees without being a pawn of the party leadership. Fetterman doesn’t have to go along with Trump’s agenda to prove his independence from the party status quo. I’d never support him if he made moves like that.

I’m ready for a change in party dynamics, but supporting either Gabbard or Patel is out of the question. Democrats don’t have to sell their souls to win back voters.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

What are you saying here? If a Democrat doesn't support Trump's nominees, they must be a pawn of the party leadership?

What I’m saying is that the American people have spoken and they are good and ticked about what is coming out now. The DOGE thing is just the tip of the iceberg, wait until sunlight is shined upon the corruption that gets exposed (assuming that Trump’s nominees do what they have been tasked to do. I understand that there are no guarantees about this sort of thing. In fact, it might please you to hear me state outright that they will likely fail, but that’s another discussion.)

Democrats and Republicans think Americans are stupid and have short memories to boot. (In their defense, they are right about this, but I don’t think their estimations in pure numbers are accurate. It’s also worth noting that I didn’t always feel this way.) People are going to remember voting records during the mid-terms far better than they used to. Why? Because for the first time in a very long time, they have real hope. Most of us have passively accepted that the government cares not a whit about us because nothing ever changes, regardless of who wins whatever elections.

Trump is doing something that no one has ever seen in an elected official. That is the difference and the driving force of hope for change. I still don’t like the guy, but I’m not putting my chips on him. I do, however, hope that his nominees who are coloring outside the lines can create real change. If they are successful, people WILL remember who opposed them. That is what I am saying.

 

[Huckleberry]

What I’m saying is that the American people have spoken and they are good and ticked about what is coming out now. The DOGE thing is just the tip of the iceberg, wait until sunlight is shined upon the corruption that gets exposed (assuming that Trump’s nominees do what they have been tasked to do. I understand that there are no guarantees about this sort of thing. In fact, it might please you to hear me state outright that they will likely fail, but that’s another discussion.)

Democrats and Republicans think Americans are stupid and have short memories to boot. (In their defense, they are right about this, but I don’t think their estimations in pure numbers are accurate. It’s also worth noting that I didn’t always feel this way.) People are going to remember voting records during the mid-terms far better than they used to. Why? Because for the first time in a very long time, they have real hope. Most of us have passively accepted that the government cares not a whit about us because nothing ever changes, regardless of who wins whatever elections.

Trump is doing something that no one has ever seen in an elected official. That is the difference and the driving force of hope for change. I still don’t like the guy, but I’m not putting my chips on him. I do, however, hope that his nominees who are coloring outside the lines can create real change. If they are successful, people WILL remember who opposed them. That is what I am saying.

That’s a valid point, but if I were in Fetterman’s shoes, I’d still have to go with my core values. If he voted for a conspiracy nut like Patel or a Putin defender like Gabbard just to possibly position himself for a future run for office, what would that say about his principles?
He’ll have plenty of chances to separate himself from the far-left social policies that damaged the party as well as stress the blue-collar economic beliefs that Democrats have always held dear. The chaos in Washington might be a delight to some, but most people want economic relief and security. Lowering federal spending (done the right way) is a good start for our nation, but if it doesn’t benefit the working class, they will not care one bit.

 

[Crimson1967]

View attachment 49079
This is the sad truth. I really like a LOT of things Fetterman has said recently, but at the end of the day, it’s not about what he says, it’s about what he does. If he doesn’t have the guts to take the lead of his own party, he is not fit to lead a nation.

The Dems need strong leadership to pull them out of the tailspin in which they currently find themselves due to doubling down on unpopular ideology and moronic spending habits (not to mention the guttural corruption that Gabbard and Patel could potentially put an end to.)

There are probably Republicans who secretly oppose some of the nominations but don’t dare incur the wrath of the orange one.

 

[Huckleberry]

There are probably Republicans who secretly oppose some of the nominations but don’t dare incur the wrath of the orange one.

Oh, I definitely believe that’s true, but those people were neutered long ago and can only sing for Trump these days, though they might cry in their pillows at night.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

There are probably Republicans who secretly oppose some of the nominations but don’t dare incur the wrath of the voters.

Lemme fix that for you.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

That’s a valid point, but if I were in Fetterman’s shoes, I’d still have to go with my core values. If he voted for a conspiracy nut like Patel or a Putin defender like Gabbard just to possibly position himself for a future run for office, what would that say about his principles?
He’ll have plenty of chances to separate himself from the far-left social policies that damaged the party as well as stress the blue-collar economic beliefs that Democrats have always held dear. The chaos in Washington might be a delight to some, but most people want economic relief and security. Lowering federal spending (done the right way) is a good start for our nation, but if it doesn’t benefit the working class, they will not care one bit.

