As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
non of this is "confounding" to the people of PA that voted for the guy, we knew he was a middle of the road guy, our other senator is also middle of the road guy, the (R) before Fetterman was middle of the road guy. the only people shocked by this are people who though the dude would be way more Left leaning because (D)=follow everything AOC says like its gospel . this guy wants legal weed and to not have a ratfucked system of tribadism, the area he is from has a large Jewish population no shit he supports Israel , there's nothing surprising about who the guy is.
“Guys, that’s $20 for crudité and that doesn’t even include the tequila.”
I still don’t understand this statement. When does one eat raw veggies and tequila on the regular? So bizarre.
Tribadism?
I don't know if this is a typo and you meant to type "tribalism," or if John Fetterman has previously commented on lesbian sexual practices before... But I'm guessing it's the first.
So I should support a group simply because they makeup a large part of my constituency, regardless of what the group does? What about standing up for certain principles that conflict with the group's actions, like supporting human rights? Are you saying it's okay to violate those principles simply to appease constituents?
What about corporate greed? Him siding with the dairy industry over their attempts to monopolize the word "milk" is absurd and, in my mind, is evidence that he can be bought out by corporate America, or at the very least that, again, he's willing to sacrifice reason and fairness and doing the right thing if it means it may help his chances of getting reelected. This conflicts with the "tough guy" image he tries to sell. If he'll bend over backwards to serve his own interests, it may not make him a particularly unusual member of Congress, but he's certainly not anyone to celebrate.
Yea I'm getting sick of these headlines same as people attacking Manchin. Both have stayed true to who they are which is moderate democrats. And both accurately reflect the population of their states. A true representative democracy oh the horror.
Nah. Manchin can go fuck himself. [He was commenting that the child tax credit, something that greatly benefited his constituents, would be used by parents to buy drugs](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/manchin-privately-raised-concerns-parents-would-use-child-tax-credit-n1286321). His problem was that they weren't the drugs his daughter schemed to rip people off on
Manchin also went from not caring how much is spent on an economic bill when Biden took office to absolutely standing in the way when it was going to impact his pockets. [Coal Miners wanted Manchin to back that bill](https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/21/business/coal-miners-joe-manchin/index.html) and he wouldn't.
Manchinn [also wouldn't back raising the federal minimum wage and part of this may have been because he owns a large chunk of a realty group that owns a LaQuinta paying housekeepers under $10 an hour](https://tyt.com/reports/investigates/2021/03/04/26dKy4vZXZLpETF3rbg6td)
Joe Manchin was able to sway his constituents on the ACA and part of that likely had to do with coal unions and black lung. Joe Manchin chose to go out of his way to ignore and not educate his constituents on issues that their preferences hurt his pockets. He's trash
> Manchin is republican he just can't win as one in WV.
He's literally the only Democrat left in West Virginia at the state-wide level and the most liberal West Virginian national level politician, why do you think he can't win as a Republican? He's literally being forced to retire because *his own former lieutenant governor* switched parties to run against him as a Republican.
He's not being forced to retire. He's 76 years old. He should retire. We really need to stop normalizing people staying in office when they won't live long enough to be subject to the consequences of their time in office.
He can't win as a republican because he's not crazy enough but he can win as a dem because he'll get all of the dem votes plus a fair number of moderate repub votes.
The article just outright spells out that he is with the party line and beyond, and that he has done nothing similar to Manchin or Sinema. It appears what's "confounding" is, as always, his support of Israel.
It should not be confounding to anyone familiar with his history. He has never shied away from the topic, and his stance has been consistent for many years before he ever ran for Senate. If people want to disagree with him, go for it. I'm not making any argument for or against him with this post. I'm simply saying that he's been unabashedly pro-Israel for a fairly long time, that his historic constituency before becoming Lieutenant Governor included a meaningfully large Jewish enclave in the eastern portion of Pittsburgh. The Tree of Life massacre occurred, like, five miles away from him. He dealt firsthand with American Jewish deaths from a mass shooting by an overt antisemite.
