CNN’s senior political analyst joined Erica Hill, CNN Newsroom host, Wednesday to review John Fetterman’s Tuesday debate performance. Avlon attempted to reassure viewers Fetterman’s poor performance on Tuesday was only a “snapshot in time”, that he will soon recover from his stroke and that he was “gutsy to even show up”. However, it is important to note that the party label does matter. This last point is a complete 180 degree from Avlon’s commentary on GOP candidates.
Hill began by recalling that he spoke with Ed Rendell, former Democratic Governor, and Charlie Dent, former Republican Congressman from Pennsylvania. What struck me was the response of the governor, who said that John Fetterman should not have debated.
Avlon acknowledged that many Democrats “feel that way” and wanted to award Fetterman a participation trophy. “And I think you have to give credit Fetterman for coming to work. It’s risky, and it’s brave. Fetterman, who was aware of how severe the stroke was, said that doctors had assured him that he could recover from it.
Avlon made the rational point that the debate was necessary in order for Pennsylvania voters to see “a side-by -side comparison and argument” between the candidates.
Hill continued with the question, asking Hill, “Does it seem like an accurate side-byside comparison?”
Avlon responded, “In the sense that Fetterman may eventually be, no, it’s a snapshot in time. It’s a snapshot of a candidate who suffered a severe stroke. It raises questions about the transparency of the campaign. Could Democrats, having known the severity, have chosen a different candidate up to August? I think so. But this choice is representative of voters and they’ll have have to consider individual performance.
Avlon concluded the Fetterman segment by saying, “The idea Fetterman along all — You know, estimates are someone who will recover form this, so this snapshot in time and the policies that these two parties represent is important.” However, it is obvious that the person matters as much as the party.
Avlon repeatedly declared Herschel Wade unfit to serve as a U.S. Senator. This was partly due to the question of whether he paid for his girlfriend’s abortion. But also because he declared him irredeemably incompetent, and anyone who continues to support him is placing party over country. Avlon decided to make party labels great again, now that the party labels have been switched and the Democrat is showing signs that he is not fit for office.
T-Mobile sponsored this segment.
Here’s a transcript from the October 26th show:
CNN Newsroom
10/26/2022
10:09 AM ET
ERICA HILL Jessica has just finished her conversation so I am going to pick up where Jessica left off. So, this morning, around an hour ago, we spoke with Ed Rendell, former Democratic Governor, and Charlie Dent, former Republican Congressman from Pennsylvania. What struck me was the fact that I asked the governor from the gate, “Do you think John Fetterman should’ve debated?”
JOHN AVALON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ASSOIST: Yes. Look, I think that a lot of Democrats feel that way. Fetterman is a creditable person, I think. It’s a risky decision. He made it knowing how severe the stroke was. And he said that doctors had assured him that he can recover from it.
Many politicians don’t debate. They don’t want the debate to be overshadowed by their fear of being attacked. Fetterman’s brave decision to take the risk and show his disability to the world was a courageous one. It was also the right thing for Pennsylvania voters, and more importantly, for Democrats. Because they deserve it — all voters deserve to see a side by side comparison and argument between these two candidates.
HILL: Do You think it was a fair side-by-side comparison
AVLON – In the sense of who Fetterman might ultimately be, it is not a snapshot in time.
HILL: Right.
AVLON – It’s a snapshot of a candidate who suffered a severe stroke. It raises questions about the transparency of the campaign. Could Democrats, having known the severity, have chosen a different candidate up to August? But this choice is representative of voters and they’ll have have to consider individual performance.
Fetterman’s idea is that Fetterman will recover. So this is a snapshot of time and the policies that these two parties represent. However, it is obvious that the person matters just as much as the party.
