‘Was it even a winnable cycle?’ John Fetterman reckons with red Pennsylvania

AMERICANA: You went on Joe Rogan’s podcast; Kamala Harris never did. In 2019, Bernie Sanders got some criticism from liberals for going on that show, and for doing Fox News, and since the election I’ve seen some re-thinking about that — about criticizing Sanders. What sort of media interviews are Democrats not doing, that they should be doing?

JOHN FETTERMAN: I’ve always been a fan of the Rogan podcast, and of him personally. That doesn’t mean that I have to agree with him on everything, but it’s all about having conversations and having an exchange of ideas. I think he really pioneered that whole medium, and I think it’s important for all of us, especially for elected leaders, to challenge your own views and to expose yourself [to others]. He has created an incredibly impressive platform, and it would be pretty dumb to ignore that or to pretend it doesn’t exist.

So, I was happy to show up there. And it also addresses an important kind of an issue, in my opinion, with the Democratic Party. We have a challenge. We have our own kind of “childless cat ladies” situation: “Bros.” People refer to these young guys as bros, and clearly that’s not a positive term. They’re described as dopes, or gullible, or brutes. People were really shocked when the whole childless cat ladies thing dropped, and it is dumb. That violates the basic, basic rule of politics. Don’t subtract, do addition. I think that was part of the new coalition that really delivered a pretty crushing victory for Trump.

In western Pennsylvania, you saw what the Biden administration did for labor unions. This was not like a Bill Clinton 2.0, NAFTA administration; they implemented a lot of Bernie ideas, pushed out a lot of funding. Why do you think they didn’t get credit?

People have normal, complicated lives. They don’t get downloads of white papers saying — hey, this happened, this happened, this happened. Getting funding for a bridge and fixing it, that’s not going to be on the front of anyone’s Facebook feed. I’ve tried to make the argument to people that we may or may not agree on 10 policy issues, but you deserve to have a quality salary to support your family, and you deserve to share the kind of wealth that your hard work creates.

When US Steel announced that they were going to sell themselves to Nippon, I jumped up on my roof across from the mill, and I was like: We’re going to jam this up and we’re going to work with the White House. And that’s exactly what we did. All you can do is fight for people because that’s the right thing to do. It’s not a quid pro quo. It’s: Here’s what I fight for, here’s what I believe, and I hope you choose to support us, but if you don’t, then there must be other things in the way for you. That gets to the issues with men and why we’re losing some of them.

I want to ask about some Republican messaging. You’ve been a defender of trans rights your whole career; Republicans spent more than $200 million on anti-trans ads, tons in Pennsylvania, video of Harris saying she supported sex change access for prisoners. And today I’ve seen some Democrats say, we need to clarify that we’re not for boys and girls sports, we’re more moderate on this. What’s your response to that?

Two things. I refuse to throw members of the gay or trans communities under the bus. I’ll never walk away from them. But it’s also true, undeniably, that if someone ran for president in 2020 and pandered to that Squad mentality, or to get likes on Twitter, and they made those kinds of statements about gender, they were going to be pretty hard to defend. That was going to get weaponized. And it’s undeniable that Republicans created a really powerful message: “She’s for they/them, and Trump is for you.” That was, I think, our cycle’s version of “where’s the beef?” or “I knew Jack Kennedy, and you’re no Jack Kennedy.” That kept hitting again and again and again and again for 10s of millions of dollars. It had an ear worm quality. And I’m not surprised that that resonated.

What was the impact of the Gaza protests, and Harris sticking to Biden’s position?

You know, I refuse to pander on that. So, Dearborn delivered for Trump? Okay, congratulations. You’re going to love the next Muslim ban. That just demonstrates what I’ve always said, pandering to that is never going to work. To all of those dopes that voted Green against [Pennsylvania Senator] Bob Casey, that was the necessary votes that would have absolutely closed the gap in his race. Well, congratulations. You just are helping elect a Republican that’s definitely not going to be protecting your kinds of values.

If you’re on the side of these protesters that say these kinds of ridiculous things like “from the river to the sea,” go ahead, but the vast majority of voters are never going to want to stand with that. The most important question to ask is: Was it even a winnable cycle for Democrats, given some of the things that were largely baked into that cake?

Is that your calculation, that it might not even have been winnable?

I’m not sure. I knew it was going to be a tough cycle. And that assassination attempt — that was an incredibly powerful visual. Can you imagine if somebody had a bullet hit Obama and he had that moment: You know, fight, fight, fight? Can you imagine how that would have resonated for Democrats? That’s never happened in American political history. There have been assassination attempts, but they never created that kind of a dynamic. That was the capstone of the things being thrown at him — impeachments, “I can’t believe he said that,” indictments. It was very strange that Democrats ran on, he’s a convicted felon. I thought our party was more about criminal justice reform.

You stack the Elon Musk factor on top of that. He is incredibly compelling to a demographic in my state. He’s like Tony Stark. I thought it was just dumb to attack him or imply that he might be breaking the law with his $1 million checks, because, to me, that just projects weakness. And I promise you: Musk doesn’t give a shit.

And you had wanted Biden to stay the nominee.

For those that decided and moved to break Biden, and then you got the election that you wanted, it’s appropriate to own the outcome and fallout. It’s perfectly understandable if you demand an alternative. It was an undeniably rough debate. The options: Double down on the only person that’s ever beat Trump, or demand an alternative. When the outcome didn’t support your thesis and actions, then own it. There’s a lot of egos, institutions and reputations that championed the alternative. When you take a reasonable, calculated risk to fuck around, embrace your culpability for what you found out.