Mediaboss Marketing

The oil and gas industry is seeing big fallout following President Biden's executive order canceling the Keystone XL pipeline. FOX Business' Grady Trimble with more.

The average price of gasin the United States hashit a 12-month high, according to new data Thursday fromGas Buddy.

The average retail gas price in the United States is now $2.50per gallon after soaring from an average price of $1.74 per gallon in April 2020. In February of last year, Gas Buddy's chart shows gas prices were about $2.42 per gallon and proceeded to rise slightly before plummeting as the coronavirus pandemic spread across the country.

12 Month Average U.S. Gas Retail Price (Chart courtesy of Gas Buddy)

Gas Buddy senior petroleum analyst Patrick De Haan told FOX Business that a significant contribution to the increase is related to the recovery from COVID-19 as well asrising oil demand globally against the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries' (OPEC)decision to cut production.

"Unfortunately prices are likely to continue rising in the weeks and months ahead so long as we continue to see improvement in the pandemic," De Haan added, "They could rise another 15 to 35 cents a gallon by summer, [it's]all really contingent on what happens in the months ahead with COVID."

OIL PRICES NEAR THEIR HIGHEST LEVELS SINCE AROUND BEGINNING OF PANDEMIC

The new datacomes as President Biden is facing pressure from progressive Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.,to cancel the Enbridge Line 3 pipeline project as well as a letter signed by dozens of celebrities to shut down the Dakota Access Pipeline for good.

Omaralleged in a letter to Biden that the Line 3 project, which began constructionin December to replace the deteriorating pipeline that was built in the 1960s,had disproportionate impacts on indigenous communities and that the Canadian firm behind its construction, Enbridge, had an abysmal safety and spill history in the U.S.

She went on to explain thatthe greater issue at stake isclimate change, arguing that we cannot afford to build more fossil fuel infrastructure.

That is especially true for projects like Line 3, which are designed for the dirtiest and most carbon-intensive fossil fuel there is, tar sands crude oil, Omar said. Climate change is not just a risk, but a risk multiplier all of the other known impacts of Line 3 will be greatly exacerbated by climate change.

FORMER KEYSTONE PIPELINE WORKER SLAMS AOC: PEOPLE LIKE HER 'LAUGH AT OUR MISFORTUNE'

Enbridge defended the project in a statement to FOX Business, highlighting the multiple reviews and approvals they have received by regulatory and permitting bodies before construction.

"Enbridge has demonstrated ongoing respect for tribal sovereignty. As the result of negotiations with tribal leadership Line 3 was routed outside of the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe Reservation and through the Reservation of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa," the company said. "Both Leech Lake and Fond du Lac have spoken and written repeatedly in support of project permits."

Omars letter to the president came a day after the Minnesota Court of Appeals denied a request by two American Indian tribes to shut down the construction of the project.

Opponents, led by the Red Lake Band of Chippewa and White Earth Band of Ojibwe, said in their petition that construction would destroy land that is protected by treaty agreements and would violate cultural and religious rights.

Enbridge said the petition had no merit and did not "recognize the exhaustive and meticulous review" of the project.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

In addition, more than 200 celebrities, climate activists, indigenous leaders and more have signed a lettercalling on the Biden administration to continue its commitment toaddressing the climate crisis by ending the long-disputed Dakota Access Pipeline.

Names on the letter includeAlyssa Milano, Leonardo DiCaprio, Scarlett Johansson, Ryan Reynolds, Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Jason Momoa, Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Marisa Tomei, Joaquin Phoenix, Jane Fonda, Don Cheadle, Ed Helms, Cher, Chelsea Handler, Ava DuVernay and Amy Schumer.

The letter highlights the impact the pipeline would have on indigenous people in the area and the fight to preserve their culture.In July of 2020, a judgeordered the pipeline shut downwhile an environmental impact study is conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

"We urge you to remedy this historic injustice and direct the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to immediately shut down the illegal Dakota Access Pipeline while the Environmental Impact Statement process is conducted, consistent with the D.C. District Courts decision and order. Additionally, the U.S. Army Corps must ensure a robust environmental review with significant tribal consultation, tribal consent, and a thorough risk analysis," the letter concludes. "With your leadership, we have a momentous opportunity to protect our water and respect our environmental laws and the rights of Indigenous people. This is our moment."

