logo
Fetterman foe and ex-congressman Conor Lamb touring Pennsylvania as Dems express frustration with often Trump-backing senator

Fetterman foe and ex-congressman Conor Lamb touring Pennsylvania as Dems express frustration with often Trump-backing senator

New York Post10 hours ago

ENOLA, Pa. — Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania isn't even up for reelection until 2028, but already a one-time primary foe, former U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb, is crisscrossing Pennsylvania and social media, looking and sounding like he's preparing to challenge Fetterman again.
At town hall after town hall across Pennsylvania, Democrats and allied progressive groups aren't hearing from Fetterman in person — or Republicans who control Washington, for that matter.
But they are hearing from Lamb, a living reminder of the Democrat they could have elected instead of Fetterman. The former congressman has emerged as an in-demand town hall headliner, sometimes as a stand-in for Fetterman — who just might bash Fetterman.
Advertisement
'I thought I was going to play Senator Fetterman,' Lamb joked as he sat down in front of a central Pennsylvania crowd last Sunday.Democrats are frustrated with Fetterman
4 Former U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb, who lost to John Fetterman in the 2022 Pennsylvania Democratic primary, has been crisscrossing the state of late.
AP
Lamb's reemergence comes at an in-between moment, roughly halfway through Fetterman's six-year term, and is helping define the struggle facing Democrats in swing-state Pennsylvania.
Advertisement
There, Democrats figure prominently in their national effort to push back on President Donald Trump, but also in their struggle to figure out what to do about Fetterman, who is under fire from rank-and-file Democrats for being willing to cooperate with Trump and criticizing how Democrats have protested him.
Frustration with Fetterman has been on display on social media, at the massive ' No Kings ' rally in Philadelphia and among the Democratic Party's faithful. The steering committee of the progressive organization Indivisible PA last month asked Fetterman to resign.
It's quite a turnabout for the hoodies-and-shorts-wearing Fetterman, elected in 2022 with an everyman persona and irreverent wit, who was unafraid to challenge convention.
For some progressives, frustration with Fetterman began with his staunch support for Israel's punishing war against Hamas in Gaza, an issue that divides Democrats.
Advertisement
It's moved beyond that since Trump took office. Now, some are wondering why he's — as they see it — kissing up to Trump, why he's chastising fellow Democrats for their anti-Trump resistance and whether he's even committed to their causes at all.
Most recently, they question his support for Trump's bombing of Iran.
4 Fetterman has confounded Democrats of late with his support of some Donald Trump policies.
AP
'It hurts,' said John Abbott, who attended Sunday's event in suburban Harrisburg.
Advertisement
Speaking at the flagship 'No Kings' rally in Philadelphia, Indivisible co-founder Leah Greenberg name-checked Fetterman.
'We're looking to the leaders who will fight for us, because even today there are folks among the Democratic Party who think we should roll over and play dead,' Greenberg said. 'Anyone seen John Fetterman here today?'
The crowd booed.Why is Conor Lamb crisscrossing Pennsylvania again?
In Pittsburgh, progressives trying to land an in-person town hall with Fetterman or first-term Republican Sen. David McCormick noticed when the two senators advertised an event together at a downtown restaurant to celebrate the release of McCormick's new book.
Progressive groups organized to protest it and — after it got moved to a private location with a private invite list — went ahead with their own town hall. They invited Lamb and a local Democratic state representative instead.
More invitations for Lamb started rolling in.
By his count, he's now attended at least a dozen town halls and party events, easily clocking more than 2,000 miles to appear in small towns, small cities and suburbs, often in conservative areas.
4 Lamb says he'll do anything to 'stop this slide that we're on toward a less democratic country and try to create one in which there's more opportunity for people.'
AP
Advertisement
'Showing up matters and it really does make a difference,' said Dana Kellerman, a Pittsburgh-based progressive organizer. 'Is that going to matter to John Fetterman? I really don't know. I don't know what he's thinking. I don't know if he's always been this person or if he's changed in the last two years.'
Fetterman has brushed off criticism, saying he's a committed Democrat, insisting he was elected to engage with Republicans and — perhaps hypocritically — questioning why Democrats would criticize fellow Democrats.
At times, Fetterman has criticized Trump, questioning the move to 'punch our allies in the mouth' with tariffs or the need for cuts to social-safety net programs in the GOP's legislation to extend 2017's tax cuts. Fetterman's office didn't respond to an inquiry about Lamb.Is Conor Lamb running for Senate?
For his part, Lamb — a former U.S. Marine and federal prosecutor — says he isn't running for anything right now, but he'll do whatever he can to 'stop this slide that we're on toward a less democratic country and try to create one in which there's more opportunity for people.'
Advertisement
To some Democrats, he sounds like a candidate.
'That he's doing these town halls is a good indication that he'll be running for something, so it's a good thing,' said Janet Bargh, who attended the event in suburban Harrisburg.
Aside from the town halls, he spoke at the Unite for Veterans event on the National Mall. He has also been active on social media, doing local radio appearances and appearing on MSNBC, where he recently criticized the June 14 military parade ordered up by Trump.
4 Lamb claims he isn't running for office, although some Democrats believe he's positioning himself to do so.
AP
Advertisement
Not long ago, it was hard to envision Lamb losing a race, ever.
In 2018, he won a heavily Trump-friendly congressional district in southwestern Pennsylvania in a special election. It was the center of the political universe that spring, drawing campaign visits by Trump and then-presidential hopeful Joe Biden.
Suddenly, Lamb was ascendant. Then he ran for Senate and lost handily — by more than two-to-one — to Fetterman in 2022's primary.
Advertisement
People often ask Lamb if he's going to challenge Fetterman again. Lamb said he reminds them that Fetterman has three years left in his term and pivots the conversation to what Democrats need to do to win elections in 2025 and 2026.
Still, Lamb is unafraid to criticize Fetterman publicly. And, he said, he's a magnet for Democrats to air their unhappiness with Fetterman. What he hears, over and over, is frustration that Fetterman spends too much time attacking fellow Democrats and not enough time challenging Trump.
'And that is, I think, what's driving the frustration more than any one particular issue,' Lamb said.
At the town hall, Lamb wasn't afraid to admit he'd lost to Fetterman. But he turned it into an attack line.
'When I watch the person who beat me give up on every important issue that he campaigned on … the more I reasoned that the point of all of this in the first place is advocacy for what's right and wrong,' Lamb told the crowd. 'And advocacy for not just a particular party to win, but for the type of country where it matters if, when you stand up, you tell the truth.'
The crowd cheered.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Few thought airstrikes could ‘obliterate' Iran's nuclear program. Then Trump said they did.
Few thought airstrikes could ‘obliterate' Iran's nuclear program. Then Trump said they did.

