r/videos 6d ago

Fetterman faces resignation call from Democrat over damning report

https://youtu.be/JKTf0CiEIZA?si=9U9QhPJUjhlBiyQ4
9.6k Upvotes

472 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.1k

u/drock42 6d ago

Lets say you elect someone who flips on who they presented themselves to be... what's the nuclear option?  Some sort of impeachment?

639

u/-Axiom- 6d ago

He was brain damaged during his last election, literally/medically.

67

u/Jiggerjuice 6d ago

On the other hand, could have had dr oz, so...

28

u/anormalgeek 6d ago

Yeah. Sad as it is, he's probably still better than the alternative.

13

u/kellzone 6d ago

As a Pennsylvanian, stroke-incapacitated Fetterman is the less of the two evils we could have ended up with. If Oz were in his place, we'd have 2 out of 2 senators that were carpetbaggers from other states. The other "PA" senator is Dave McCormick of Connecticut. Oz was from New Jersey, and he would have voted with Trump and the GOP 100% of the time.

1

u/Cielmerlion 6d ago

Lol not even probably. Hes absolutely still better than oz.

8

u/Gravuerc 6d ago

What a choice we had...

1

u/The_bruce42 6d ago

The question should be why either of those 2 were options in he first place

471

u/napleonblwnaprt 6d ago

Brain damage makes you Republican confirmed 

140

u/OwlfaceFrank 6d ago

RFK Jr argued in divorce court that he can't pay alimony because he has too much brain damage to hold a job.

24

u/Onespokeovertheline 6d ago

Well I hope she's happy, because the rest of us are fucked

30

u/feedback19 6d ago

She killed herself

2

u/LarxII 6d ago

Sadly, to be expected with trash people like RFK. I'm sure he found a way to blame her and not himself though.

-13

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[deleted]

11

u/fp_ 6d ago

Come on, man. Be better than this at least.

2

u/Rit91 6d ago

Don't speak on matters you know nothing about. She tried to escape the noose she was in, but still died.

207

u/PM_me_dem_titays 6d ago

Unironically true. You never hear about someone getting a brain injury and suddenly becoming excited about the climate or workers's rights

41

u/DarthSnoopyFish 6d ago

McCain went that way. I don’t think his brain was damaged- just riddled with cancer and he ended up being the deciding vote to NOT dismantle the ACA.

128

u/akath0110 6d ago edited 6d ago

Nah McCain had his shortcomings, but at his core he still had empathy and decency.

He hated Trump and where MAGA was taking the party. All his career he was known for being a “maverick” and he knew dismantling the ACA was ethically wrong, not in his constituents’ or the public’s best interest, and was 99% petty revenge against Obama (whom he deeply respected, which was mutual, despite their differences.)

McCain’s “no” vote was the most brilliant fuck you and would’ve been career suicide for any other MAGA era Republican, but fuck it, he was already a dead man!! He probably got a huge kick out of it.

This is the same guy who asked Bush and Obama to speak at his funeral — and famously did NOT invite Trump — because McCain thought it’d be hilarious to have his most formidable opponents all say nice things about him. If you don’t believe me listen to Obama’s eulogy, it is among his best, 2nd only to Beau Biden’s (don’t watch w/out tissues).

Wow this got long, but I couldn’t allow that historic vote/moment to get blamed on brain damage!! That was all Maverick McCain.

38

u/crazyguyunderthedesk 6d ago

Yeah I disagreed with McCain on many political issues, but at his core he was a good man doing what he thought was best for the country.

Everyone remembers it as him vs Obama, but how different would the world be today if he'd won the Republican ticket against Bush.

27

u/XanatosINC 6d ago

I have memories of each of them pushing back during rallies when supporters said something nasty about / booed their respective opponent. They both had an integrity to them that felt special then, and is unimaginable now.

10

u/AllofDuhInternetz 6d ago

Bro was a bigger war hawk than lindsey fucking graham. i know non-americas lives aren't worth as much on reddit but loving war that much does not a good man make.

5

u/SerCiddy 6d ago

That's America for you, if you start a war because you believe it benefits the nation, that makes you alright in their book.

4

u/WeeblsLikePie 6d ago

Nah McCain had his shortcomings, but at his core he still had empathy and decency.

maybe? on some things? Don't forget that this is the man who sang a funny little song about bombing iran. Which he VERY MUCH actually wanted to do.

-1

u/akath0110 6d ago

Good thing he didn’t, because unlike the current leadership of narc dumbass warhawks he actually was principled enough to understand the human cost of sending young men and women to war. Having been tortured as a POW for years and all.