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

The calls come after Biden previously signed an executive orderon his first day in office halting the construction of the Keystone XL Pipelinethat would transport upto830,000 barrels of crude oil daily fromAlberta, Canada, to Nebraska.

The project -- initially proposed more than a decade ago --would have sustained about11,000 U.S. jobs in 2021including 8,000unionjobsand generated $1.6 billion in gross wages, according to the Keystone XLwebsite.

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen told FOX Business' Varney and Company that he believes Biden "didnt look into the legalities or the effects on the ground before halting the project, and is leading the effort to overturn Bidens executive order with a dozen other state attorneys general.

I don't think we'd have gotten 13 other state attorneys general to sign on to this if we didn't think we actually had a good legal case to bring here, he told hostStuart Varney.

We certainly are reviewing all of our constitutional avenues that we think we can get ourselves into district court on the federal side, he added. And I think we're going to be successful there.

Knudsen added thatits important to let thepresidentknow the decision is not okay.

We're not going to take this idly and [we're] going to keep fighting to keep this project alive, he said. It's too vital to a state like Montana.

Berg Pipe announced 106workers will also face layoffs, furloughs or a reduction of hours beginning in April. A number of temporary workers have already been let go. Revoking thepermit has already resulted in 1,000 layoffs at the Alberta, Canada-based TEC Energy.

Fox Business' Bradford Betz, Tyler McCarthy, Jonathan Garber and the Associated Press contributed to this report

Originally posted here:
Gas hits highest price in 12 months as progressives, celebrities pressure Biden to cancel more pipelines - Fox Business

Consumer and worker advocates on Thursday welcomed the re-introduction of legislation in the U.S. House that would eliminate what they say is effectively a "get-out-of-jail-free card" for corporations.

At issue are forced arbitration clauses, which may appear in fine print in a wide range of contracts such as those for employment, bank accounts, student loans, or cell phones. The clauses, critics argue, favor wrongdoing companies by preventing consumers or workers from having their day in court; instead the clauses mandate that disputes are resolved privately through a company-appointed arbitrator.

According to Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), who introducedthe FAIR Act, the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act, with 155 co-sponsors, "Forced arbitration is an underhanded maneuver that corporations use to trick consumers, workers, and small businesses out of their right to go to court and seek damages from a jury of their peers."

"If this sounds unfair, it's because it is," he said in a statement.

"Big businesses that already have all the power in the relationship regularly stack the deck to avoid the only thing out there that could hold them accountablethe United States justice system," said Johnson.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who introduced the Senate companion bill to the FAIR Act in 2019, is expected to reintroduce it in the Democrat-controlled upper chamber next week, according to a statement from the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC), one of dozens of organizations supporting the measure.

NCLC associate director Lauren Saunders, associate director of the National Consumer Law Center, welcomed the new legislation.

"Companies use fine-print forced arbitration clauses to deprive people of an impartial judge, forcing disputes into a biased, secretive, and lawless forum before arbitrators who do not have to follow the facts or the law, who are typically paid by the company, and where there is no right of appeal," she said in a statement.

The proposed legislation, Saunders added, "stops forced arbitration and restores access to the courts for survivors of sexual harassment, national guard members terminated from their jobs for serving their country, seniors in nursing homes, and consumers ripped off by Wall Street or predatory lenders."

According to Remington A. Gregg, counsel for civil justice and consumer rights at advocacy group Public Citizen, "There may be no more blatant example of how giant corporations like Wells Fargo, Equifax, Amazon, and Uber rig our economy than forced arbitration. Take-it-or-leave-it, fine print text requiring arbitration is hidden in most contracts as a get-out-of-jail-free card for companies that rip off, defraud, injure, cheat, discriminate against, harass, abuse, and violate the privacy of workers and consumers."

We should think of individual arbitration clauses as allowing the transfer of $$ from low-wage workers to lawbreaking employers. https://t.co/TN80mggbvM

Gregg was one of those who submitted written testimony to a House panel hearing Thursday on the issue.

