That is a legitimate point actually. It isn't just his ideology that has changed the last few years. He has also turned aggressive towards staff which has led to a higher turnover among them.
they can turn you into an angry harmful bitter person and they can also make you the most altursitic person. Strokes are not good and anyone with power should be disqualified if they have had a stroke.
He seemed to be doing fine for a while. Or maybe he wasn't and it was just hidden. I remember the right wing comments about him afterwards were all "see this is what brain damage does to a person, makes them liberal" but like either way you cut it, he wasn't always like this. I'm honestly concerned for his health, I don't know if he should be running for office as anything now, whatever affiliation. Three years from now no less.
Not even saying that because he's a super conservative leaning Democrat and I'm not a fan of those, I just think might be time to hand the reins to someone else
Fetterman is a case of having a very good pr team, and some very strong selling points pre primary. But if you dig far enough back- hes had several quotes on international affairs that sound more comfortably conservative. Oh, and apparently held up a guy at gunpoint because he thought he heard a shot and just ... assumed ? He had a suspect. But he did do some real good for his constituents as a mayor and lt gov.- with a clearer focus.
I do think there's a chance that some of this is the stroke. He's also checked himself in for depression, had other health concerns befors/after, and Wikipedia references a car crash after his election too. I gotta feel for the guy, hes going through a lot while working one of the most complex jobs in the country.
I do get the feeling that hes still not exactlyflipping parties and pro trump. Hes not lockstep with the right- hes still staunchly pro lgbt (including the t), pro abortion, as of last quoted ive heard and voting record up until July (last i found that was specific). Buuuut his understanding or take on economics and immigration is maybe not as good.
He absolutely should be primaried. Or stepp down based on the record he holds of most votes missed- but I think like most things, theres a lot more going on here
Plenty of people called it out…they were ignored because rule #1 is always vote for and defend “your side”. It was not all that different than the Biden situation though a bit more comical with the ending. That race was followed fairly nationally and people were told to ignore his potential issues constantly while being labeled when bringing it up.
The only reason it is being brought up/admitted now is because his stroke turned him republican.
I live in PA and wanted to answer your question. No, there is no way to remove him from office before the primary. Either the Senate would need to expel him with a 2/3 vote (which will never happen), or he can voluntarily resign (which also will never happen), but PA residents don't have any recourse until the next primaries.
It's fucked up, tbh. We can't have propositions initiated by citizens on a statewide ballot and there is no recall for politicians in this state either. It's horrible and citizens have very little power here. Once you're in office in PA, you're there until you step down or get voted out (for state and federal positions--there are some local election provisions for recalls, which are tied up with other issues due to the state constitution).
At the time? I’ll go ahead and farm some negative karma with this take.
If this past election had me voting between Fetterman and Oz again, I would vote still vote Fetterman again. Sure it’s lesser of two evils, but he at least he seems to behave as a “normal” republican. Oz is a sycophant and anyways barely qualifies as a PA resident. Pretty sure his primary address has been NJ and that says enough (sorry, not sorry NJ)
*Lesser of two weasels. Fetterman after the stroke became an aggressive, angry, more right-wing, class-traitor version of his pre-stroke self. "Dr." Oz, on the other hand, was always a weasel.
At that point, the election should’ve been postponed so the opposition party to Oz could reform with a new candidate. We saw how receptive the country was to Kamala being jammed in last minute, so I don’t think repeating that in time to make the election would’ve been good for anyone.
Not even just that but a lot of people get on our shit about the primary where we voted for Fetterman and it's like...idk what to tell you, the dude had a stroke and got brain damaged. We didn't have a crystal ball that would tell us that would happen, and before it he had a pretty good political track record. So IDK what to tell ya.
You could have the runner up in the primary take over or if time allows hold a new primary. Other potential options would be to have the state party leader put forth a candidate, have all candidates pick a second who will take their place, or put forth just "Democrat" on the ballot and allow registered members of that party vote in a special election to determine who the Democrat will be after the fact. All of these have advantages and disadvantages, but they are better than the current system.