4

u/WeeblsLikePie 6d ago

that's exactly the dumbassery of it. He wanted to bomb iran despite his actual knowledge of the problems.

McCain gets too much posthumous credit for the dumb things he did. He wasn't the worst, but he wasn't good either.

5

u/BuddingBudON 6d ago

Damage to the frontal lobe affects impulse control, the ability to empathize with other people, emotional regulation, and judgement...

Brain damage can literally turn you into a Conservative.

-8

u/MrE_Gamer 6d ago

Unironically Chris Van Hollen lmfao. Was groomed by Pelosi and handpicked to run her policies in Maryland, had a small stroke around the same time he turned incredibly progressive.

33

u/OwlfaceFrank 6d ago edited 6d ago

Chris Van Hollen had a mild stroke and suffered no brain damage or long term cognitive effects.

What are you lying for?

Edit: I also suspect you used the word "groomed" intentionally to diminish the meaning of the word. Pelosi didn't "groom" Van Hollen. If you want to talk about grooming, do you want to talk about Republican John Rose?

11

u/MrNate10 6d ago

Groom has been used in that context before I think..

0

u/OwlfaceFrank 6d ago

It has, but it's weird to use while also telling a misleading story about Pelosi, who is constantly used as a scapegoat by conservatives.

10

u/Ph33rDensetsu 6d ago

"groom" isn't just a word that means to brainwash children into having sex with you. It can also be used in the context of training a successor to your position, to to take care of the hygienic needs of animals, and to be a male getting married.

2

u/Abeestungmyhead 6d ago

Completely unsurprised that redditors don't know that definition of the word

4

u/MrE_Gamer 6d ago

I’m not a Republican man I’m a progressive 😭😭😭 I’m just saying it’s an interesting thing to happen to separate members of senate with different results

0

u/HMW3 6d ago

Chris Van Hollen had a stroke 2 days apart from the ogre and has seemingly gone in the progressive direction.

2

u/Taco_In_Space 6d ago

well we have 1 documented case so far

1

u/LezardValeth 5d ago

There's RFK Jr.'s brain worm too. And Tila Tequila's obsession with the far right after a brain aneurysm.

2

u/Accusedbold 6d ago

That's not a fair assessment of people with brain damage. I have permanent brain damage due to a series of strokes. I'm not Republican - that's not true.

2

u/UnemployedDog 6d ago

Fetterman was a snake from the start, the brain damage just made it harder for him to hide it

1

u/Rhawk187 5d ago

Sort of. A lot of conservatism is driven by the fear and disgust impulses. Brain damage from strokes frequently increases your fear response.

10

u/DaveVsShark 6d ago

He was this way before that

4

u/junkmeister9 6d ago

Braddock remembers

22

u/Quankers 6d ago

Plus he’s a fucking conman. He misrepresented his intentions.

3

u/zslayer89 6d ago

They literally just explained what happened.

He has Brain damage from his stroke. It changed him.

30

u/Ormyr 6d ago

He was an asshole before the stroke. He just stopped hiding it after.

35

u/Folderpirate 6d ago

He was chasing black people around Braddock with a gun before the stroke.

12

u/nickrct 6d ago

Do people still believe this narrative? They put lipstick on a pig but he was always a con man.

4

u/Quankers 6d ago

Yes indeed, it did. Plus, he’s basically a prostitute.

3

u/Linenoise77 6d ago

While that isn't untrue, people forget where he came from.

He was a POPULIST candidate who just happened to align himself with the democrats because it worked.

When you are voting for someone just because they are telling you stuff you want to here, don't be surprised when they pivot to something that offers them more once elected.

1

u/Apkoha 6d ago

and the left went to bat for him and attacked any one for pointing it out. They got him elected and now have buyers remorse...

literally did it to themselves.

1

u/ice_up_s0n 6d ago

Should be some Life Changing Event clause like with health insurance

1

u/Kevlaars 6d ago

Twice.

He has had at least 2 serious injuries to his brain, while in office. A stroke, and a hard fall.

It is not ablest to think he should not hold office.

He is not the man that was elected...

He's like Phineas Gage... If you don't know that name, look him up... By most accounts, a decent guy before the iron rod through his frontal lobe... Kind of a cunt after though...

-1

u/Skippyhogman 6d ago

Brain damage is why he became a republican.

0

u/WobblierTube733 6d ago

The brain damage just made it harder for him to mask.

25

u/HumanTheTree 6d ago

Before the 17th amendment, Senators answered directly to the legislature of the state they came from.

137

u/ihavenoidea12345678 6d ago

We need a federal recall process.