The House Judiciary's Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law also heard testimony from former Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson, who in 2016 sued network chairman CEO Roger Ailes for sexual harassment.

In her remarks, Carlson pointed to her own experiences and those of women who suffered similar abuse and explained how forced arbitration silences women.

She said that "silencing is the harasser's best friendand perpetuates the systemic problem of protecting predators and pushing women out of the workforce." Carlson, according to her prepared remarks, added:

I want you to just for a moment feel what it's like to find the courage to come forward. A woman finally decides to go to HR to complainand if she has an arbitration clausethe reaction will bephew! Good! "No one will ever know about this!" Her case is promptly thrown into the "secret chamber" of arbitration. Then the way we handle these things goes into effect. The woman will likely be blacklisted, demoted and fired from her job. In arbitration shell find out there are limits on discovery and no appeals. There is no legal precent being set because none of it is actually taking place in a court. She may receive a paltry reward but in arbitration cases, employees only win less than 3% of the time. Meantime, large corporations with lots of complaints can keep an arbitrator paid for years. It's that repeat business thing. Wink wink. Our woman will never work again, and notably, no one at her place of employment will know what happened to her, and worst of all, her perpetrator will likely stay on the jobfree to harass again and again. And so the cycle continues.

Public Justice executive director Paul Bland told the panel that passage of the FAIR Act would bring sweeping benefits.

Ending forced arbitration, Bland said, "may well be the single most unsung method advancing racial justice, public safety, gender equality, workers' rights, and economic fairness generally."

"The reintroduction of this bill is urgent in this moment," he said, "during a pandemic in which countless employers are treating essential workers as sacrificial, and nursing home negligence has led to massive infection, the ability of ordinary people to hold corporations accountable through the civil justice system is a life or death issue."

Tens of millions of Americans stand to benefit from the bill.

The Economic Policy Institute's Heidi Shierholz and Margaret Poydock noted in a statement: "As of 2017, 56.2% of private-sector nonunion workers were subjected to forced arbitration agreements and an EPI and Center on Popular Democracy analysis projects that by 2024, that share will rise to more than 80%. The FAIR Act is a crucial step toward ending the growing practice of forced arbitration."

"Congress must pass this critical piece of legislation," they said, "to ensure workers are able to enforce their rights and are not barred from bringing their employer to court."

Read the original:
Progressives Applaud FAIR Act Reintroduction Aimed at Ending Anti-Worker, Anti-Consumer Forced Arbitration - Common Dreams

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer's embrace of far-left policies could be an attempt to head off a potential primary challenge from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, told "The Story" Monday.

HostMartha MacCallum noted that Schumer, D-N.Y., who has spent more than two decades in the Senate, has recently called for federal decriminalization ofmarijuana, the cancellation of student loan debt over $50,000 and a so-called "baby bonds" plan proposed by Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., that wouldgive every newborn a federally funded $1,000 savings account.

Cornyn responded that Schumer's attempt to cover his left flank likely won't help him should he face a primary challenge next year.

SEN. JOHN CORNYN, R-TEXAS: It looks to me like the progressives like Bernie Sanders, AOC and Elizabeth Warren are in the driver's seat, and they've [Democrats] got people who generally are pretty pragmatic, like Senator Schumer.

He's not particularly ideological, but they've got him scared with the prospectof a midterm primary. The problem they have is that the progressives are driving their entire party to the hard left. And as we saw on November 3rd in the House, Republicans made gains.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

We defended Senate seats [that]some people thought we would lose. And I don't think this move to the hard left that you'll see Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are pushing Chuck Schumer [toward]is going to help him in 2022. But it's up to them.

New York has not had a Republican U.S. Senator since then-Rep. Schumer defeated the popular longtime Sen. Alfonse "Al" D'Amato, R-N.Y.,in 1998.

Visit link:
Cornyn: Progressives have Schumer 'scared' of primary challenge in 2022 - Fox News

The replacement of Donald Trump with US President Joe Biden is much more than a changing of the guard in the White House. It marks a wholesale changeover in Washingtons foreign policy elites, a substitution of mindsets. Recent deep-think journal articles map the shift.

