John Fetterman, as someone put it, is doing a Bulworth in reverse.
Bulworth was a fictional California senator in the 1990s movie of the same name who suddenly abandoned his establishment politics for an outspoken leftism, and all ended happily ever after.

Fetterman is the real Pennsylvania senator who has suddenly modulated his leftist politics, outraging his former supporters and pleasing his former critics.

The senator is demonstrating how — through theatrical dissent from a few fashionable left-wing causes and strategic rebranding — it’s possible to create a Democratic politics shorn of some of its dumbest, most unnecessary cultural vulnerabilities.

Fetterman has distanced himself from the excesses of the left on a couple of key things and done it with a devil-may-care verve that has drawn added attention and underlined his independence.

He has had, to use the term from the Clinton years, some Sister Souljah moments. One of the advantages of such a moment is that, when done correctly, it generates benefits out of all proportion to the significance of the underlying issue. (The term derives from Bill Clinton criticizing a pro-riot statement by a rapper.)

That’s not to say that the Israel-Gaza war or the border — the two substantive issues where Fetterman has gone his own way — aren’t important. But how much is Fetterman really giving away ideologically by robustly favoring Israel in a war with a terrorist group or acknowledging the crisis at the border?

You can still favor Medicare for All while saying Israel should finish the job against Hamas, and you can still support a $15 minimum wage while saying we should get a better handle on the border.

Similarly, it doesn’t cost Fetterman anything to say that Bob Menendez of New Jersey, indicted for corruption, is a disgrace who doesn’t belong in the Senate. It’s not as though Fetterman is the Senate majority leader.

Fetterman, though, has made his points in pungent, showy ways that gives them more resonance. He says he’s going to return a $5,000 donation from Menendez’s PAC in envelopes of cash. He puts up posters of Israeli kidnap victims on his office walls. He irreverently shuts down an anti-Israel heckler.

Fetterman isn’t really departing from Democratic orthodoxy per se. Other Democrats are pro-Israel and anti-Menendez, while the party didn’t used to be as committed to a de facto open border as Biden has been. What he’s doing is declaring his independence from the radicalism of the Left and from the progressive brand. Now, after proudly declaring himself a progressive for years, he says he’s never been one.

Fetterman is also triggering the right people. Earning the contempt of angry and childish pro-Hamas protestors helpfully pushes Fetterman’s image to the center.

Another benefit of Fetterman’s high-profile acts of heterodoxy is that it puts him on the popular side of these issues. According to a recent Quinnipiac poll, 26% of voters think more favorably of Fetterman for expressing strong support for Israel, whereas 14% say this makes them think less favorably of him. On the border, people favor his position 35-9.

In sum, Fetterman is pointing to a different path for the Democrats, where the party doesn’t have to cater to its left and, in fact, can pivot off of it to appear more reasonable.

Democrats should pay attention, although they probably won’t — ensuring that Fetterman has lots of running room to brand himself as a different kind of Democrat.

Rich Lowry is editor in chief of the National Review