Is John Fetterman Going To Surprise Us?

Senator John Fetterman has recently been displaying rhetoric that seems to signal a potential shift toward the center. In a notable statement, Fetterman expressed hope for the success of President-elect Donald Trump, stating, “I’m not rooting against him,” and emphasizing the importance of putting the “country first.” This uncharacteristic remark raised eyebrows, suggesting that the reliably left-wing senator may not be as rigidly partisan going forward.

And yes, he’s been a hardcore partisan since joining the U.S. Senate. His lifetime conservative score (as ranked by Heritage Action for America) is just 7%. That’s actually below the average of 11% for Senate Democrats.

So, rhetoric aside, his voting record paints a far different picture of what kind of senator he really is. That said, his willingness to engage with Trump’s Cabinet nominees has drawn the ire of many on the far left. His actions were seen as a betrayal by some activists who are staunchly opposed to any cooperation with the Trump administration.

In a recent interview with Fox News, Senator John Fetterman made a point of discussing his approach to bipartisan cooperation, especially when it comes to meeting with Trump nominees.

Senator Fetterman was asked by Fox News host Bret Baier about his thoughts on Tulsi Gabbard as a potential nominee, asking directly if she is “one of the nominees that you could vote for?”

He didn’t exactly answer the question.

“I met with her; in fact, I think I’ve met with virtually all of them, and the ones that I haven’t, they’re on my schedule, RFK and Governor Noem, so I’m happy to meet with all of them.”

He then quickly pivoted to the broader issue of meeting with Trump nominees and the way his party has responded to that.

“I got a lot of blowback just, you know, even to meet with them,” Fetterman said. “And to me, I see that as just doing my job, and I’m going to have a conversation with anyone that would like to have a conversation with me.”

Fetterman further emphasized the importance of engaging in dialogue, even if it’s with individuals whose views or public personas might be shaped by media portrayals. “And if someone believed everything that’s been written or said about me was true, I mean, you can’t possibly know me, or I think I could know her either, just based on [what] someone read,” Fetterman remarked. “But I’m going to sit down and have a conversation, and I’m really glad that I’ve done that.”

Fetterman also shared his stance on some nominees he was already inclined to support, adding, “Some of these nominees I’m going to vote for already. In fact, you know, whether it’s our colleague Rubio, Representative Stefanik, or even Sean Duffy, and I expect to vote for him as well too, and Brooke Rollins for agriculture, again.”

However, he made it clear that not all nominees had been decided upon, as some would require more deliberation. “But then there’s others, you know, that we’re going to go through the process, but I’m open to hear from everyone,” Fetterman explained. “I don’t know why that’s controversial.”

In a broader reflection on the democratic process, Fetterman reminded viewers that, despite political differences, it’s essential to acknowledge how democracy functions. “And I also would like to remind everyone on the Democratic side, that’s the way democracy works. Trump won, and now they’re going to run the table, and so they get to pick those kinds of people,” he said. “And if you don’t have to agree with all of it, but I want to find a way to work together on a bunch of them.”

While this may appear to be a genuine effort at bipartisanship, I remain skeptical.

Is Fetterman really showing a commitment to working across the aisle, or is he strategically supporting non-controversial nominees to bolster his opposition to figures like Tulsi Gabbard, Pete Hegseth, Kash Patel, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.? Many Democrats reflexively oppose every Trump nominee as part of their identity as “the resistance,” but Fetterman represents a swing state that’s trending red. Consider that last year, two long-serving Democrat senators—Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Sen. Bob Casey Jr. (D-Pa.)—lost their elections for having voting records that were far out of step with the mainstream views of their constituents. So, is Fetterman’s stance truly bipartisan, or is it a calculated, pragmatic move designed to secure his political future?

The true test of Fetterman’s shift to moderation will lie in his actions, particularly his stance on key legislation. One example is his support for the Laken Riley Act, a bill that aims to tighten immigration enforcement by detaining illegal immigrants arrested for committing crimes such as burglary and theft.

At this point, I remain skeptical of Fetterman’s intentions. While his recent comments and actions have given me some hope that he may be more moderate than his Democrat colleagues in the Senate, it’s important to remember that talk is cheap. His future votes will speak louder than any statement or sentiment he expresses today.

Only time will tell if Fetterman’s shift is genuine or just a calculated political maneuver.