If those are his true values, then let the chips fall where they may. I have zero problems with that. However, if he talks one game, but his actions don’t back them up, then he’s just another typical American politician and I personally feel like we are living in a time when the electorate will observe and respond accordingly. If that ends his political career, so be it.

The party that can maintain the support of the blue-collar working class holds all the high cards for now. You know I’m a complete cynic and I will state on the record that I don’t have faith that either party really cares about them so the question comes down to this: which party can fool them most effectively? For now, it’s obviously the MAGAs.

The political danger for Dems would be if Trump delivers. For the first time in a long time, people are paying attention to how badly they are getting screwed by our so-called representative government. If Trump’s nominees can expose how badly they are getting bent over by their representatives, then this whole MAGA thing is not going away, even if Trump does. This is why the establishment is fighting tooth and nail against exposure. While I am personally skeptical of such a thing happening, there is still a chance that the next 2-4 years could completely change U. S. politics (at least for a little while.)

 

[Crimson1967]

Just trying to picture him taking the oath in his hoodie.

 

[Bamaro]

As I said before, I like his views in general but he would be a terrible candidate for POTUS. If you think the republicans were brutal with Biden's age related issues (even while trump's are very worrisome too), they will be even worse with Fetterman.
It shouldn't be that way but it is.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

Just trying to picture him taking the oath in his hoodie.

Yeah, he really needs to stop dressing like a 13 year-old. I've seen what he looks like dressed professionally and I have to say, he looked pretty damn sharp.

 

[Its On A Slab]

Looking forward to his coming to his inauguration wearing jorts and a Carhart hoodie.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

As I said before, I like his views in general but he would be a terrible candidate for POTUS. If you think the republicans were brutal with Biden's age related issues (even while trump's are very worrisome too), they will be even worse with Fetterman.
It shouldn't be that way but it is.

Maybe, but Fetterman is the only person I have ever seen actually improve his mental acuity after both a stroke and a mental breakdown. I'm not alone on this; I've heard people from both sides acknowledge it, too.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I follow Fetterman on Twitter, so let me give you the "good" and the maybe bad, it depends upon your point of view:

THE GOOD
- Fetterman is extremely politically astute, able to read the room, willing to posture as the truth teller
- he deserves IMMENSE credit and compassion for overcoming the stroke that felled him

THE MEH
But here's the thing I'll say with Fetterman, which is part of the first point above: he's actually about as left-wing as you can get but he PRETENDS to not be as liberal as he is by attacking "his own side" He engages in misdirection (this IS politically smart so TIFWIW) but then go watch how he votes.

(The link above I've used for 25 years and it has a complex diagram of how to view - in general ideological terms - the candidates; it will even denote changes in position and figure them).


Now, I have LIKED him on Twitter, for real. But what I'm saying is he plays this little game repeatedly. It's as predictable as an Auburn fan diminishing our national championship count.

- say something eminently reasonable
- castigate the liberal side for over-reacting on something
- present himself as in thought about the particular issue
- vote 100% of the time (excluding Israel, which he is 100% for) with the Democrats

He basically poses as a reasonable guy you could watch football with and frames his disagreement as the right thing to do. Again - this is POLITICALLY effective, and I give him credit for it.

But he's NOT the "I'm just a middle of the road PA guy here serving my state for a term or so" guy from the bar, either.

Again, I like the guy, he's damn near impossible to hate.

Just don't buy the created persona that he's anything but a liberal (NTTAWWT).

 

[Bamaro]

Maybe, but Fetterman is the only person I have ever seen actually improve his mental acuity after both a stroke and a mental breakdown. I'm not alone on this; I've heard people from both sides acknowledge it, too.

I think he still needs help like closed captioning in understanding verbal communications. Republicans would be all over him mercilessly about that.

 

[crimsonaudio]

I think he still needs help like closed captioning in understanding verbal communications. Republicans would be all over him mercilessly about that.

I mean, that sort of disability is probably enough to keep anyone from winning a presidential election.

 

[Crimson1967]

Fetterman:
1) opposes all restrictions on abortion
2) favors barring members of Congress and their families from owning stock
3) is anti-death penalty
4) believes in man-made Climate Change and wants to do something about it
5) wants to end the filibuster
6) supports Israel
7) believes China is an enemy
8) supports Ukraine
9) wants the US to remain a part of NATO
10) is skeptical of unrestrained free trade
11) supports common sense gun control
12) is pro-immigration but concerned about border control
13) favors legalizing marijuana
14) is pro-law enforcement but favors restriction on use of deadly force
15) supports a wealth tax
16) supports union rights
17) opposes lab-grown meat

With the exception of number 17, I agree with him! I'm pleased to join you @Bazza in advocating that this man run for president. He might not be my first choice, but I'd be happy with him in office.

