What I can't shake here is the implication embedded in all of the posts from our "friends" on the other side, which is that if you've had a stroke that causes aphasia, you are either disqualified from public service because it's somehow an immutable characteristic or you should retire from public life and "focus on recovery" i.e. more or less retire to nursing home. If anything horrible has ever happened to you? It's time to basically give up on life because if you do that, it helps some scumbag snake oil peddler with a R behind their name get elected to Senate.
John Fetterman is 53 years old. His brain is almost certainly in better shape than the brain of Chuck Grassley and we can expect Fetterman will be alive for much longer than Grassley will be alive. Yet we're subjected to a torrent of abuse when Grassley is effectively running as a rotting corpse. It isn't insulting to mention this about Grassley because the curse of our mortality and fragility in old age is a fact of human life - he is doomed to die sooner rather than later.
The hypocrisy and lack of self-reflection here is stunning. It is possible to hope for your candidate to win without signaling that a father with children who seems to basically be a good guy is a reprobate and also a vegetable.
You know this how?
You people keep demonstrating why this frenzied defense of Fetterman is such a turnoff. You know it's a bad situation but you think if you just talk enough, regardless of whether you know what the hell you're talking about, it will just go away.
Undecided voters don't want to hear "don't worry, his brain is fine" from someone whose basis for saying that is nothing beyond wishful thinking. They don't to hear what-about-ing about Herschel Walker or Chuck Grassley.
Undecided voters want to know why you people insisted Fetterman was ready to debate and would be fine, and he wasn't. What happened? And why should anyone believe this is the last time the Fetterman campaign will offer reassurances that turn out to be empty?
