I'm frustrated by a lot of things about this. But the MOST frustrating thing is that I couldn't even tell you if there was a logic to caving in. Maybe there was? Maybe there wasn't? Who the fück knows?
Maybe, but in today’s America, it’s not clear whether collaborating with fascists is something to praise or to criticize.
As a Pennsylvanian, I don't get Fetterman's political reasoning. He won the primary in 2022 because the progressive side of the party came out in force for him, while the center-left Dems mostly backed Lamb. Now, the progressive side of the party in PA hates him, and Lamb is out there at protests and town halls (Fetterman isn't doing either), winning over some progressive Dems. I know 3 years is an eternity in politics, but it just seems that if Lamb (or some other credible center-left Dem) runs in the primary, Fetterman has no chance. Fetterman seems to think he's making himself into the next Manchin, a blue dog Dem who can hang around for decades, but he's becoming the next Sinema, a flip-flopping Dem without a base who will get flushed out in the next primary.
1. Elizabeth Warren or someone should start a move within the caucus to replace Dick Durbin. And it better pass. 2. Josh Marshall’s take is not as doomy as ours. My short summary is, yeah, this really sucks, and it’s stupid from every angle. However, hanging together this long is something Senate Dems weren’t capable of even as recently as March. Is our caucus learning? He says yes, and that’s not nothing.
I wonder if the answer lies somewhere in Fetterman’s voting track record during his long and extensive legislative career prior to becoming a Bernie favorite for Senate. you know…all the critical votes he took on important issues while serving as mayor of…oh wait. As lieutenant governor… oh wait. maybe…just maybe.. Dem voters should be a little more skeptical when someone with literally zero legislative record runs as an outsider…you have zero idea what you’re gonna actually get.
It's not 3 years in politics that changed Fetterman.. He had a massive stroke after the Democratic primary, but before the General election. At the time, it was thought the damage from the stroke was contained to his aphasia, but, after he took office, his staff started to become concerned about his behavior. He was prone to angry outbursts, depression, and paranoia. Its bad enough that within a year of his election, most of his top staffers had left and those that remained were in constant fear of his outbursts and what he might do to himself if things continued the way they were going. https://archive.is/pS26K https://www.spotlightpa.org/news/2025/05/fetterman-mental-health-concerns-union-meeting/
I think the thing with Fetterman is that he had that stroke. Strokes cause brain damage and can affect a lot of cognitive functions, as well as personality. We don't really have a lot to go on because although he ran a Campaign, who knows what things were like behind the scenes. I've always thought that best explained his actions.
I see it as Democrats viewing this as a "sell high" moment. People start starving because of a lack of SNAP benefits and they might turn on the Democrats holding out for affordable health insurance - "I don't care about my Obamacare, I can't afford bread!" I doubt that turns out to be politically expedient, but that's the rationale that makes the most sense to me other than the Democrats being captive opposition. Speculative cowards, in short.
I get the short term reason, to get starving people food, to get government employees their paychecks. Democrats don't seem to have the stomach to watch people in agony for political gain, so they caved. What I don't get is the long term, unless they just wanted to get every Republican on record voting against the ACA so they can use it against them in the midterms. Problem with that is Democrats don't have the messaging apparatus to continue to pound and the Repiblicans will just make shit up like immigrants eating pets and that will become the story before we go vote in a year. People are stupid.
If that's the thinking, why didn't anyone say that? Why didn't they make a demand that SNAP be fully funded as a condition for their capitulation. I don't doubt your thinking of course but they could just as easily be caving in now because rich donors don't like flight delays or because they think collaborating is fun. We have no way of knowing. They're just so fücking feckless. At least the Weimar Socialists tried to do something and lost. The Democrats aren't even trying.
The people most affected by reductions in ACA premium credits are at an income level somewhat above the income level of most of those getting SNAP benefits. A lot of the latter set, for example, will be on Medicaid and unaffected by all this until funding reductions for Medicaid kick in next year (?). The only rationale I can think of is that the Dems now can say that any ACA credit reductions are fairly and squarely on the Republicans given their refusal to negotiate. Oh and I seriously doubt an ACA credit vote will ever come to the floor of the House.
According to their press conferences they had a zero percent chance to pass aca legislation and now they have a nonzero chance to vote on aca legislation. Victory!
Comment "you are way underselling that horror" https://bsky.app/profile/eoinhiggins.bsky.social/post/3m5apzfzesk2x
So, a follow-up on this. I'm seeing dribs and drabs on social media suggesting what happened was even worse. Namely that Schumer and the Dem leadership were onboard with the defections ... and still moronically let the defectors go out to the media the next morning and say the most fcuking boneheaded, politically stupid shit imaginable. That's even worse political practice than I originally imagined. Schumer has got to go. I'm livid.