Two-faced Fetterman

Initially thrilled with the Pennsylvania senator's election in 2022, I've already set my sights on who we can primary against him in 2028.

When Fox News and other conservative media are hailing a Democrat for speaking what they consider as “sense,” something is seriously wrong. While a broken clock can be right twice a day, in Fox News’ case, it’s more like a broken clock once in a blue moon.

In 2022, I was thrilled when John Fetterman ran for office. Pennsylvania Republican senator Pat Toomey announced he wasn’t running for re-election, and the prospect of a Democrat serving alongside Bob Casey, Jr. excited me.

In the end, it came down to Fetterman vs. Dr. Mehmet (quack quack) Oz.

Vote for Oz?

Or so I thought.

---

After a series of health setbacks at the start of Fetterman’s term, Democrats were hopeful about what the freshman PA senator would accomplish.

Hope no longer.

The marriage started out pretty with Fetterman initially championing and defending Democratic policies. By 2023, Fetterman had declared that he was not a “progressive.” A bit of a worrying statement, but no one was particularly on high alert.

When Fetterman came out with his hawkish stance on Israel after the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack, things really took a turn. The Democrats had difficulty expressing their support for Israel’s right to defend itself while also championing the sovereignty and protection of the Palestinian people. At a time when college students were holding “Free Palestine” protests, the Democrats had no coherent message.

Democrats struggling to convey their message condemning Hamas and supporting innocent Palestinians.

This was a central criticism to Kamala Harris’s failed presidential campaign. Arab and Muslim voters overwhelmingly handed Michigan to Donald Trump, unhappy with the actions of the Biden administration (that Harris was unfortunately a part of).

So Trump > Harris, right?

Voters are now finding out.

Fetterman stumped hard for Harris, showing his commitment to the Democratic Party. But after Trump’s win, he became the first—and only—Democratic senator to visit Trump’s Floridian palace at Mar-a-Lago.

An aside: I commend Fetterman’s willingness to reach across the aisle and work in a bipartisan manner. It is one of the reasons I adored John McCain. He, too, was considered a political maverick. Even though he was Republican, he had no problem voting for good Democratic policies.

The difference? McCain knew better than to be bipartisan with a dictator.

Fetterman’s efforts at “bipartisanship” with this GOP-controlled Congress have been deeply disappointing. There can be no compromise. GOP members have sold their souls to allow Trump to do and implement anything he pleases. (I also believe there are GOP members who personally and morally disagree with him but keep their mouths shut at the risk of not getting re-elected.)

Fetterman? does. not. care. While his approval ratings among PA Democrats have decreased, his approval ratings among PA Republicans have nearly doubled. He insists that he’s not switching parties. That he’s a Democrat through and through.

From my perspective (and probably from the perspective of other PA Democrats), he already has: DINO—Democrat in name only.

One of the things that recently pissed me off was my U.S. Rep. Chrissy Houlahan’s vote for censure of Rep. Al Green from Texas. She was one of 10 Democrats who defected to join Republicans in censuring him. I’ve already written at length about it, so I’ll spare the rehashing.

However, the difference between Houlahan and Fetterman?

Does that mean [Houlahan] is worth kicking out despite 90% of the positive things she's done? If your kid gets a 90% in school, that 90% is still an "A." They made some mistakes but did a good job overall. (Grading Fetterman, however, is for another day.)

Today, I’m grading Fetterman.

Sure, he’s still supportive of the basics—LGBTQ+ rights, social programs, and pro-choice and pro-union policies—but the consistent legislative support with the GOP (who represent Drumpf) has me scratching my head, trying to figure out how he’s representing his PA Democratic constituents.

Fair enough, he’s supposed to be a senator for all Pennsylvanians.

But I get a little twitchy when I get Dave McCormick’s newsletter (He’s your senator, too! Subscribe to see what he is up to!) detailing an interview about how buddy-buddy he and Fetterman are. Yes, they need to work together on legislative issues for Pennsylvanians, but the problem RIGHT NOW is that we fundamentally disagree on those issues. The GOP runs every branch of government, including a 53-senator weight in the legislature. Fetterman, with his recent voting record, makes it 54.

According to the Progressive Punch website, he has a progressive voting rate of “B” (4 stars = worthy of support). The “B” comes from his lifetime (time in Senate so far) voting record, which has swung from high-to-low 80s. However, when you sort by 2025-2026 crucial vote or overall percentages, Fetterman comes in dead last. While Progressive Punch has this year’s voting record percentage in the mid-to-high 60s, my arbitrary score gives him a “D” (2 stars = tolerable).

Although he’s voting progressive more than half the time, voting 30%-35% with Trump supporters is too much. Give the GOP an inch, they’ll take a light-year.

Looking back, Fetterman vs Oz was actually a toss-up. The Dems got a few wins in the Senate, but having a 65% progressive crucial voting record—the lowest of all Democratic senators—is a troubling sign. When a freshman senator from Michigan like Elissa Slotkin currently sits at an “F” (mostly because she’s been in office less than 60 days) but has a higher crucial voting percentage score? That’s also troubling. (Note: I don’t know how recent these data are.)

In a time when Democrats feel like this administration is operating at extremes,

• elevating the executive branch above the Constitution;

• renaming and repurposing a Congressionally supported government agency on digital oversight to a meme-named monkey business run by an eccentric billionaire that’s trying to control the country’s money and is responsible for cutting at least 30,000 federal jobs (with more to come, including a layoff of half of the Department of Ed employees this week) under the guise of “waste and fraud”; and

• allowing a Republican-controlled Congress to make sweeping cuts into Medicaid that covers 72 million people of whom 2.8 million are Pennsylvanians,

Fetterman has publicly stated that he will “never vote to shut our government down” despite the proposed budget bill’s inclusion of Medicaid cuts upwards of $880 billion over the next decade that would eliminate coverage for about 16 million Americans.

Let’s be honest: Democrats lose either way. Either they vote against the bill, propelling the government into a shutdown, or risk voting for a bill that not only cuts Medicaid significantly but also provides the president with an unprecedented ability to do things, such as impose tariffs, for as long as he chooses for the Congressional year under the National Emergencies Act.

Finally, the rule provides that each day for the remainder of the first session of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act with respect to a joint resolution terminating a national emergency declared by the President on February 1, 2025.

What emergency?

From The Hill:

A House GOP leadership aide added: “This provision simply prevents the Democrats from limiting the President’s authority.”

Actually,

This provision simply prevents [anyone] from limiting the President’s authority.

There. FIFY.¹

Oh, and about that grade? Based on the Progressive Punch’s metrics, I’m giving Fetterman a “D-” (which does not stand for devoted Democrat). To me, he is dangerously close to an “F”: 1 star—intolerable—not worth fighting for vs. Republicans.

He hasn’t yet, but he’s failing.

1. Fixed it for you.