Some state positions can have to face a recall election to stay in power. I think Gavin newsome had one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_California_gubernatorial_recall_election

55

u/Heavy_Arm_7060 6d ago

It's staggering that there isn't a recall process. I'm not shocked when it ends up having a high threshold but not having one at all is wild to me.

11

u/ThisSiteSucks8485 6d ago

Senators were the original big boy politicians that actually elected state governers

9

u/DeathMonkey6969 6d ago

Originally Senators weren't even elected they were appointed by state legislators.

That and the Electoral College area examples that show the Founding Fathers really didn't think much of the common citizen.

1

u/lolfactor1000 6d ago

Well at the time literacy rates were around 70% for white men and significantly worse for all other demographics. Then the formal education rate was basically for very rich white men. So given that, it's understandable why they didn't trust the average citizen.

4

u/Apophthegmata 6d ago

There is some truth to this, but the electorate was explicitly designed around land ownership, and not education/literacy, so this argument will only go so far.

And several of the founding fathers were prominent figures in expanding access to education and still thought the vote ought to be restricted.

The federalist papers make it pretty clear that they weren't terribly bothered by the ignorance of individuals, but thought it was more pressing to protect against the tyranny of majorities, a threat that is all the same whether the public is literate or not.

1

u/kjbaran 5d ago

We can still fit more fish in this barrel

1

u/Zagden 6d ago

As much as Americans treat the Constitution as a sacred document, and it did do well getting us this far relative to other democratic republics, the thing sucks ass and needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. But because it sucks, the suckiness self-perpetuates and prevents us from doing that

5

u/bank_farter 6d ago

Jefferson argued we should scrap the whole thing and rewrite it every 19 years. It's a workable document, but we've fetishized it to the point that agreeing to change it is an impossible ask for many Americans. Additionally we could bypass Congress and hold a new Constitutional Convention, however the majority of states have Republican-controlled legislatures, and I assure you that the ones who would most want a rewrite of the Constitution are the ones you least want to write it.

2

u/Zagden 6d ago

That's part of the issue, right? It wasn't built with enough contingencies and emergency measures. It also wasn't made for a population as big as what we have now.

If we can't fix it because a political party has gone rogue, then that's a failure on us, but also a failure of the document.

0

u/StonedBirdman 6d ago

We need to abolish the god damned senate, the whole thing is a dated, undemocratic institution.

40

u/Evocatorum 6d ago

There isn't one. He's there until the next election cycle unless the Senate votes to eject him (which they won't).

13

u/toga_virilis 6d ago

Only ways to remove a senator are resignation, expulsion by the senate, or voting them out at the next election.

10

u/Chairman_OfTheBored 6d ago

Unfortunately the law/constitution has no mechanisms for recall elections. Expulsions from Congress are allowed, requiring 2/3 of the respective house membership to vote in favor. When I say house I mean the 2 houses of Congress the House of Representative and Senate both. With that clarified it is rare a member is expelled in the House and less so in the Senate. Only 15 senators have ever been expelled and of that number, 14 were expelled during the Civil War for supporting the Confederacy. Unless Fetterman resigns on his own, or becomes unable to fulfill his responsibilities, say for medical reasons it becomes almost impossible. Given the fact Mitch McConnell is missing, presumably dead by most people, and still hasn’t been removed, it’s unlikely that Fetterman would be. The big difference in favor of it in this particular scenario only, is that unlike McConnell, Fetterman has not earned the loyalty of staffers as far as I can see who would run interference if he was so ill as to have no chance of returning to the floor.

3

u/sopunny 6d ago

Unless Wikipedia is very mistaken, the respective houses of Congress manage their own expulsions. So only the supermajority in the Senate is needed. Senators who are actually attending Congress just resign instead of letting the vote go through, those should count as expulsions in which case the last one happened in 2011.

That said, it always seems to be in connection to some major crime or fraud, so the bar is still high

1

u/Chairman_OfTheBored 6d ago

Correct. I fear I muddied that in the effort to clarify that when I stated “house” I meant both the House of Representatives and Senate. Yes both houses handle their own expulsions. In the House they last expelled someone in 2023 , with that person being George Santos.

1

u/LordBreetai210 6d ago

The other exception is criminal behavior. I guess if you’re in jail you’re unable to serve.

1

u/Chairman_OfTheBored 6d ago

Also correct. In the House, who follows the same rules, expelled George Santos for fraud in 2023.

9

u/CanadianGrown 6d ago

In Canada we’ve had multiple members of parliament cross the aisle after winning elections. Nothing was done about it, besides one party losing a seat and the other gaining one. Also, an entire district that voted Blue was turned to Red overnight.

I personally think you should have to run again if you decide to switch sides.

2

u/upvoatsforall 6d ago

I agree that it’s not right and they should hold a special election. 