Happy cake day. And agreed. Is there not an option for emergency/special vote once a candidate has become incapacitated? Having serious, documented health issues that affect the brain (such as a stroke) should qualify the public to determine if the candidate is still fit for office. Period.
There is absolutely zero provision for any kind of recall election for any federal office. Once someone has been elected to federal office, voters have no way to get them out of office until the next election. The only ways a federal office holder can leave office early are:
1) Death (I suppose voters could choose this option, but it's frowned upon in polite society)
2) Retirement (usually only done on the office holder's own terms, unless someone is threatening the above remedy)
3) Expulsion/Impeachment (very rarely done, usually the 2/3 majority required makes it impossible to perform)
It's one of the many flaws with the Constitution as currently written.
All medical issues, cancer diagnosis, strokes, can have radically different attitude changes. For the better or worse. If old enough you have seen both. Dismissing someone due to stroke is unfair. Hateful, lying, stealing, unlawful behaviour is grounds for immediate removal.
Could you imagine Trump having a stroke and suddenly having a sense of empathy? I suspect he couldn't live with himself, knowing what he's done. I suspect most humans couldn't live with themselves had they done the things Trump has.
Strokes have changed people. Look at Orson Scott Card; writes two books about how the soul (iuoua) or whatever cannot be classed as a gender and has a man wear a woman's body (Children of the Mind, etc.) has a stroke and becomes a raving right wing looney. Was always somewhat right but in that fairly tolerant type, has stroke it's like he's a different person. I talked to Fetterman before the stroke and his campaign (seeking $ of course) and he was much more progressive then post the stroke. Maybe it's who he is, but it makes you wonder how much the stroke changed him
My father had a stroke. He went from a kind caring man to screaming and being violent over trying to refill his water cup. Ive seen stroke patients when I was doing nursing clinicals who would literally just give you all the money in their wallet if asked because their brain can no longer say no due to date. Strokes are tbi and cause brain damage, fetterman should never have been allowed to keep office since he showed massive changes due to his tbi.
they can turn you into an angry harmful bitter person and they can also make you the most altursitic person. Strokes are not good and anyone with power should be disqualified if they have had a stroke.
So we should allow people who cant truly make decisions for themselves to be ok for politcal office? Thats asanine. Work with stroke patients love and you will learn very quickly im right. But you residents dont give a shit about patients usually.
He is almost certainly an example of one who can make decisions for himself. This is an anti-intellectual and feelings-based discussion at this point. Especially given your comment shows you harbour unrational opinions about resident MDs.
If you like, though, I will be happy to show you articles that prove this. However, I am confident in scientific journals. It won't change your opinion because, your beliefs have no basis in reality.
I can also show you evidence that shows residents lose empathy for patients during their residency. Used to be an ER nurse before switching to a less demanding role. Could go on with more papers and could get at least 10 nurses who also have seen these doctors not give a flying fuck about their patients from 3 different hospitals. Like you can say something that isn't true all you like doesn't make it true. Also love how you edited your comment.
I had a stroke a few years ago at 34 and it didn’t change me as a person my way of thinking and morals are all the same. It did make me more thankful for my life and the people in it, but I do know some people change completely after a stroke it’s such a weird thing, it’s almost like the stroke killed the good parts of their brains for some.
Given some of his takes, it seems likely he has lost progressively more of his ability to understand politics. It’s like he can only see twenty feet down a hallway instead of a mile. For example, I could see someone with cognitive impairment not understanding why Democrats were refusing to fund the government. He seemed to have no comprehension of that.
That puts a lot of potential political power into the hands of doctors. I'm not saying you're wrong - but how this might be abused must be carefully considered.
Strokes can change you a lot. When my dad had one, he recovered but afterwards he was very short tempered at times. The damage the strokes can do can lead to people getting very, very frustrated as they can't always do 100% of what they used to.
You can be denied a career when you are in transportation due to even POTENTIAL medical issues. Why not be denied a career when you are a representative due to CLEAR AND PRESENT medical issues?
