Most of the Democratic hacks in the legacy media didn’t even try to put a positive spin on Lt. Gov. John Fetterman’s awful debate performance last night. But a few brave media figures decided to come to the Pennsylvania Democrat’s defense.
Fetterman’s debate with Senate opponent Mehmet Oz (R-PA) was predictably awful, with Fetterman unable to string together coherent sentences or directly answer questions. Fetterman’s performance damaged his chances of winning, which most journalists acknowledged. But MSNBC disagreed, with Rebecca Traister of New York magazine saying on the network that Fetterman “had some really, really strong comebacks” and that Oz had some “fumbles.”
MSNBC guest: “[Fetterman] had some really, really strong comebacks, and his opponent, Oz — first of all, he also fumbled, right? I fumble on television, right?
Anchor: “I definitely fumble on television.”
Guest: “Oz was nervous and hesitant at first too. I mean, this happens.” pic.twitter.com/MRVJ0hpENH
— Washington Free Beacon (@FreeBeacon) October 26, 2022
DEBATE NETWORK DISPUTES FETTERMAN CAMP’S CLAIMS CLOSED CAPTIONING DIDN’T WORK AS PLANNED
MSNBC columnist Liz Plank joined in, saying that Oz “gave a masterclass on how to bully people with disabilities” for having the gall to debate his opponent in a debate. Plank also said that the debate is “proof” that the “electoral system is still not accessible to people with disabilities.” Of course, Plank sang a different tune when she attacked former Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-NC), saying that the wheelchair-bound Republican was using “ableist stereotypes to exploit America.”
Dr Oz just gave a masterclass on how to bully people with disabilities https://t.co/FA4AlG1rRa
— Liz Plank (@feministabulous) October 26, 2022
.@feministabulous: If it wasn’t clear that the U.S. electoral system is still not accessible to people with disabilities, tonight was proof. #PASenateDebate https://t.co/hdXOl1yeik
— MSNBC (@MSNBC) October 26, 2022
Kara Swisher, who left the New York Times in June to rejoin Vox Media, also got in on the act. When NBC’s Dasha Burns told viewers that Fetterman struggled to communicate with her at all without the aid of closed captioning, Swisher lashed out at Burns and said that she must just be bad at small talk. After Fetterman crashed and burned during the debate, even with closed captioning (underperforming even Burns’s concerns), Swisher insisted there were no issues and that she had nothing to apologize for.
Kara Swisher has over 1.4 million Twitter followers and has no regrets over using her platform to attack Dasha Burns and accuse her of being “bad at small talk” and spreading “nonsense” to protect Fetterman. pic.twitter.com/4l4Bxr4iEu
— Cameron Cawthorne (@Cam_Cawthorne) October 26, 2022
And, of course, there is the Bulwark, the blog where people who pretended to be conservatives gather to defend the Democrats in lockstep. Sarah Longwell decided that there was no way of knowing who Pennsylvanians would think won the debate. Sure, Fetterman cannot speak or understand words, but Oz was “trying too hard.”
One of the reasons I like focus groups so much is I watched that PA Senate debate and genuinely wonder how voters will respond to it. Do they think Fetterman isn’t up to the job? Or did they watch Oz trying too hard and think, “jeez, I hate that phony?” Could go either way.
— Sarah Longwell (@SarahLongwell25) October 26, 2022
Fetterman was unfit before his stroke based on his record and positions, but he is plainly unfit now when he cannot carry on or understand conversations. Fetterman and his campaign also covered up this fact, and he pushed the debate back in the hope that he could build up a lead in early voting. Establishment media dutifully propped up his campaign at every stop, trying to help him cover up his deficiencies.
Whether more journalists come out of the woodwork over the next week to join MSNBC and others in protecting his campaign is anyone’s guess, but those who have already have shown exactly what we already knew: Establishment media outlets want the Democrats to win at all costs, even (or especially) if that Democrat will be nothing more than a mindless automatic vote for the Democratic Party’s agenda.