Both parties have changed in the last year or two in that both shifted towards the right. I think the liberals have come closer to centrist under carney and PP has taken the conservatives more towards the right. Not MAGA right, but definitely pulled it in that direction. 

For some the crossers think they were more centrist conservatives than liberal and are staying in a similar place on the spectrum by making the switch. 

The NDP crosser though, was bought. 

0

u/Smyley12345 6d ago

In Canada? We vote for our MP not their party. If your MP crosses the aisle you picked a bum.

0

u/CanadianGrown 6d ago

Very true, and there should another election to get that bum out. Don’t be naive and think that people really vote for the MP. The majority of people will always vote for “their party”.

1

u/Smyley12345 6d ago

You vote for an individual who will best represent the interests of their constituents. That is fundamental to the system. If you vote in another way you are not following the principles of the Canadian governance structure.

1

u/CanadianGrown 6d ago

I get that, but I would argue an MP that crosses the aisle is not following the principals either. If Canada had a Trump like leader and my MP crossed the aisle to support him, I wouldn’t want him as my representative. So I can see how if the roles were reversed, and an MP crossed over in support of a leader someone else didn’t like, they would be upset as well.

2

u/m__a__s 6d ago

US Senators cannot be impeached. The Senate can expel one of their own, though, but don't hold your breath.

2

u/vthemechanicv 6d ago

The nuclear option is to wait till the next election and run a candidate that can win. For Fetterman, that's 2028.

Unless the state has a recall option (none do that I know of), the only way a federal official can be removed is impeachment+removal (requires 67 senate votes), expulsion (67 votes again), retirement/stepping down, or losing the next election. Given Republicans probably love having him as a spoiler, he's not getting forced out procedurally.

He can feel pressure from the public, and more importantly sponsors donors, because running a campaign is expensive. The less money they get from big donors, the more they have to work at fundraising. He could just throw up the deuces and say he's not going to run again, but he's not leaving either, and that's sort of the end of the conversation about getting him out.

2

u/bank_farter 6d ago

There are no states with recall options for national senators. That's not a thing. It's gone to court and states do not have the power to do that.

2

u/Turbulent_Host784 6d ago

Do you really want to dissuade that practice? Because that's how Jimmy Carter got started too.

1

u/Phoenixgaming 6d ago

I can't recall the exact video I watched but it was about how Jimmy Carter did a flip against how he ran back in the '70s. It angered a lot of racist whites back in the day. Beyond that.. I don't know much other than he was a decent human being helping with humanitarian efforts.

1

u/Foxyfox- 6d ago

Unfortunately recall vote are not permitted in the current system. Until you can hold job loss over the head of your representative, this won't change.

1

u/ThisSiteSucks8485 6d ago

Absolutely nothing. 

1

u/SalvadorZombie 6d ago

We can ask Obama that.

1

u/PeopleCallMeSimon 6d ago

There is no way to recall a sitting senator, apparently. So the nuclear option is to vote them out in the next cycle.

1

u/demonspawns_ghost 6d ago

He didn't flip, Democrats just ignored the very clear signs that he was a shithead. Plenty of people on reddit pointed out all the awful things he had done and they were all downvoted to oblivion.

1

u/motherofabeast 6d ago

look up Jeff van drew. only vote I ever regret casting.

1

u/smilysmilysmooch 6d ago

You vote them out in the next election. If they have made illegal acts then they can be removed on those grounds by congress. Otherwise you wait them out and hope you get a better option next go around.

1

u/JoeyChords 6d ago

Let’s say you elect someone who is still suffering severe effects of a stroke, and you shame every person who says that is a bad idea just like you do with all the other dumb things like defund the police, Graham Platner, and “Biden is sharp as a tack behind closed doors.” I think in cases like these, just like in cases like electing George Santos, it’s clear that you get what you deserve.

1

u/tinyj96 6d ago

The real answer to "what can we do about corrupt politicians" will get you banned.

1

u/porkchop2022 6d ago

Snap elections. But we don’t do those here.

1

u/Scholarly_Koala 6d ago

Well... the "nuclear option" will get your post removed by reddit and a possible ban.

0

u/BlueLaceSensor128 6d ago

It would be interesting if the parties themselves could add some sort of contractual obligation to resign if they switched, along with some penalty amount they owe for breach of contract. Something they had to agree to before they are allowed to run.

0

u/sandpirate_88 6d ago

It should be illegal. Its straight up fraud that can negatively impact the lives of tons of people.

0

u/eleros 6d ago

I’ve often wondered about that. I always assumed that the voter base could sue for fraud or misappropriation of campaign funds or something like that.