How does perpetuating a material lie square with Democrats’ professed concern for democracy?

It’s not hyperbole to say that last Tuesday night’s Pennsylvania Senate debate may have saved the state and the country from another two years of liberal wreckage. Voters finally learned what the Democratic Party, the liberal media, campaign officials, John Fetterman’s doctor, and particularly his ambitious wife, Gisele, have been trying desperately to hide: Fetterman’s stroke earlier this year has rendered him unfit to perform the duties of a senator.

For months, this group worked together to conceal the truth from voters, and they were prepared to do whatever was necessary to carry him over the finish line. Unfortunately for them, from the moment Fetterman uttered his first words during the debate — “Hi. Good night, everybody” — the jig was up.

Knowing Fetterman was in no shape for a debate, his campaign tried desperately to avoid one. They saw nothing wrong with covering up a material fact about their candidate’s fitness for office. America already has a “Weekend at Bernie’s” president. Why not a senator as well?

Although the election of a cognitively challenged senator pales in comparison to the election of a cognitively challenged president, whoever wins the Pennsylvania Senate seat may very well determine party control of the Senate — and Democrats know it. Barring any October (or November) surprises, Republicans need to win three of the races currently ranked as toss-ups by RealClearPolitics: Arizona (D +2.4), Georgia (R +1.6), New Hampshire (D +3.4), Nevada (R +0.6), Pennsylvania (D +1.5), and Wisconsin (R +3.3).

As of Tuesday morning, Fetterman leads his Republican opponent, Dr. Mehmet Oz, by 1.5 points in the RCP average of polls in the Keystone State. This average includes an InsiderAdvantage poll conducted the day after the debate that found Oz up by 3 points — the first time Oz has prevailed in any survey of this race.

Given that 82% of voters surveyed in a post-debate snap poll thought Oz had won, it’s reasonable to believe the debate was a game-changer. And although $2 million in donations poured into Fetterman’s coffers from Democratic Party operatives following the debate, it’s reasonable to assume that Fetterman will soon be feeling Oz’s exhaust.

Republicans are right to be optimistic heading into November. Over in Wisconsin, incumbent Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) is polling well ahead of his Democratic challenger, Mandela Barnes. Of the last 10 polls in this race, Johnson has led in nine and tied in one. This race no longer belongs in the toss-up column.

And if the GOP prevails in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, it needs just one more win to take back control of the Senate. Although some Republicans are optimistic about a pickup in New Hampshire, as it currently stands, incumbent Sen. Maggie Hassan (D) is clearly ahead. In Georgia, new allegations surfaced last week that Republican nominee Herschel Walker paid for a girlfriend’s abortion in 1982. The anonymous woman, “Jane Doe,” did not provide “direct proof of the abortion claims,” according to NBC News. Still, this is just the latest in a string of accusations against Walker, and it may very well hurt his chances of victory.

That said, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) had a hot mic moment last Thursday and was overheard admitting to Biden, “The state where we’re going downhill is Georgia. It’s hard to believe that they will go for Herschel Walker.” This race is anyone’s guess.

The outlook for the GOP is much brighter in Nevada and Arizona. In the Silver State, Republican Adam Laxalt has come from behind incumbent Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) to lead by 0.6 points. Laxalt is widely expected to win this race.

And, although incumbent Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) remains ahead of Republican challenger Blake Masters by 2.4 points, his lead has been shrinking steadily, which has many predicting an upset victory in this race.

Both Laxalt and Masters have significant momentum, and the current positive environment for Republicans is likely to carry one, if not both, candidates to victory.

If Democrats had simply been honest about Fetterman’s cognitive decline from the get-go, they might not be in this position. They could have nominated a physically healthy, more centrist candidate to take his place and given Pennsylvania voters a legitimate choice. Instead, Democrats covered up the extent of Fetterman’s injuries and are now asking Pennsylvania voters to ignore what they’ve seen with their own eyes and vote for him anyway.

All of this raises a serious question: The Democratic Party repeatedly warns Americans about the threat Republicans pose to our democracy. How does perpetuating a material lie square with that? And why is no one talking about it? Just asking.


A previous version of this article appeared in The Washington Examiner.

If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN

Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA

1 thought on “How does perpetuating a material lie square with Democrats’ professed concern for democracy?”

  1. And, in a not so distant universe, a fix may be in, and all our swelled up and hopeful heads will explode when the clues that have been slowly dribbling out from Biden and friends, about their chances appear very good to be the winners.

    With the polls showing all these wins for the Republican future, what will happen if/when they don’t appear?
    We can’t let our guard down, and we must vote, just to show that when they pull their fast one, again, we might actually do something about it. Recent history demands that we be vigilant.


Leave a Comment