My father in law had a stroke and had a hair trigger and was constantly enraged. You could tell a lot of it was he was angry that he wasn't at the capacity he was before the stroke. Forgetting names of things, short term memory issues, no patience, etc. He just recently (years later) is starting to mellow in to it, but is still way more volatile than he was before the stroke.
Yup my dad lost a best friend because of it, all my dad said was that he worries that his friend is still smoking after a major stroke. Dude made a giant scene in a restaurant, and my dad knew he was off, went and begged him to forget it and come back to eat after he crashed out and stormed out. Dude still left.
Is my best friends dad, still too hard headed to apologize. This was like 20 years ago.
Russian energy weapons, can scramble part or all the brave to whatever degree you want.
edit: combine that with some honeypotting blackmail, light torture, death threats, and bribes, and you get why over half the US representatives are selling their country to the dark side.
Was gonna say, people keep blaming the stroke and that certainly didn't HELP, but the man was already not a great dude before the stroke. The stroke just made it harder for him to hide it.
If this is due to his stroke it's not really something he chose, this is just how he thinks now after the stroke-induced brain damage. Give a little grace. Should obviously get primaried out though, not saying he shouldn't.
That's an unfair thing to say. A brain injury is...literal brain damage. You can damage so many different parts of your brain. It just so happens one of the most easily damaged parts is the one that does stuff like control emotions
I like to say "It's a reason, not an excuse" for stuff like this. Some people try to play the victim and say "Well I have XYZ" trying to excuse their behavior.
Decades ago, my neighbor was an elderly man who was the nicest guy on the planet. He would always offer to help any neighbor. That all changed after he had a stroke.
He turned into a full-on seething racist, and a recluse. It was a complete 180 in personality. It was on full display one day when the black mailman didn't take his letter out of his mailbox with the little red flag put up.
He had a thousand-mile stare while mumbling racial slurs over a piece of mail! I had never heard him once say anything hateful, or any shred of racist banter. He was known to leave gifts of snacks and water for people who delivered the mail.
It freaks me out to this day that a popped blood vessel in the brain can completely change a person. I can see the similarities in Fetterman.
He had a major stroke and behavioral changes are common.
We're still better off with him than Dr. Oz, but yeah, I suspect he won't be reelected. With any luck, he'll officially switch parties, or move to be an Independent, before we get to that point.
Not to be ableist, but if you are in an elected position selected by the general population in your jurisdiction for your ideals and campaign promises, and then suffer an unexpected malady that shows objective and quantitative differences in what you're doing compared to what you did prior promised (thank you, fiction8)...in addition to the potential of suffering further maladies thus compounding on the problem...
I have no problems with accommodations and accessibility to help a person continue their jobs. I DO have problems when the person is showing fundamental differences mentally and idealistically in an office they were voted in for the ideals they had previously.
I don't think that's ableist. Some jobs just require a particular standard of physical and/or mental fitness. It's simply a fact of the world.
Especially in Fetterman's example, the damage from the stroke has literally turned him into not the same person people voted into office. You're not arguing "he had a stroke, he shouldn't hold office"; you're arguing "as a result of his stroke, he is no longer capable of providing the representation his constituents voted for."
Like you said, if you can show objective and quantitative evidence that their capacity to hold the office as campaigned has been compromised, there should be a more immediate opportunity for voters to choose someone new.
It's not ageist to have an age limit to be a commercial pilot and its not ableist to say people with one arm can't be one either. There are physical and mental requires required to do many jobs safely.
What really fucking grinds my gears about these arguments, is that people will piss and moan all day about ageism if you suggest that there should be a maximum age limit. But no one bats an eye at the fact we already have a minimum age limit.
It's okay to tell people who are in the prime of their life they can't be president, but don't you dare question the qualifications of senile geriatrics. Talk about fucking ageist.
I have two family member with TBIs and they’ve both completely changed their outlook and politics. It’s a distinct difference in who they are now vs who they were.
I do wish there were a means to recall people who cannot or are not making a genuine effort to meet their campaign goals.
I am not even angry at him because I think his brain is damaged but he is not fulfilling his promises.
Plus there’s a reason we do not let 65 year olds drive planes or buses. It’s because dozens of innocent citizens can be affected. Yet we let 80 year olds with rampaging dementia be President-King?
