He’s taking too active an approach to be quiet quitting. Activities such as speaking at a Trump rally, for example.
It’s certainly not conducive to winning a campaign. But does it mean he won’t try?
Logically, of course he won’t run again. But we’re trying to use logic to determine the actions of a brain-damaged person who has shown no logic in the past couple years. That’s a fool’s errand.
That’s not his job though. Taking activities outside of (and especially in opposition to) your job are part of it. Someone going to Burning Man in the middle of a major project, for example, would definitely fit the definition.
You have a very good point that there is no effective way to predict what this person may or may not do.
I think it’s more analogous to someone who works for Ford attending a Chevrolet design engineering meeting. Opposing Trump and those who enable Trump is Fetterman’s job.
Apparently, the “Big Tent” Democratic Pary is not big enough for John Fetterman
Yes, the tent is big, but not big enough to encompass those who choose to deliberately assist Trump and the GOP in the next election.
Where they then share confidential Ford design plans with Chevrolet engineers. That’s pretty close to what Fetterman is doing; it’s sabotaging the party he belongs to.
What democrat “trade secrets” (or equivalent) did Fetterman share in his video message at the GOP Midterm convention?
Disagree.
Fetterman is more popular – by a 17 percent margin – among Pennsylvania Republicans than is our officially GOP senator:
Republicans care more what team you are on than your policy positions. This makes them the bigger tent party. Democrats may eventually be bit by that.
Are you asking how endorsing and supporting Trump is a betrayal of the Democratic Party?
Yes, negotiation normally is how these things work. But people who are trying to thwart democracy are not worth negotiating with. It would all be moot if they succeed no matter the result of negotiations. Once there are genuine consequences for everyone involved in 1/6 and the other election plots, then we can negotiate with the remaining right wingers since they would be back to horrible within normal parameters.
Fetterman did not endorse trump. That word has a very specific meaning in politics. He simply thanked for support for the steel industry.
You claimed Fetterman was “sabotaging” the Party by filming a video. comparing to a Ford Engineer sharing trade secrets with Chevrolet engineer. I think it is more like a Ford employee buying a Chevrolet.
So you think Gavin Newsom is sabotaging the DNC by endorsing the Trump Accounts.
Do you think James Carville’s criticism of the DSA is sabotaging the party?
I am not sure why “bipartisonship” is not regarded as a good thing in politics on the SDMB.
Yeah, I’m not engaging in this “so you’re saying” garbage.
Fetterman has been supporting Trump over and over again for a long time. This is not one incident. Your “whataboutism” is very, very poorly done.
Just read the rest of this thread for crying out loud.
you have a different definition of “sabotage” than I do.
I welcome common ground and bipartisionship. I never any politician (DNC or GOP) as always wrong or always right and I think it is great thing that Fetterman is not afraid to cross the aisle on occasion and I never criticized Adam Kinzinger or Liz Cheney for their opinions on Trump.
The TDS on the SDMB is incredible.
No, most of the people who are deranged about Trump have already left.
Moderating:
This was an unneeded and unhelpful addition to an otherwise perfectly cromulent post. TDS is a common shorthand, but it still ends up accusing your fellow posters of “derangement”. Personal attacks aren’t welcome outside the Pit, even if your intent was to use it as a pithy phrase for attitudes you disagree with. And it definitely draws away from having a civil discussion of the topic. Avoid personal attacks such as this going forward - you already proved you could make your points without such.
Bipartisanship has a mixed bag since really since Obama it has gone only the direction of offers of to the GOP and working together back. Unfortunately the gulf is wide enough now that there are few issues where bipartisanship is an option. At least right now.
But support at a political rally of the opposing party is not bipartisanship. That’s not just support of steel tariffs and anything else perceived as helping the steel industry. It is showing up to support the GOP in a rally to rev the faithful for midterms. Different.
When you engage in “bipartisanship” with authoritarians and racists what you wind up with is authoritarianism and racism.
Bipartisanship does not need to be inherently good or bad. Like most things in life it needs to be evaluated on the merits as they exist in the moment. Right now, in 2026, engaging with Republicans is going to be seen as capitulation. That is how they will see it. That is why Republicans in Pennsylvania like Fetterman. For their purposes, he’s the perfect Democrat. If he decides to switch parties and run in a Republican primary the calculation is going to change.
In a generation, assuming that the Republicans repudiate Trumpism, maybe bipartisanship can become a worthwhile goal again. Right now it is not.
That’s almost as good of one, as referring to him as “Diet MAGA.”