USA Today

time38 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Few thought airstrikes could ‘obliterate' Iran's nuclear program. Then Trump said they did.

Experts long argued that airstrikes alone would not be capable of permanently ending Iran's nuclear program absent negotiations. WASHINGTON — A highly politicized debate is unfolding over the impact of June 21 U.S. airstrikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, raising questions over the attack's goal and projected impact. President Donald Trump quickly claimed total victory in the strikes' wake, claiming that Iran's 'key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.' Subsequent scrutiny of that claim amid early assessments from intelligence agencies has led Trump and his allies to double down on and even expand on his declarations of success. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth claimed to CNN that the strikes 'obliterated Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons.' Iran itself has acknowledged the impact of the U.S. and Israeli attacks. But in the years since Washington's withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran, experts and analysts have emphasized that airstrikes alone would merely delay Iran's nuclear ambitions rather than permanently derail them. Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Illinois, reiterated that long-held understanding in a June 26 interview. 'The targets are hard targets, deep targets, mobile targets. So it was never meant to eliminate the program,' Quigley told USA TODAY. 'It was never meant to do anything but slow the program.' The congressman, who is on the House's intelligence committee and has regularly received briefings on Iran, added, 'We've always been told . . . the only way to end this (nuclear) program is with a lot of troops on the ground for a long time. A war.' The former head of the National Nuclear Security Agency's nonproliferation programs, Corey Hinderstein, struck a similar tone. 'The conventional wisdom that you can't destroy the Iranian (nuclear) program through air attack alone has actually held,' said Hinderstein, now a vice president at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 'While some are saying that the airstrikes were tactically and strategically successful, I think that the jury is still out on that, and we don't actually have the information that we need to believe that this program is gone.' Third nuclear site, hidden centrifuges, missing uranium Iran may have another nuclear site that, if equipped with enrichment centrifuges and conversion equipment, could continue the process of preparing uranium for use in a nuclear bomb, if the regime wishes to pursue one. Shortly before Israel began its air campaign against Iran, the regime told the International Atomic Energy Agency that it had a third nuclear enrichment site but did not reveal details. Analysts believe an undisclosed underground facility at Pickaxe Mountain near the Natanz nuclear plant may be even deeper under the surface than the Fordow enrichment plant that was severely damaged in the U.S. strikes. The Pickaxe Mountain facility was first publicly revealed in 2023 by experts who spoke with the Associated Press. And it's unclear how much of Tehran's approximately 880 pounds of highly enriched uranium was destroyed or buried during the strikes — satellite images show cargo trucks parked outside the Fordow enrichment plant in the days before the U.S. attack. U.S. lawmakers briefed June 26 and June 27 on intelligence assessments of the strikes acknowledged the missing uranium and called for a full accounting of the material, according to CNN. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, told the news agency that the question of the uranium's whereabouts underscores the importance of Iran negotiating 'directly with us, so the (IAEA) can account for every ounce of enriched uranium that's there.' More: Where is Iran's enriched uranium? Questions loom after Trump claims victory. But whether Iran wants to negotiate is another question. Despite the country's obligations as a member of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Iran's Guardian Council approved a law June 25 halting the country's cooperation with the IAEA and its inspections of Tehran's nuclear sites 'until the safety and security of our nuclear activities can be guaranteed,' the country's foreign minister said on social media. Contributing: Tom Vanden Brook and Cybele Mayes-Osterman, USA TODAY Davis Winkie's role covering nuclear threats and national security at USA TODAY is supported by a partnership with Outrider Foundation and Journalism Funding Partners. Funders do not provide editorial input.

Michelle Obama won't run for office, but her podcast may guide Democrats
Michelle Obama won't run for office, but her podcast may guide Democrats

USA Today

time38 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Michelle Obama won't run for office, but her podcast may guide Democrats