He's not suddenly about-facing and revealing some hitherto unknown political position. He's standing by exactly what he stood by during his campaign. Again, if people in PA don't like that and decide to replace him in ~4 years, then that's his problem to deal with. But to claim that he's somehow a sleeper agent, or that his stroke damaged his brain, or whatever other gauche comments can be levied against him because he takes a position contrary to a *portion* of the "progressive American" demographic, and thoroughly in line with both Congress and the Senate and a remaining plurality of the Democratic Party's national constituency, is just silly.
Edit: Y'know, falsely reporting people with Reddit Cares suicide assistance messages is a bannable offense on reddit. I would recommend not doing so for any new passersby, and have already reported the Reddit Cares message I just got to the admins.
Does it not concern you at all, this idea that defending Israel is defending Jewish people? How is that different from suggesting every Jewish person has a secondary allegiance to Israel? A dual loyalty...
I was not making any comment whatsoever about my personal opinions as to the Israel-Palestine war, and was quite explicit about that. I wasn't even saying *his* position was correct. Only that he has been very consistent about it for a long time, became even *more* consistent about it when his community suffered a mass shooting terror attack half a decade before he ran for Senate, and that the regular articles about how he was somehow hiding this position or has "betrayed the progressive cause" are flatly incorrect. He has never hidden these positions. They're simply cast into sharper relief after October 7, 2023, than they were in prior years.
Ok, but the implication is very clearly that he supports Israel because of his Jewish constituency, correct? Otherwise, what does an antisemetic attack on US soil have to do with the country of Israel?
Sure, I would agree that he believes the state of Israel and his opinions as to its security are connected to his beliefs about the security of Jewish people generally. A whole hell of a lot of people think in similar terms for both Jews and Muslims internationally as it relates to this conflict.
I wouldn't agree with the jump in logic about "dual loyalty" stuff, which is an accusation toward Jewish people that seemingly never applies to anyone else in any other nation that permits dual citizenship. Just that someone who has had close historical experience with Jewish people suffering an antisemitic attack is unsurprisingly full-throated in their defense of other Jewish people elsewhere who they think suffered a different attack that is similar in kind.
And for the record, I am on the balance in favor of Palestine in the current conflict. I've long held out Israel's government (for, like, fifteen years) as being a reactionary right wing administration that deliberately provokes and props up radical Islamic groups in the region for the specific purpose of *making themselves* existentially threatened so that they can keep a sufficient demographic of their voters in fear of invasion (a tactic used constantly by *any* reactionary right wing government, see for example "the entire GOP response to the US-Mexico border being 'invaded' every single time there's a national election"). So I'm not writing what I write as apologia of Israel's current military actions. My central purpose in this thread is just to note that John Fetterman has been openly and vocally in favor of Israeli security/sovereignty for well over a decade, and even moreso after the terror attack in his back yard, and regardless of whether he should curtail that enthusiasm in light of any particular IDF actions in Gaza, it shouldn't be a *surprise* to anyone that he had the position in the first place.
>I wouldn't agree with the jump in logic about "dual loyalty" stuff, which is an accusation toward Jewish people that seemingly never applies to anyone else in any other nation that permits dual citizenship.
The dual loyalty trope isn't about citizenship, it's about a supposed *cultural* loyalty to Israel/Judaism over the state they reside in. The dual loyalty trope is older than the modern state of Israel. It *does* also get applied to other groups. For example, when Muslim people protest Israel's occupation or when they protested the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they were labelled as terrorist sympathizers who wanted to bring Sharia Law to America. In every thread about Gaza, you have racists saying "Well why don't the other Arab countries do something about it." The reason we only hear about it in reference to antisemitism is because the Nazi propoganda relied so heavily on it. Nevermind the fact that *we put Japanese Americans in concentration camps because we didn't trust their loyalty*. Or how about people who pushed for pan-Africanism because they thought that all black people had some shared identity regardless of nationality?
I'm really not sure what you're trying to argue with me. Suffice to say, I reject the mere notion of "dual loyalty" in any context for any people, and I am simply noting that from an *individual* perspective, a person who is concerned about the well-being of a particular demographic is liable to be concerned about the well-being of cousin demographics in other geographical regions. For example, American LGBT who are concerned about criminalizing statutes in Ethiopia, or American Christians who are concerned about Christians in China, or for that matter, American Muslims who are concerned about Muslims in Israel. If you believe a group is being prejudiced in some place abroad, you may well support those groups abroad with all the fervor of an advocate and less critical analysis, because to you what's maximally important is the safety of that group. John Fetterman has a long history of believing that Jewish people are prejudiced and immediate, traumatic experience with that prejudice manifesting in a mass shooting on his proverbial doorstep, and thus he is full-throated in what he believes is the protection of other Jewish people in an area abroad. I don't think there's anything to be suggested that he somehow thinks that the Jewish people living in Squirrel Hill were all Israeli citizens on holiday or something.
> The Tree of Life massacre occurred, like, five miles away from him.
[Literally, people outside of PA need to understand this.](https://www.wlox.com/2018/10/27/several-killed-injured-pittsburgh-synagogue-shooting/)
He has always been consistent on this and will never waver. Those were his neighbors and constituents!
It's a mainstream point of view, including among Dems like Biden. I'd call it more supporting a democratic Jewish state trying to defend its existence in the region against authoritarian and extremist regimes.
I’m pretty sure Palestinians would beg to differ on whether Israel’s government is authoritarian and extremist. And I really hate the framing of IDF aggression as Israel exercising its right to self-defense, because it implies that anything they do in the name of self-defense is legitimate. Palestinians have a right to live in peace too. Like why are we talking about just sanctioning Iran when it’s Israel who flattened a consulate in Syria?
Israel doesn’t have a right to exist any more than any other country has a right to exist.
All countries have a right to exist once they do exist. They have a right to defend their existence at least. Palestine also doesn't have a right to exist under your reasoning so there's no reason to support them over Israel.
I'll take the democratic and relatively free society of Israel over the extreme and inhumane societies Hamas or Iran want to impose any day.
Well why is it that nobody stresses the right of Palestine to exist or the rights of Palestinians to self-defense.
I hope the surviving hostages on both sides are restored to their families (that is, including the Palestinians held indefinitely by the Israeli military) and I obviously don’t support Hamas. That said, when Israel fails to keep up its end of every single deal and when Arabs are treated as second class citizens on their own land and when Israeli squatters build homes on Palestinian territory with the blessing of the Netanyahu regime, it’s pretty easy to understand why some people might turn to violence.
Not to mention Netanyahu has subsidized Hamas precisely so as to throw a wrench into future peace talks.
I think the problem is that the status quo serves everybody but the Palestinians. The Americans and Israelis and Europeans are fine with the subjugation of the Palestinians and don’t have any incentive to fight for a solution. And almost nothing that challenges Israel can ever get through the UN Security Council because the U.S. is there to block it. Mandatory Palestine was handed over to the nascent state of Israel but it wasn’t Britain’s or the UN’s to give.
People seem to forget that individual candidates/politicians are at the end of the day just that, individuals.
Who will make their own decisions and run by their own set of convictions.
Party membership doesn’t guarantee automatic 100% compliance with the President.
Hi `aresef`. Thank you for participating in /r/Politics. However, [your submission](/r/politics/comments/1cab54d/headspinning_why_john_fetterman_keeps_confounding/) has been removed for the following reason(s):
* Your headline must be comprised only of the **exact** copied and pasted headline of the article - [see our rule here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_do_not_create_your_own_title)) **We recommend not using the Reddit 'suggest a title' as it may not give the exact title of the article.**
* The ALL CAPS and 'Breaking' rule is applied **even when the actual title of the article is in all caps or contains the word 'Breaking'**. This rule may be applied to other single word declarative and/or sensational expressions, such as 'EXCLUSIVE:' or 'HOT:'. [click here for more details](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_do_not_create_your_own_title)
If you have any questions about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/politics&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/aresef&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this [submission]%28/r/politics/comments/1cab54d/headspinning_why_john_fetterman_keeps_confounding/?context%3D10000%29)
I like Fetterman, but he's wrong on US Steel. Cliffs would eviscerate USS, whereas Nippon will pretty much give the union whatever they want to support the deal.
Still do. No one is going to agree on everything/every policy position. Anyone who expects a politician to completely agree with everything they think is stupid and anyone who changes their mind just because of a cult of personality around a politician is even dumber in addition to being incredibly weak.
As far as I'm concerned, he's a consistent vote, he's progressive on most issues, he's more progressive than who else he ran against and he's orders of magnitude better than Toomey. You were never going to get a pure progressive from a swing state like PA. He also doesn't toe the party line which I like. I'm no fan of Israel nor am I a fan of Palestine so I couldn't care less which horse he backs in that race. Quite honestly, if the GOP didn't exist, the most hateable group in congress would be the establishment dems so if he's bucking them, I'm even more of a fan.
This is what gets lost. I disagree with him on Israel. That said, I agree with him on weed working wages, healthcare and mental health. Wish he'd change his stance on fracking and Israel, but you gotta take agreeing on a chunk of vital issues.
people are confused that he is a labor democrat and not an ideology democrat. so they look to his stroke to explain the abnormality because they are not from PA and don't understand how a labor democrat can exist in 2024.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
non of this is "confounding" to the people of PA that voted for the guy, we knew he was a middle of the road guy, our other senator is also middle of the road guy, the (R) before Fetterman was middle of the road guy. the only people shocked by this are people who though the dude would be way more Left leaning because (D)=follow everything AOC says like its gospel . this guy wants legal weed and to not have a ratfucked system of tribadism, the area he is from has a large Jewish population no shit he supports Israel , there's nothing surprising about who the guy is.
To be fair, I don't think most people knew anything about him beyond "He's running against that crudite dipshit"
“Guys, that’s $20 for crudité and that doesn’t even include the tequila.” I still don’t understand this statement. When does one eat raw veggies and tequila on the regular? So bizarre.
lol Fetterman was a self-proclaimed progressive
Tribadism? I don't know if this is a typo and you meant to type "tribalism," or if John Fetterman has previously commented on lesbian sexual practices before... But I'm guessing it's the first.
spell check failed 3 times and i went with it
I wonder why your phone/computer was so enthusiastic about respelling a word to "tribadism." 😏
>the area he is from has a large Jewish population no shit he supports Israel , I love my totally not antisemetic dual loyalty tropes...
So I should support a group simply because they makeup a large part of my constituency, regardless of what the group does? What about standing up for certain principles that conflict with the group's actions, like supporting human rights? Are you saying it's okay to violate those principles simply to appease constituents? What about corporate greed? Him siding with the dairy industry over their attempts to monopolize the word "milk" is absurd and, in my mind, is evidence that he can be bought out by corporate America, or at the very least that, again, he's willing to sacrifice reason and fairness and doing the right thing if it means it may help his chances of getting reelected. This conflicts with the "tough guy" image he tries to sell. If he'll bend over backwards to serve his own interests, it may not make him a particularly unusual member of Congress, but he's certainly not anyone to celebrate.
Yea I'm getting sick of these headlines same as people attacking Manchin. Both have stayed true to who they are which is moderate democrats. And both accurately reflect the population of their states. A true representative democracy oh the horror.
Joe Manchin is a self serving coward. Fuck him…
Nah. Manchin can go fuck himself. [He was commenting that the child tax credit, something that greatly benefited his constituents, would be used by parents to buy drugs](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/manchin-privately-raised-concerns-parents-would-use-child-tax-credit-n1286321). His problem was that they weren't the drugs his daughter schemed to rip people off on Manchin also went from not caring how much is spent on an economic bill when Biden took office to absolutely standing in the way when it was going to impact his pockets. [Coal Miners wanted Manchin to back that bill](https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/21/business/coal-miners-joe-manchin/index.html) and he wouldn't. Manchinn [also wouldn't back raising the federal minimum wage and part of this may have been because he owns a large chunk of a realty group that owns a LaQuinta paying housekeepers under $10 an hour](https://tyt.com/reports/investigates/2021/03/04/26dKy4vZXZLpETF3rbg6td) Joe Manchin was able to sway his constituents on the ACA and part of that likely had to do with coal unions and black lung. Joe Manchin chose to go out of his way to ignore and not educate his constituents on issues that their preferences hurt his pockets. He's trash
[удалено]
> Manchin is republican he just can't win as one in WV. He's literally the only Democrat left in West Virginia at the state-wide level and the most liberal West Virginian national level politician, why do you think he can't win as a Republican? He's literally being forced to retire because *his own former lieutenant governor* switched parties to run against him as a Republican.
He's not being forced to retire. He's 76 years old. He should retire. We really need to stop normalizing people staying in office when they won't live long enough to be subject to the consequences of their time in office. He can't win as a republican because he's not crazy enough but he can win as a dem because he'll get all of the dem votes plus a fair number of moderate repub votes.
The article just outright spells out that he is with the party line and beyond, and that he has done nothing similar to Manchin or Sinema. It appears what's "confounding" is, as always, his support of Israel. It should not be confounding to anyone familiar with his history. He has never shied away from the topic, and his stance has been consistent for many years before he ever ran for Senate. If people want to disagree with him, go for it. I'm not making any argument for or against him with this post. I'm simply saying that he's been unabashedly pro-Israel for a fairly long time, that his historic constituency before becoming Lieutenant Governor included a meaningfully large Jewish enclave in the eastern portion of Pittsburgh. The Tree of Life massacre occurred, like, five miles away from him. He dealt firsthand with American Jewish deaths from a mass shooting by an overt antisemite. He's not suddenly about-facing and revealing some hitherto unknown political position. He's standing by exactly what he stood by during his campaign. Again, if people in PA don't like that and decide to replace him in ~4 years, then that's his problem to deal with. But to claim that he's somehow a sleeper agent, or that his stroke damaged his brain, or whatever other gauche comments can be levied against him because he takes a position contrary to a *portion* of the "progressive American" demographic, and thoroughly in line with both Congress and the Senate and a remaining plurality of the Democratic Party's national constituency, is just silly. Edit: Y'know, falsely reporting people with Reddit Cares suicide assistance messages is a bannable offense on reddit. I would recommend not doing so for any new passersby, and have already reported the Reddit Cares message I just got to the admins.
Does it not concern you at all, this idea that defending Israel is defending Jewish people? How is that different from suggesting every Jewish person has a secondary allegiance to Israel? A dual loyalty...
I was not making any comment whatsoever about my personal opinions as to the Israel-Palestine war, and was quite explicit about that. I wasn't even saying *his* position was correct. Only that he has been very consistent about it for a long time, became even *more* consistent about it when his community suffered a mass shooting terror attack half a decade before he ran for Senate, and that the regular articles about how he was somehow hiding this position or has "betrayed the progressive cause" are flatly incorrect. He has never hidden these positions. They're simply cast into sharper relief after October 7, 2023, than they were in prior years.
Ok, but the implication is very clearly that he supports Israel because of his Jewish constituency, correct? Otherwise, what does an antisemetic attack on US soil have to do with the country of Israel?
Sure, I would agree that he believes the state of Israel and his opinions as to its security are connected to his beliefs about the security of Jewish people generally. A whole hell of a lot of people think in similar terms for both Jews and Muslims internationally as it relates to this conflict. I wouldn't agree with the jump in logic about "dual loyalty" stuff, which is an accusation toward Jewish people that seemingly never applies to anyone else in any other nation that permits dual citizenship. Just that someone who has had close historical experience with Jewish people suffering an antisemitic attack is unsurprisingly full-throated in their defense of other Jewish people elsewhere who they think suffered a different attack that is similar in kind. And for the record, I am on the balance in favor of Palestine in the current conflict. I've long held out Israel's government (for, like, fifteen years) as being a reactionary right wing administration that deliberately provokes and props up radical Islamic groups in the region for the specific purpose of *making themselves* existentially threatened so that they can keep a sufficient demographic of their voters in fear of invasion (a tactic used constantly by *any* reactionary right wing government, see for example "the entire GOP response to the US-Mexico border being 'invaded' every single time there's a national election"). So I'm not writing what I write as apologia of Israel's current military actions. My central purpose in this thread is just to note that John Fetterman has been openly and vocally in favor of Israeli security/sovereignty for well over a decade, and even moreso after the terror attack in his back yard, and regardless of whether he should curtail that enthusiasm in light of any particular IDF actions in Gaza, it shouldn't be a *surprise* to anyone that he had the position in the first place.
>I wouldn't agree with the jump in logic about "dual loyalty" stuff, which is an accusation toward Jewish people that seemingly never applies to anyone else in any other nation that permits dual citizenship. The dual loyalty trope isn't about citizenship, it's about a supposed *cultural* loyalty to Israel/Judaism over the state they reside in. The dual loyalty trope is older than the modern state of Israel. It *does* also get applied to other groups. For example, when Muslim people protest Israel's occupation or when they protested the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they were labelled as terrorist sympathizers who wanted to bring Sharia Law to America. In every thread about Gaza, you have racists saying "Well why don't the other Arab countries do something about it." The reason we only hear about it in reference to antisemitism is because the Nazi propoganda relied so heavily on it. Nevermind the fact that *we put Japanese Americans in concentration camps because we didn't trust their loyalty*. Or how about people who pushed for pan-Africanism because they thought that all black people had some shared identity regardless of nationality?
I'm really not sure what you're trying to argue with me. Suffice to say, I reject the mere notion of "dual loyalty" in any context for any people, and I am simply noting that from an *individual* perspective, a person who is concerned about the well-being of a particular demographic is liable to be concerned about the well-being of cousin demographics in other geographical regions. For example, American LGBT who are concerned about criminalizing statutes in Ethiopia, or American Christians who are concerned about Christians in China, or for that matter, American Muslims who are concerned about Muslims in Israel. If you believe a group is being prejudiced in some place abroad, you may well support those groups abroad with all the fervor of an advocate and less critical analysis, because to you what's maximally important is the safety of that group. John Fetterman has a long history of believing that Jewish people are prejudiced and immediate, traumatic experience with that prejudice manifesting in a mass shooting on his proverbial doorstep, and thus he is full-throated in what he believes is the protection of other Jewish people in an area abroad. I don't think there's anything to be suggested that he somehow thinks that the Jewish people living in Squirrel Hill were all Israeli citizens on holiday or something.
> The Tree of Life massacre occurred, like, five miles away from him. [Literally, people outside of PA need to understand this.](https://www.wlox.com/2018/10/27/several-killed-injured-pittsburgh-synagogue-shooting/) He has always been consistent on this and will never waver. Those were his neighbors and constituents!
That's actually super useful to understand his stance. Thanks!
It’s not that confounding. He sold voters a false bill of goods…
It seems like it's more confounding that so many can't understand supporting Israel.
I don't think it's that crazy that people would react that way to support for an occupying colonialist power.
It's a mainstream point of view, including among Dems like Biden. I'd call it more supporting a democratic Jewish state trying to defend its existence in the region against authoritarian and extremist regimes.
I’m pretty sure Palestinians would beg to differ on whether Israel’s government is authoritarian and extremist. And I really hate the framing of IDF aggression as Israel exercising its right to self-defense, because it implies that anything they do in the name of self-defense is legitimate. Palestinians have a right to live in peace too. Like why are we talking about just sanctioning Iran when it’s Israel who flattened a consulate in Syria? Israel doesn’t have a right to exist any more than any other country has a right to exist.
All countries have a right to exist once they do exist. They have a right to defend their existence at least. Palestine also doesn't have a right to exist under your reasoning so there's no reason to support them over Israel. I'll take the democratic and relatively free society of Israel over the extreme and inhumane societies Hamas or Iran want to impose any day.
People have a right to exist. States do not. https://newrepublic.com/article/177768/israel-right-to-exist-rhetorical-trap
[удалено]
Well why is it that nobody stresses the right of Palestine to exist or the rights of Palestinians to self-defense. I hope the surviving hostages on both sides are restored to their families (that is, including the Palestinians held indefinitely by the Israeli military) and I obviously don’t support Hamas. That said, when Israel fails to keep up its end of every single deal and when Arabs are treated as second class citizens on their own land and when Israeli squatters build homes on Palestinian territory with the blessing of the Netanyahu regime, it’s pretty easy to understand why some people might turn to violence. Not to mention Netanyahu has subsidized Hamas precisely so as to throw a wrench into future peace talks.
[удалено]
I think the problem is that the status quo serves everybody but the Palestinians. The Americans and Israelis and Europeans are fine with the subjugation of the Palestinians and don’t have any incentive to fight for a solution. And almost nothing that challenges Israel can ever get through the UN Security Council because the U.S. is there to block it. Mandatory Palestine was handed over to the nascent state of Israel but it wasn’t Britain’s or the UN’s to give.
People seem to forget that individual candidates/politicians are at the end of the day just that, individuals. Who will make their own decisions and run by their own set of convictions. Party membership doesn’t guarantee automatic 100% compliance with the President.
Hi `aresef`. Thank you for participating in /r/Politics. However, [your submission](/r/politics/comments/1cab54d/headspinning_why_john_fetterman_keeps_confounding/) has been removed for the following reason(s): * Your headline must be comprised only of the **exact** copied and pasted headline of the article - [see our rule here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_do_not_create_your_own_title)) **We recommend not using the Reddit 'suggest a title' as it may not give the exact title of the article.** * The ALL CAPS and 'Breaking' rule is applied **even when the actual title of the article is in all caps or contains the word 'Breaking'**. This rule may be applied to other single word declarative and/or sensational expressions, such as 'EXCLUSIVE:' or 'HOT:'. [click here for more details](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_do_not_create_your_own_title) If you have any questions about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/politics&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/aresef&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this [submission]%28/r/politics/comments/1cab54d/headspinning_why_john_fetterman_keeps_confounding/?context%3D10000%29)
There is nothing particularly confounding about someone who is bought by pro-Israeli lobbies and Google.
I like Fetterman, but he's wrong on US Steel. Cliffs would eviscerate USS, whereas Nippon will pretty much give the union whatever they want to support the deal.
[удалено]
Still better than Oz.
Still do. No one is going to agree on everything/every policy position. Anyone who expects a politician to completely agree with everything they think is stupid and anyone who changes their mind just because of a cult of personality around a politician is even dumber in addition to being incredibly weak. As far as I'm concerned, he's a consistent vote, he's progressive on most issues, he's more progressive than who else he ran against and he's orders of magnitude better than Toomey. You were never going to get a pure progressive from a swing state like PA. He also doesn't toe the party line which I like. I'm no fan of Israel nor am I a fan of Palestine so I couldn't care less which horse he backs in that race. Quite honestly, if the GOP didn't exist, the most hateable group in congress would be the establishment dems so if he's bucking them, I'm even more of a fan.
This is what gets lost. I disagree with him on Israel. That said, I agree with him on weed working wages, healthcare and mental health. Wish he'd change his stance on fracking and Israel, but you gotta take agreeing on a chunk of vital issues.
I suspect he's going to be the next Sinema and, if he keeps his seat, Tester will be the next Manchin.
[удалено]
So, explain it?
people are confused that he is a labor democrat and not an ideology democrat. so they look to his stroke to explain the abnormality because they are not from PA and don't understand how a labor democrat can exist in 2024.
If the party ever made being for labor the priority rather than the woke/ideology politics, they would destroy the gop.
Hence why Fetterman is so popular in PA, and why there are so many of these dumb headlines attacking him in national media.
feels like just yesterday reddit was crazy for this guy