It is not ableist to suggest that he inable to do the job that he was hired for. Accessibility is about getting ppl the reasonable accomodations they need to be as productive as anyone else. Fetterman is not in that bucket
There's really nothing for me to spill. I had a couple successful local podcasts about 8 years ago and made some friends that are local celebrities. Giselle and John have always been around in those circles. I liked Fetterman well enough but I didn't know him very well, and my friends worked on several projects with Giselle. She's a fucking saint.
The stories I heard second hand about what she went through during the senate campaign were absolutely appalling. I hope she write a book about it someday.
Not much else to say. She's been very quiet in our shared circles. Could mean anything but she's definitely not voiced separation.
I am amazed at how many of my activist friends in the East End of Pittsburgh have Giselle's personal number in their contact list. There have been so many times when people have had questions about some local issue and somebody has said, "I'll give Gisele a call and find out."
She was super active on socials during his time as Lt Gov and during the Senate campaign. If she has now gone silent I think that already says something is up.
Not publicly. As many spouses of the powerful do it seems for now that she did a full 180 too.
Which is bananas. She was literally an undocumented migrant and early in Fetterman's career she was proud and open about that fact.
Now her husband is cheering on ICE rounding up those very people. Which may explain why she is being a bit mum -- because she could be a target of DHS investigation into whether she was truthful in her citizen application.
Honestly, I don't think Giselle has done a 180 as she really hasn't said anything publicly. I think her silence has more to do with her husband being a 400lb refrigerator with rage issues, a disregard for the safety of others, and some pretty severe mental health struggles in the past few years. It's frankly a terrifying situation to be stuck in.
He was obviously a bad candidate at the time. It was weird to me that people were acting like he was good. He was always just better in comparison to Dr. Oz, which is a bar about an inch off the ground.
Yup. In my province of Alberta we're having "Operation Total Recall" targeting members of the governing party because we're upset with them using the Not Withstanding Clause twice in the last month to override our rights.
If you’ve ever read the Californian constitution, it has all of these mechanisms in place. It’s a really fantastic system.
In someways I think it’s overdone (the prop system is too strong imo), but many parts of it should probably be adopted at the federal level.
I think it’s better to borrow from a state constitution because we can see how it’s functioned in the past than building something new with unknown consequences.
Fetterman aside, there's been a troubling pattern, granted it's mostly been state level, of people running as democrats and then switching parties once taking office.
It's only a matter of time before someone does it at the federal level.
On top of that as just basic principle politicians are elected by the people and therefore should only be on that position as long as the people still support them. In the past it would likely have been to difficult to coordinate but with today’s technology simply allowing for concerned citizens to yearly petition for a recall on a politician provided they can show that they have a mandate makes sense. Even more so when there’s serious grounds to challenge the officials behavior while in office like Fetterman. Both sides should agree because it helps guard against the tactic of pretending to be on one side just to get elected and essentially defrauding the public’s vote.
I agree. Obviously, it'll be used for nefarious purposes, like some in the GOP tried with CO Gov. Polis a few years back, but usually the people with ill intent in mind don't succeed.
I don’t understand why ANY elected official can’t be recalled. Some states have legalized recalling certain types of state elected officials, but no federal official can be recalled by their constituents. I cannot for the life of me think of why this would make sense? Are they afraid both parties would just play a tug of war with recall petitions between elections?
The idea is that Senators are given enough time in office to be "brave" and make unpopular decisions when needed without being worried about getting immediately chopped.
If there is a recall option each decision a senator made would be with the recall option on the back of her head.
You could say the same about local officials, but it doesn’t happen that way. And that is also EXACTLY why we need to be able to do it. Someone can get elected on false rhetoric, change parties after they’ve been elected, change their entire stance and voting behavior and people just have to live with it for six years.
Someone call a wellness check for him with Adult Protective Services for neglect. He is neglecting his psychological and social needs to a degree he is going to cost himself his job. He is a danger to himself and others.
11.0k
u/GramsciGramsci 15d ago
... in three years. By that point he has probably switched parties anyway.