A lot of these sound nice but are kind of vague.
What does common sense gun control mean?

What does he want to do about climate change and how is he going to do it?

Skeptical of unrestrained free trade. That’s nice, but what does it mean in terms of his policies?

Concerned about border control. You want a wall or not?

Pro-cop but restrictions on deadly force. Restrict to what extent and how?

What kind of wealth tax? And what kind of union rights?

Seems like a good guy but I would need more specifics on these things.

 

[oldtimetider]

I was impressed with Shapiro after the assassination attempt in Pa. Much will depend on the next 3 or 4 years. The middle class has carried the burden of supporting those above and below for a generation or more. But... I'm not sure there's any country that has handled the post-WW2 era any better than the U.S. We do have our issues. Housing costs, medical care, a tax system that allows the wealthiest to pay less (percentage wise) than the middle or working class... and allows too many to pay nothing...All these and more need fixing. I hope the current administration can make some headway but I'm unconvinced. As an old guy, I'm an institutionalist, in spite of the fact that our institutions, (governement, religion, the press, even the family) seem to have grown less and less effective. However without them, I'm not sure what's left to hold us together.
It seems to me that that just about the only thing that pulls people together on a national level is hardship or threat or a belief that we're somehow victims of something... and then we find ourselves united by fear or anger.

Occasionally we have those leaders who are able to pull us upward though. Reagan's vision of shining city on a hill... JFK asking us to "ask not what our country can do for us".... MLK saying "I've decided to stick with love- hate is too heavy a burden"

Lord knows, we're much in need of a Lincoln...

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I follow Fetterman on Twitter, so let me give you the "good" and the maybe bad, it depends upon your point of view:

THE GOOD
- Fetterman is extremely politically astute, able to read the room, willing to posture as the truth teller
- he deserves IMMENSE credit and compassion for overcoming the stroke that felled him

THE MEH
But here's the thing I'll say with Fetterman, which is part of the first point above: he's actually about as left-wing as you can get but he PRETENDS to not be as liberal as he is by attacking "his own side" He engages in misdirection (this IS politically smart so TIFWIW) but then go watch how he votes.

(The link above I've used for 25 years and it has a complex diagram of how to view - in general ideological terms - the candidates; it will even denote changes in position and figure them).


Now, I have LIKED him on Twitter, for real. But what I'm saying is he plays this little game repeatedly. It's as predictable as an Auburn fan diminishing our national championship count.

- say something eminently reasonable
- castigate the liberal side for over-reacting on something
- present himself as in thought about the particular issue
- vote 100% of the time (excluding Israel, which he is 100% for) with the Democrats

He basically poses as a reasonable guy you could watch football with and frames his disagreement as the right thing to do. Again - this is POLITICALLY effective, and I give him credit for it.

But he's NOT the "I'm just a middle of the road PA guy here serving my state for a term or so" guy from the bar, either.

Again, I like the guy, he's damn near impossible to hate.

Just don't buy the created persona that he's anything but a liberal (NTTAWWT).

I told you so.

Just 3 days ago, Bill Maher came out and endorsed Fetterman as a good candidate for the Dems in 2028 because he’ll stand up against his party. But as l said right here - he won’t really, it’s all theatrics.

Today he comes down on the 20 side of an 80-20 issue because he can’t run for President in his party otherwise.

Maher brought up a Fetterman-Buttigieg ticket, which l thought a bit absurd.

Especially when one of his stated reasons was Mayor Pete removing his pronouns from his Twitter page.

Courage apparently only goes so far.

 

[mdb-tpet]

Fetterman:
1) opposes all restrictions on abortion
2) favors barring members of Congress and their families from owning stock
3) is anti-death penalty
4) believes in man-made Climate Change and wants to do something about it
5) wants to end the filibuster
6) supports Israel
7) believes China is an enemy
8) supports Ukraine
9) wants the US to remain a part of NATO
10) is skeptical of unrestrained free trade
11) supports common sense gun control
12) is pro-immigration but concerned about border control
13) favors legalizing marijuana
14) is pro-law enforcement but favors restriction on use of deadly force
15) supports a wealth tax
16) supports union rights
17) opposes lab-grown meat

With the exception of number 17, I agree with him! I'm pleased to join you @Bazza in advocating that this man run for president. He might not be my first choice, but I'd be happy with him in office.

We cannot eliminate the Filibuster, at least when there is not a split Congress. The minority party must have some way of being heard. If there is no Filibuster, then a 51% Congress can pass anything without as much as a reasonable discussion. I'm up for discussing a different kind of Filibuster, such as a requirement of getting 2 votes from the minority parties etc. And 17 is well, whatever. Let it go.