A good place to start is the May 2020 article in Foreign Affairs by Daniel Benaim and Jake Sullivan titled Americas Opportunity in the Middle East. Sullivan was an early negotiator of the controversial 2015 nuclear deal with Iran (the JCPOA) and is now President Bidens national security advisor.

Sullivan made it clear that the US ought to immediately reestablish nuclear diplomacy with Iran and salvage what it can from the 2015 nuclear deal, and only after that get into regional negotiations to tackle Irans hegemonic troublemaking and terrorism.

This indeed is the approach that President Biden seems to be taking, even though it probably will free Iran of Western sanctions up front, and fritter away whatever leverage Washington has on Iran for addressing regional challenges over time. For this reason, Israel passionately opposes this approach to dealing with Iran.

In a similar vein, Rob Malley signed off on a January 2020 report by the International Crisis Group (of which he was president and CEO) with 19 conflict-prevention tips for the Biden administration. Just before he became President Bidens chief Iran envoy, Malley and his colleagues urged the US to initiate a process of fully reversing Trump-era sanctions... and support Irans International Monetary Fund loan request as a sign of good-will while Iran brings its nuclear program back into full compliance.

It may be tempting to link rejoining the JCPOA to other issues, but that could put the whole deal at jeopardy. The objective should be a clean re-entry. Other issues, such as regional de-escalation and Irans ballistic missile development, are critical, but best pursued subsequent to, not as a condition of, full restoration of the existing agreement.

cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });

Again, this runs directly counter to Israels view of how to handle Iran and the JCPOA. To understand just how disastrous a clean-return to the JCPOA would be, read Dr. Uzi Rubins recent piece of JISS scholarship. He warns that if the US administration bows to the Iranian nation (as Ayatollah Khamenei has demanded) by rushing back into Obamas nuclear deal with no substantial correction of its many weaknesses, the ayatollahs will justifiably regard this as a historic victory.

Iranian prestige and standing in the region will be enhanced immensely, and Iranian coffers will overflow with income from oil exports and renewal of international trade. This Iranian victory also will discourage Arab states from further normalizing their relations with Israel.

Martin Peretz reminds us in a pungent essay on TabletMag.com that the policies Ron Malley has promoted and facilitated over 20 years are consistently in the service of rapprochement with the Palestine Liberation Organization, Hamas and Iran which are held up by institutional progressives as the marquee victims of Western interventionism in the Middle East. He notes that Malleys allies in Washington (like Peter Beinart, who no longer believes in Jewish statehood) venerate Malley for his capacity to do something Beltway militarists find deeply threatening: See beyond Americas self-congratulatory self-conception and grasp how the US and its allies look to their victims. Ugh.

Yossi Klein Halevi nevertheless seeks a path forward for Israel and its new Gulf allies in dealing with the new Democratic administration. In a paper published for an Emirati think tank, he calls for an Israeli-Gulf state initiative aligning with the moderate majority within the Democratic Party, to present a strategically credible and united front on Iran.

IN PLACE OF the Obama administrations dangerous illusion of an Iranian-imposed regional stability, a new force for regional stability has emerged the Abraham Accord alliances. This gives Israel a strategic advantage it lacked in the first round of the struggle to prevent the Iran deal. A joint Arab-Israeli case against a return to the JCPOA in its previous form (or cosmetically modified) will carry substantial strategic and moral weight. This is an advantage that must be maximized.

Writing in Commentary Magazine, Bret Stephens begs President Biden not to mess up the Abraham Accords. He reminds readers that Obamas policies succeeded in infuriating or betraying nearly all of Americas traditional allies in the region while winning no new friends; whereas the logic contained in the Abraham Accords offers Biden one shot at success across a range of traditional Democratic foreign-policy objectives. These include reducing the scale of US Middle East commitments by growing Israel-Arab alliances and promoting regional integration; advancing normalization of Arab ties with Israel to fight Islamic radicalism and Palestinian rejectionism; and countering Iranian aggression.