As Democrats search to counter Trump it may not be Barack Obama, the party's most popular figure, that they should turn to, but Michelle. Michelle Obama is back – just not on the political stage. At a time when the Democratic faithful are hungry for dynamic leadership, the former first lady is getting cozy and personal in a podcast called "IMO," a breezy hour-long celebrity chat co-hosted by her brother, basketball executive Craig Robinson. "I feel like at 60, this is the first time where all my decisions are for me," Obama said on her June 19 episode with radio show host Angie Martinez. With her daughters Sasha and Malia launched in their own young adult lives, "this is a period of freedom." Each week, Obama and Robinson are joined by celebrities like comedians Damon and Marlon Wayans, producer Issa Rae or actress Keke Palmer – with just a glint of politics. It's her space to talk with friends. References to her husband, former President Barack Obama, or the eight years they spent raising young children in the White House are matters of fact, but the political wildfire of the second Trump administration is barely noted, except as a launching point to talk about how people are impacted by Trump's new policies. As recently as last July, an Ipsos poll revealed that only Michelle Obama stood a chance of besting Donald Trump in the presidential election. Even before leaving the White House in early 2017, a corner of the Democratic Party clamored for her to run. She has repeatedly slammed the door on that. But as Democrats search for a liberal counter to the right-wing media ecosystem that helped Trump win back the White House by reaching millions who don't pay attention to mainstream media, the online show of a relatable and popular Democrat could be what they are looking for. Regardless of what Democrats want her podcast to be, Michelle Obama has demonstrated she'll do her show her way. For now, she's using a platform that reflects the former first lady's larger, and perhaps more effective, cultural strategy that mirrors how Black women voters - part of the party's loyalist base - are coping after former Vice President Kamala Harris' loss in the 2024 election, said Democratic strategist Nina Smith. "So this is the best way that she can create space and show the multi-dimensional nature of Black women: our thinking; how we engage friends; how we engage with people across racial lines; how we engage with our siblings; and the fullness of us, while also allowing her to speak to the issues of the moment," Smith said. IMO (short for "in my opinion"), is largely devoid of juicy gossip, let alone talk about any current or former White House occupants. The Father's Day episode, which featured Bruce Springsteen and watched by roughly 216,000 viewers on YouTube, came just days after Trump berated the rock music icon for calling the administration "corrupt, incompetent and treasonous." While Trump's name never came up, they both chuckled when Michelle Obama made a joke about some people being president who need therapy. Instead, they talked about going to therapy, building relationships with absentee parents and being present for their children during formative years "I realized that parenting is pennies in the bank," Springsteen said. "It's that time when you were working and you didn't want to stop, but you did. That made a huge difference to me. I always felt that if I had failed with my kids I would have failed tremendously at life." More: Pop stars, massive crowds and history: How the Obama and Harris campaigns compare Michelle Obama responded with a story from her childhood about what it meant when her father, who worked long hours as a city worker in Chicago, turned his full attention to her and her brother. "When he was present he was present in very small but meaningful ways," she said. 'She hates politics' Michelle Obama, a corporate lawyer specializing in marketing and intellectual property law, was carried into the national spotlight when a skinny senator with a Muslim middle name beat the old guards in both parties with a message of a new America founded upon hope. For most of that time she had to be more mindful of her husband's agenda and image. Since Trump took office, she's been openly critical of him, but on her terms, such as at the 2024 Democratic National Convention in her hometown of Chicago, rather than on her podcast. Speaking up and what she considers the right moment will likely continue, said Democratic strategist Lynda Tran. "I would not be surprised to see her using her voice to rally Democrats in the future assuming the appropriate venues and strategic value. And I would expect an overwhelmingly positive response from Democrats when she does," Tran, who worked in the Obama administration, told USA TODAY. But her participation in politics might be through raising money and giving speeches, rather than a central role in the party's future. Her focus in the last few years has been on outside projects, her family and now the new podcast she co-hosts with her brother. Demands to do more from either Barack or Michelle Obama are often met with scoffs by longtime supporters, such as Natalie Graves, a clinical social worker who was at Chicago's Grant Park when the couple took the victory stage in November 2008. More: Obama warns Trump administration has 'weak commitment' to democracy in Connecticut speech "My first response is an eye roll," Graves, a 55-year-old registered Democrat, said of ongoing efforts to recruit the former first lady to run for president. "If a person says that they don't want to run, what are we talking about? They're ignoring the fact that she has made it very clear that she hates politics." 