585
John Fetterman accidentally calls himself ‘a lifelong Republican’ (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 4 days ago by to c/politics@lemmy.world
80 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Social and news media commenters seize on senator’s gaffe, with some characterizing it as a Freudian slip

With speculation about whether he may defect from the Democratic party swirling around him, US senator John Fetterman described himself seemingly unintentionally as a “lifelong Republican” during a fireside chat in Texas over the weekend.

Fetterman made the comment when someone listening to him speak with CBS News political correspondent Major Garrett at the Texas Tribune Festival on Saturday asked the Pennsylvania senator why he had not become an independent.

“Because I’m a lifelong Republican,” Fetterman replied. Garrett promptly corrected him by saying, “Democrat,” as Fetterman raised a hand and shook his head in disbelief.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 4 days ago (1 child)

Anyone who is loyal to a party is putting a party over their constituents. I'd say whichever party he was going to say is a problem. No representative should be voting for what the "rest of the group" is voting for but rather what the people they represent want. If 65% of his constituents say they want to end U.S. sanctions on Cuba it shouldn't matter what they want, or the party wants, his vote should be to end sanctions on Cuba or be immediately ousted for being corrupt.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 12 points 4 days ago

    You are correct about this. The key problem for him specifically is actions are not reflecting what the majority of his voters wanted. But this does also address another problem (not so much for senators but for representatives in the House), the number of people they represent.

    We need an expansion of the House and redistricting so that each seat only represents a limit of people, so they can actually talk to those people and know what their interests are. Too large a chuck of population and that becomes muddled, and so party lines is far simpler to manage, assuming the votes still stand. But for local issues, which are often what bills are about, how can party line always be the best option, or even matter? Some things are politically bounded, they're what's best for the people in that region, and if the rep doesn't even really know who that is or what they want...

    Granted, they have a staff to do a lot of this, but the population number per is still too high.

    Oh, and Fetterman is damaged goods, they need a new senator. Of course, look at Kentucky, they didn't even have one of the senators for 90+ days (and I still have doubts).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent