Speculation has swirled around Senator John Fetterman lately, about whether he might switch his party affiliation from Democrat to Republican. Charlie Cooke, on today’s edition of The Editors, pushes back, saying “John Fetterman is heterodox” — not a Republican.
“He has proven willing to break with his own party, which is unusual in this day and age,” says Charlie. “He does so in a brusque manner that is guaranteed, perhaps designed, to garner attention. He’s immune to one of the creepiest elements of modern progressivism, which is the instant downloading of the latest groupthink, subsequently to be presented as if it is long-standing conviction.”
Charlie points out that while Fetterman’s immunity in that regard has made him rather unpopular with Democrats and more acceptable to Republicans, “that doesn’t change who he is or what he believes. He’s not a Republican. He is a Democrat. An eccentric Democrat perhaps, but a Democrat. . . . So when it comes to key questions — Supreme Court justices, fiscal policy, religious liberty, and so forth — he’s going to disappoint the right.
“I think where John Fetterman could be interesting,” says Charlie, “is when it comes to the seemingly inevitable radicalism of the next Democratic trifecta. James Carville said recently that Democrats should abolish the filibuster, pack the Supreme Court, add new states, and so forth. It seems unlikely to me that John Fetterman would be interested in that, partly dispositionally, partly because he’s from Pennsylvania, and partly because he has friends in the Senate who seem well placed to be able to make the case to him that he should protect the institution.
“If I were Republicans, I would stay friendly with him, stay on the same terms. But I wouldn’t try to bring him into the fold. I’d try to turn him into an institutionalist who can be relied upon not to break the Constitution when his team gets back into power.”
The Editors podcast is recorded on Tuesdays and Fridays every week and is available wherever you listen to podcasts.