'Served their time' The former first lady firmly shut the door on running for president in March, saying her daughters, who are both in their 20s, had "served their time" in the limelight and should get to be private young adults. "I wanted them to have the freedom of not having the eyes of the world on them. So when people ask me would I ever run, the answer is no," Obama said on Kyle Kelcie's 'Not Gonna Lie' podcast. "If you ask me that, then you have absolutely no idea the sacrifice your kids make when your parents are in that role." Democrats are casting about for trusted voices to better connect with different voters and help create a left-wing media ecosystem to match that of the right. Some liberal strategists are asking donors to contribute to finding voices and influencers on the left to counter people like Steve Bannon and Joe Rogan who helped propel Trump to office, the New York Times reported last month. Democrats statistically have more trust in mainstream media than Republicans, said Texas Christian University political science professor Adam Schiffer. The Democratic brain trust is asking 'who is the Democratic Joe Rogan?' he said, but 'it's not necessarily clear that there could be one because Democrats don't necessarily find that gratifying and entertaining.' More: Town halls, f-bombs and Elon Musk: How Democrats are waging a new messaging war Younger people have a radically different media consumption than their parents, Schiffer said, and it "could become a critical problem for Democrats" if they don't figure out how to get in front of them. No matter how popular, a former first lady in her sixties might not be the best emissary to young people, he said. Influencers played a large role in Harris' abridged presidential campaign last summer and fall, but they couldn't compete with a Republican online juggernaut that has been building for over a decade. And not everyone is an "IMO" fan. Some are calling out the former first lady's complaints about living in the White House. For example, former Fox News host Megyn Kelly mocked the podcast in a June 26 video posted to X, later saying Michelle Obama was "trashing her children and husband again." When Michelle Obama does talk about politics in her podcast, it mostly orbits around the future for Americans in her daughters' generation and how political decisions impact ordinary people. She's often echoing the kind of kitchen table politicking that only voters in swing states get to hear about every four years from presidential candidates. "I'm talking to so many young people who are deathly afraid of their futures in this climate," she said in the May 21 episode. "They're not just worried about jobs, they're worried about being able to become the next entrepreneur, they're wondering whether, you know, they'll have healthcare and housing [and] whether they'll be able to pay off their student loans." In that episode, Obama and her brother spoke with Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky about the future of businesses under the Trump' administration's new tariffs. They talked about how the taxes on goods brought into the country are being passed on to consumers and hindering the ability of younger Americans trying to make it to reach their goals in the current economy. More: Will TikTok be banned? Donald Trump says he has a 'warm spot' for app as it faces January deadline "I mean, some people can hold on, but other people are not only losing their businesses, but they're losing their homes in the process," she said. "It's kind of scary." Michelle Obama did use the podcast to defend her decision not to attend Trump's January inauguration, which sparked rounds of criticism and speculation about her marriage. She insisted she was simply "making the choice that was right" for her. "Whatever the backlash was, I had to sit in it and own it. But I didn't regret it, you know? It's my life now, and I can say that, now," the mom of two said on a June 26 NPR podcast. Dems in a ditch Michelle Obama's show also arrives at a time when the Democratic brand remains in the ditch with progressive voters. About one-third of Democrats said they are optimistic about their party's future, a May poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found. Though several Democrats are starting to make moves toward 2028, liberals have struggled with the lack of a main character to match Trump's political moxie the way then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi did in his first term. Lately, Democratic officeholders have clashed with federal agents at press conferences, immigration hearings and ICE facilities, creating viral moments that have been cheered by mainstream and more left-leaning progressives. More: Vance defends using military to quell protests, refers to Sen. Alex Padilla as 'José' Such actions have never been in either of the Obamas' style, and some Black political activists and artists have been emphasizing the need for "self-care" over political action in the aftermath of the 2024 election. "It's important for her to stay within the public space, so it's good that she wants to be active. She endorses candidates and stuff of that nature. I have no problem with that," said Steven Uzoukwu, a 33, a cybersecurity analyst from Baltimore, Maryland. "I just think we shouldn't rely on the Obamas to save America."

