
<p>John Fetterman’s debate with Mehmet Oz was worse than anyone could have expected. In retrospect, it was a political mistake to agree to the debate – even with the unprecedented effort to lower expectations.</p>



<p>In my long political involvement, I have seen candidates benefit from low expectations. ; Georgia Senate candidate Herschel Walker may have been one of those candidates. ; Usually, the lower expectations are the result of opposition and media attacks. ; President Reagan was a good example. He even once said that one of his strengths was low expectations.</p>



<p>It is rare – unheard of – for a campaign, itself, to set the low bar, as did Fetterman’s own press release. ; In it, they said that a debate is not the candidate’s best format – and that his opponent was more experienced in appearing before the camera. ; This already is not a good admission from a candidate who wants to be a member of what is called the “world’s greatest debating forum.”</p>



<p>The fact that Fetterman had to use Closed Captions to comprehend questions and answers was terrible optics. ; They must have known that at the planning stage. ; ;</p>



<p>Recognizing the potential pitfalls for Fetterman in a debate situation in which he had manifest comprehension issues is the apparent reason why Fetterman put the debate off until after many voters had already cast ballots. ; That was the only smart thing the campaign did in terms of debate strategy.</p>



<p>Even with the forewarnings and special considerations, team Fetterman must have been wincing in the back room as the candidate repeatedly floundered on stage. ; Even with the aid of Closed Captions, Fetterman made a number of imprecise and somewhat incoherent statements – using words that did not make sense in the context or out of context. ; ;</p>



<p>In most cases, it was possible to decipher what Fetterman meant, but it took deciphering. ; Some of the more notable examples:</p>



<p>Fetterman referred to the “living wage” as a “willing wage” – and then floundered in trying to explain his position on the issue.</p>



<p>In discussing abortion, Fetterman said that choice “beleans (sic) a woman and her doctors.” ; Other invented words included &#8220;vogotional schools&#8221; and &#8220;wayjuhlottaway.&#8221;</p>



<p>When asked by moderators why Fetterman has changed from anti-fracking to pro-fracking – showing a clip of his earlier opposition, Fetterman said that he was always in favor of fracking as if oblivious to his previous stance.</p>



<p>Fetterman often interrupted Oz with off-the-wall irrelevant comments such as &#8220;you roll with Doug Mastriano!&#8221; ; He even interrupted Oz’s closing remarks with a gratuitous “you want to cut social security.”</p>



<p>It was a pathetic performance, to say the least. ; One can feel sympathy for a man who suffered a stroke and has residual effects. ; But in this one debate, Fetterman tended to prove Oz’s expressed concerns over his opponent’s ability to serve effectively in the United States Senate. ; It has been a growing concern among Pennsylvania voters – and this debate will not assuage it.</p>



<p>Fetterman’s only defense on that issue of his health – in face of not releasing his actual medical records – was a letter from a doctor, who was not involved with Fetterman’s medical treatment, attesting to his fitness.  ; The doctor has questionable credibility since he is a donor to the Fetterman campaign – and in view of what the audience could see unfolding in real time.</p>



<p>Given the trend toward Oz prior to the debate, it is very likely that the one-on-one confrontation has sent the Fetterman campaign over the cliff. ; That is my best guess at this time.</p>



<p>So, there ‘tis.</p>

Did Fetterman end his campaign in the debate?
