Jon Lovett

familiar.

So I don't think there's anything wrong with being incredibly critical of John Fetterman, but we have this way on our side of deciding that someone isn't on our side and then making it true.

And I don't know that it's a balance, right?

Because like, of course he should be criticized.

And of course he should face pressure to do the right thing when it comes to say, like voting for on Trump nominees, for example.

But I do think we would rather have Fetterman caucusing with us.

If he ends up being that 51st vote, then we would rather have JD Vance making all the decisions.

Like, the fact that he can see to being a Republican, he's already flirting with it in his mind, even though he's sort of publicly saying that he's not considering it at all.

But actually, Trump's Republican Party is so kind of unpleasant for anybody who's heterodox to tell us a little bit about how we should be dealing with people like this.

You know, stepping back also, like...

We hear all the time about how we need to be a big coalition and that we don't have people have to have all the same points of views.

Like we need to be a party that kind of like embraces all these people.

And it goes both ways, by the way.

It does go both ways.

But part of it is like, okay.

Like, he has taken positions that we think are wrong on immigration and ICE.

He's taking positions that a lot of people in Democratic Party view are wrong on, say, funding Israel's military.

Like, argue against those.

Fine, but when people reach a different conclusion and don't vote with you 100% of the time, what happens the next day?

And it can't be that they're all traitors.