Amazing, utterly amazing where we are in 2024, no?

Said this months ago but I actually did some reading on the guy awhile back and came to the conclusion I don't think he's a bad dude. I would never vote for him, but he's not as bad as most dems.

Uh oh...is his body double going off script??

Going off the (D) script again...this is Good Fetterman.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senator-blasts-un-rights-chief-concern-anti-israel-agitators-never-condemning-hamas

Ag_07 said:

---

I think his point was nothing she could say was going to change his mind and vice versa.

At that point it's a useless discussion.

Can't say I disagree

---

Perhaps. But imho- that's unproductive, and puts us in the position we're in now.

Even if no one changes their mind, People want to be heard. He should hear her, and then explain why he disagrees. That's what diffuses situations instead of escalating situations. It's how we learn new things and get different perspectives. If she still persists after you've heard her, than you end the conversation at that point.

Maybe that's what happened here, but it doesnt seem like he was allowing any discourse, which I'd argue, should be one of his top priorities as an elected official.

I obviously would never vote for the guy but I have to say, I love his IDGAF attitude to what anyone else thinks.

Surprised they're able to get that close. Does he not have security?

CS78 said:

---

Surprised they're able to get that close. Does he not have security?

---

I don't think anyone was that concerned about "Perry" or the 120 lb Karen that just won't shut the F up.

Which is what this really boiled down. Dude just wanted to sit outside and have his soda in peace but no, Karen and her beta sidekick just had to get their virtue signal video for Facebook.

AgGrad99 said:

---

I dont know the back story, but imo - He didnt handle it that well. He should engage in discourse with them.

If she's part of his constituency, give her a time limit, listen to her and allow her to make her points...and then counter them with facts.

Sticking his fingers in his ears and saying 'lalalalalala' isn't exactly productive.

But again, he mentions harassment o his staff. Maybe there's more to the story.

---

Being anti woke is always productive

That dude is like, "get away from me you crazy beeetch"

AgGrad99 said:

---

Ag_07 said:

---

I think his point was nothing she could say was going to change his mind and vice versa.

At that point it's a useless discussion.

Can't say I disagree

---

Perhaps. But imho- that's unproductive, and puts us in the position we're in now.

Even if no one changes their mind, People want to be heard. He should hear her, and then explain why he disagrees. That's what diffuses situations instead of escalating situations. It's how we learn new things and get different perspectives. If she still persists after you've heard her, than you end the conversation at that point.

Maybe that's what happened here, but it doesnt seem like he was allowing any discourse, which I'd argue, should be one of his top priorities as an elected official.

---

You're working under the assumption she was genuinely looking to have a rational dialogue. He said they had been harassing his staff. While I'm not a Fetterman supporter, I don't think he's wrong here. She wants to filibuster, not debate.

jefe95 said:

---

He's got a bit of the Big Lebowski vibe to him.

---

This is exactly it!

Aglaw97 said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

Ag_07 said:

---

I think his point was nothing she could say was going to change his mind and vice versa.

At that point it's a useless discussion.

Can't say I disagree

---

Perhaps. But imho- that's unproductive, and puts us in the position we're in now.

Even if no one changes their mind, People want to be heard. He should hear her, and then explain why he disagrees. That's what diffuses situations instead of escalating situations. It's how we learn new things and get different perspectives. If she still persists after you've heard her, than you end the conversation at that point.

Maybe that's what happened here, but it doesnt seem like he was allowing any discourse, which I'd argue, should be one of his top priorities as an elected official.

---

You're working under the assumption she was genuinely looking to have a rational dialogue. He said they had been harassing his staff. While I'm not a Fetterman supporter, I don't think he's wrong here. She wants to filibuster, not debate.

---

The casual vibe works better when he's in a casual setting.

Tex117 said:

---

jefe95 said:

---

He's got a bit of the Big Lebowski vibe to him.

---

This is exactly it!

---

And I think that is why most dude's can relate. You get to a point in life where "look I think this, you think that, we're not going to agree, so please just STFU and let me sit here in peace". Especially when dealing with women.

The only thing more obnoxious than a young libtard is an old balding one. Probably some burnt out hippy from back in the day that never grew the hell up.

Fetterman should have told them STHU and GTFO

ttu_85 said:

---

The only thing more obnoxious than a young libtard is an old balding one. Probably some burnt out hippy from back in the day that never grew the hell up.

Fetterman should have told them STHU and GTFO

---

He kind of did in a way.

Quote:

---

You're working under the assumption she was genuinely looking to have a rational dialogue. He said they had been harassing his staff. While I'm not a Fetterman supporter, I don't think he's wrong here. She wants to filibuster, not debate.

---

To be fair, I think we're all making assumptions without more info.

Like I said, perhaps that's what happened. I'm just going off the video. They both seemed the same to me. She likely didnt want to hear his opinion, and he obviously didnt want to hear hers.

If this was AOC "lalalalala'-ing a conservative constituent, wanting to espouse Israel over her support of Hamas, I have a feeling people would feel differently...but we should be consistent about what we expect out of our elected officials.

Trajan88 said:

---

Would have been choice if he was eating a hot dog or sammy while they attempted to talk to him.

---

Him sipping that coke reminded me of the Canadian politician destroying that reporter while eating an apple.

AgGrad99 said:

---

Quote:

---

You're working under the assumption she was genuinely looking to have a rational dialogue. He said they had been harassing his staff. While I'm not a Fetterman supporter, I don't think he's wrong here. She wants to filibuster, not debate.

---

To be fair, I think we're all making assumptions without more info.

Like I said, perhaps that's what happened. I'm just going off the video. They both seemed the same to me. She likely didnt want to hear his opinion, and he obviously didnt want to hear hers.

If this was AOC "lalalalala'-ing a conservative constituent, wanting to espouse Israel over her support of Hamas, I have a feeling people would feel differently...but we should be consistent about what we expect out of our elected officials.

---

I agree we should be consistent, which is why I don't have a problem with his response. You don't ambush a person on a park bench with 5-6 of your "friends" and someone videotaping the encounter if you are serious. I don't agree with people ambushing Ted Cruz, AOC or anyone else when they are out on the street. If you are truly serious, that's not the way you handle these things.

In an ideal world, he would have openly debated her on the spot because I doubt she can hold her own during a factual debate. But I doubt that's his strength and only a few politicians can do this effectively. The second best thing he could have done was tell her that he's happy to have a meeting with her to discuss her concerns, to make that appointment with his staff, to outline the specific points she would like to discuss with him and that his office does not allow cameras during meetings. I presume she quickly would have backtracked because again I don't think she's serious.

That's fair.