With Supreme Court Ruling, Another Check on Trump's Power Fades
With Supreme Court Ruling, Another Check on Trump's Power Fades

New York Times

time44 minutes ago

  • New York Times

With Supreme Court Ruling, Another Check on Trump's Power Fades

The Supreme Court ruling barring judges from swiftly blocking government actions, even when they may be illegal, is yet another way that checks on executive authority have eroded as President Trump pushes to amass more power. The decision on Friday, by a vote of 6 to 3, will allow Mr. Trump's executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship to take effect in some parts of the country — even though every court that has looked at the directive has ruled it unconstitutional. That means some infants born to undocumented immigrants or foreign visitors without green cards can be denied citizenship-affirming documentation like Social Security numbers. But the diminishing of judicial authority as a potential counterweight to exercises of presidential power carries implications far beyond the issue of citizenship. The Supreme Court is effectively tying the hands of lower-court judges at a time when they are trying to respond to a steady geyser of aggressive executive branch orders and policies. The ability of district courts to swiftly block Trump administration actions from being enforced in the first place has acted as a rare effective check on his second-term presidency. But generally, the pace of the judicial process is slow and has struggled to keep up. Actions that already took place by the time a court rules them illegal, like shutting down an agency or sending migrants to a foreign prison without due process, can be difficult to unwind. Presidential power historically goes through ebbs and flows, with fundamental implications for the functioning of the system of checks and balances that defines American-style democracy. But it has generally been on an upward path since the middle of the 20th century. The growth of the administrative state inside the executive branch, and the large standing armies left in place as World War II segued into the Cold War, inaugurated what the historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. coined the 'imperial presidency.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store