He also warns Biden against overworking the Israeli-Palestinian issue. The infatuation so many US policymakers have with Palestinian statehood has disserved American interests in myriad ways; as well as harming Israeli, Arab, and even Palestinian interests.

Picking up on obsessions with peace-processing the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, Shany Mor and Michael Doran write in a pair of brilliant MosaicMagazine.com essays that Americas foreign policy establishment has, in the name of peace, only incentivized conflict in the Middle East.

The peace-processing guild (which Trumps team upended) remains wedded to a fuzzy-headed and unchanging conventional wisdom, characterized by epistemic closure, that has proven remarkably resistant to sober-minded reappraisals (such as the Trump peace plan).

This guild sanctimoniously seeks to rescue a morally fallen Israel (a country compromised by its own hard-fought victories) by forcing a peace deal that will see Israelis in pain. Thus, Israeli withdrawals and sacrifices for peace are the only way to ritually purify Israel from its sins, and thereby expiate America of its responsibility for crimes against progressivism and against an equitable balance of power in the region. When speaking of Israel, You need to furrow your brow like a parent who is more disappointed than angry, and assert that Israels policies will not achieve their goals but rather backfire on Israel.

Mor calls this a return to the dark days of daylight (referring to Obamas drive to open up daylight, or distance, between America and Israel). Doran calls this saving Israel in spite of herself, and he locates the source of this predilection in neo-theological Protestant missionary impulses that run deep among American elites.

How I wish that the new administration would hearken to the wise words of Jim Jeffrey, a veteran American diplomat who served in seven administrations, most recently as special representative for Syria engagement and special envoy to the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS. Writing in Foreign Affairs, Jeffrey argues that Biden does not need a new Middle East policy, because the Trump Administration, for all its peccadilloes, got the region right.

Trump made it clear that he would work primarily through partners on the ground. Therefore, he supported Israeli and Turkish military actions against Iran and Russia in Syria, and relied primarily on the Gulf states, Jordan, Iraq, and Israel to stand up to Tehran. The US would in turn complement these efforts militarily when necessary, selling weapons, targeting terrorists, or punishing Syrian President Bashar Assads use of chemical weapons. [While] the administration was generally cautious about using military power... when it did decide to act, US forces effectively targeted Assad, terrorist groups, Russian mercenaries, and Iranian-backed militias.

In exchange for carrying this extra burden, the Trump administration largely ignored the domestic behavior of important partners, including Egypt, Turkey, and even Saudi Arabia. The administration also made clear that it would openly back Israel when it came to Palestinian issues, overturning long-standing US and international policies on arms transfers, the Golan Heights, Jerusalem, and Western Sahara. Those policies produced the historic Abraham Accords between Israel and several Arab states.

In short, if it aint broke, dont fix it!

Go here to see the original:
Biden brings back 'progressive' diplomacy, and Israel is worried -opinion - The Jerusalem Post

As Paste EIC Josh Jackson put it after watching John Fettermans first campaign video in his upcoming bid for the Pennsylvania Senate, if Im Pat Toomey, Im really glad Im retiring. Watch for yourself:

Its a great ad, but more importantly, its coming from an actual progressive who believes in things like Medicare for All and a $15 minimum wage. Weve seen a lot of very good political ads in the past few years, but often they come from nothingburger candidates like Amy McGrath, who offer nothing beyond a few slick videos and whose centrist policies stand no chance of taking root in conservative parts of the countryor in actually helping those people, even if by some miracle they won. The difference between someone like Fetterman and someone like McGrath is, to put it bluntly, the bullshit factor. Fetterman means what he says, and youll never find him dancing circles around the truth. He doesnt need to; he has both the courage of his convictions andperhaps more importantly in politics on this scalethe faith that his convictions are appealing to a massive chunk of the electorate. Its a big change from Democrats whose chief selling point is that theyre not Republican.

The tempting comparison here is to say that Fetterman is AOC for rural people, for purple-staters, for the hackneyed notion of the REAL (read: white, allegedly culturally conservative) American. There is probably some truth to the idea that as inspiring as AOC or Rashida Tlaib or Ilhan Omar or Cori Bush or Ayanna Pressley or Jamal Bowman are, the common thread is that they come from big cities with a high minority population. Translating their appeal outside those concentrated urban areas is a harder task, and there are many middle-of-the-road Democrats in winnable conservative districts who believe The Squad was used as an effective weapon against them in the 2020 races. Theres a lot of rationalization in that perspective, since it absolves them of their own lack of policy ambition, but if theres a nugget of truth there, its that the battle plan for exporting progressive politics into the interior requires a slightly different approach.

As far as I can tell, John Fetterman embodies that approach almost perfectly. Theres a lot to like, and his ubiquity during the election led to a kind of informal Internet cult developing around him and his wife, but there are a few key things that really matter. The first is that he can handle himself verbally. Theres no nonsense to the guy, and if you attack him, he can stand on his feet and exchange blows. There are other qualities, too, which are trickier to admit. Hes got a masculine aura, which matters more than you might think if youve never lived in small, red towns, and he knows which issues to highlight and which to push to the background. A look at his campaign website finds nine core topics, from minimum wage to weed legalization to healthcare to environmental justice to LGBTQIA+ rights to criminal justice. Not listed there? Guns, the albatross weighing down every democratic candidate outside urban districts. And in fact, Fetterman himself is a gun owner. Hes the kind of guy who can credibly speak to both progressives and those voters who have progressive interests but consider themselves culturally opposed to liberalism.

Its a rare quality, but hopefully becoming more common. The path to a broad coalition for progressivesone that can feel impossible due to social and cultural differencesare people like Fetterman who can highlight the hypocrisy and phoniness of the two-party power structure in ways that feel genuine and not simply in furtherance of a political career. Thats because hes walked the walk for a long time, starting as mayor of Braddock, PA, where he tattooed the dates of each of the towns murders on his watch onto his arm. As a young man, he was well on his way to taking over his fathers insurance business before a friends death in a car accident changed his path totally. He became a Big Brother, joined Americorps, and won his first mayoral race in Braddock by a single vote. He made about $110 a month as mayor, and $30,000 running an Out-Of-School Youth program, and founded a non-profit to benefit the city and its residents. In 2010, he was arrested for protesting the closure of Braddock Hospital. The so-called Braddock Renaissance is a fascinating story, and whats clear at the root of it is that Fetterman was never in this for his own ambition.

People like Fetterman, or AOC, are few and far between, but its inevitable that in a time of progressive political awakening, theyll become more common. And in order for any of this philosophy to take root in red and purple parts of the country like Pennsylvania, it will take candidates like Fetterman who can credibly bridge the culture gap and talk to people on their level from experience. The movement for a higher minimum wage or Medicare for All or free public education will require different tactics in different parts of the country, but the ideas themselves are palatable to an overwhelming majority everywhere. To get the message across, you need a good messenger, and thats what has to change from place to place. What works in Queens might not work in rural Pennsylvania or in Texas or in Idaho, and vice versa. In that sense, Fetterman represents the tip of the speara new kind of candidate who is almost like a missionary, spreading the important ideas where theyll have the most trouble catching on.

His Senate campaign will be fascinating to watch, especially in the primary stages where he faces the inevitable party candidate. Will he have the same popular appeal among white voters as Bernie Sanders? Will he be able to make inroads with black urban voters, or will he face the same obstacles that Sanders faced in the south on that front? The more Fetterman can make his campaign about the message, the more successful hell be, and its likely that the chief tactic used against him will be the same social bludgeons used against Sanders and figures like Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. His success or failure takes on an importance far beyond this individual race, because to some degree it represents the future success or failure of the movement he represents. In a perfect world, he would be the AOC of purple America and illustrate the path forward. At the very least, it will be a stress test of the very concept of a progressive winning a massive race like the one for U.S. Senate in a state not called Vermont, and an illustration of what works and what weapons the opposition will use to stop it from happening.

In a basic sense, his goal is to reach the people, and to make the people want to reach him. If he can do that, the skys the limit, and not just for John Fetterman.

More here:
John Fetterman Represents the Progressive Movement Into Red and Purple America - Paste Magazine