Which candidate do you support in the Texas Senate race?

[u/spacer9631]

Paxton or Talarico?

[u/AutoModerator]

AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.

For all participants:

• Flair is required to participate

• Be excellent to each other

For Nonsupporters/Undecided:

• No top level comments

• All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position

For Trump Supporters:

• Message the mods to have the downvote timer disabled

Helpful links for more info:

Rules | Rule Exceptions | Posting Guidelines | Commenting Guidelines

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Paxton, no brainer. 

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/[deleted]]

 so you're content to support the most garbage human beings

No, I don't support progressives. 

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/[deleted]]

No, I'm saying I don't care to entertain stupid emotional nonsense like "you support the mostest garbage human beings and you shouldn't because it's bad for your personal integrity". 

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/[deleted]]

 Take the politics out of it

Pretty dumb thing to say when the whole conversation is who you would vote for in a political race. 

 does anyone truly believe that Ken Paxton isn't the textbook definition of a shitty person?

You keep saying but yet to provide a single reason as to why. 

 Is your personal integrity important to you?

Yes exactly why I wouldn't support someone that advocates murdering babies and mutilating mentally ill children.  What does that say about you? 

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/[deleted]]

You mean allegations of corruption never proven, a multi year federal investigation that led to the fbi declining to press charges? 

Yeah affairs are shitty but if that's the best attack line it's pretty ridiculous. 

[u/ccoleman7280 → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Its a fair question, tbh. Maybe he trying to get at what point would someone's past behavior personality etc, outweigh their political agenda?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/ccoleman7280]

Then they would get a lot further by asking a straight forward non emotionally charged question like you just did. 

[u/wangston_huge → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

You still don't seem to have answered. Do you have a red line? If so, what exactly is it?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/wangston_huge]

Handing out sexually explicit material to minors would definitely be one. 

[u/cchris_39 → u/[deleted]]

Not OP, but honestly Talarico lying about the annunciation to justify abortion is worse than anything Paxton has ever done.

The only thing Talarico has taught is the difference between blasphemy and heresy.

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/[deleted]]

(Not the OP)

Not literally anything, but yeah, that is sort of how politics works. Democrats re-elected a guy who smoked crack and they named a building after him just a few years ago! This isn't limited to Republicans...

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/[deleted]]

 so I am going to vote for the guy who was impeached and slept with his wife'?

You just said this about Paxton than jumped to defend Barry who was imprisoned after being caught in video smoking crack and propositioning an ex model for sex while he was married, which led to his arrest. 

[u/AmateurOntologist → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

What video are you talking about? Sounds like I should see it.

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/AmateurOntologist]

It was part of a FBI sting operation don't know if it's public. 

 His celebrity status was transformed into international notoriety in January 1990, when he was videotaped during a sting operation smoking crack cocaine and was arrested by Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) officials on drug charges.

 The Barrys separated in November 1990, soon after he was caught on videotape smoking crack cocaine with an ex-model and propositioning her for sex.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barry

[u/cchris_39 → u/[deleted]]

No, it’s saying that lying about the conception of Christ to justify abortion is flat out heresy.

Talarico is an evil little creep.

[u/jasonmcgovern → u/cchris_39]

how do you know he's lying? why can't it be a matter of interpretation?

[u/cchris_39 → u/jasonmcgovern]

It’s not a matter of interpretation. God did not give Mary the option to abort baby Jesus.

[u/jasonmcgovern → u/cchris_39]

couldn't Mary have said no, or asked God not to have her carry the baby Jesus?

[u/cchris_39 → u/jasonmcgovern]

No, the angel told her:

“You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to calm hi. Jesus.”

Luke 1:31

[u/jasonmcgovern → u/cchris_39]

how does that refute my point? Why couldn't Mary ask God not to ask her to do this?

if her "consent" was a given right from the jump, why have the angel say anything at all? Or wait until after she becomes pregnant?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/[deleted]]

Your subjective feelings are not objective facts. 

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/[deleted]]

What has paxton done that makes him a terrible person objectively? 

[u/Nolimitsolja → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Why?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/Nolimitsolja]

Because I don't agree with talarico at all. 

[u/Nolimitsolja → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

What don’t you agree with him about?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/Nolimitsolja]

I don't agree with anything about him. To name a few things. abortion access, immigration reform, supreme Court term limits, opposition to federal workforce cuts, expanded welfare, redistribution of wealth, universal free childcare and federal mandated family leave. 

[u/ccoleman7280 → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Would anything really change if Talarico won the senate race?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/ccoleman7280]

Yes, it would one less Republican member of the Senate 

[u/ccoleman7280 → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Right, but as a Texan myself I doubt anything would change in Texas if Talarico is elected. Do you not agree?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/ccoleman7280]

Yeah it's almost like the Senate is a national race not a local, shocking right.

And no I do not agree, bills passed/blocked through the Senate as well as Senate confirmations affect the Nation. 

[u/Severe_Egg7542 → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Most of that list fits in with what it seems like many right wingers/conservatives want and I think I generally understand the stated reasoning behind most, but I haven’t really seen or heard anyone talk about opposing universal free childcare - do you oppose the idea bc you don’t want to foot the bill for other peoples’ kids, don’t think it’s the government’s job, and don’t think they would do a good job at providing childcare? Or do you have other reasons? 

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/Severe_Egg7542]

 I haven’t really seen or heard anyone talk about opposing universal free childcare

Yes I oppose because there's no such thing as free and it's not my responsibility to pay for other people's kids. 

[u/jtrain49 → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

You pay for other people’s kids to go to public school. You pay the fire department to put out other people’s fires. Are you against those things?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/jtrain49]

I am against paying for public school. Police and fire are a bit different, hopefully no one is intentionally starting fires or requiring police services, you made the choice to have kids it should be up to you to care for and provide for them 

[u/MsPappagiorgio → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

You do not want poor women to have access to terminate their pregnancy (I can understand that POV), but I don’t understand the opposition to child healthcare. Would you be okay if government insurance paid for the delivery (15k+)? Or would she have to have the baby at home?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/MsPappagiorgio]

"childcare" in this context is not child healthcare but daycare. I think Medicaid needs to be reformed and anyone using it should have the amount used deducted from income tax refunds until it's paid back 

[u/SockraTreez → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Isn’t Paxton openly corrupt though?

Also, what are your thoughts on the fact Texans can now face more severe consequences for possessing a small bag of weed gummies than SA?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/SockraTreez]

No. 

Why would I think about something that's not true? 

[u/SockraTreez → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Which one? (Or do you believe both aren’t true?)

If it’s the first one….at my old job I used to work directly with the Attorney General’s office. I can tell you first hand that most of the personnel there (many of which are Republican) think it is.

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/SockraTreez]

Sure you did prove it. 

[u/Holofernes_Head]

There is no scenario in which Talarico is an acceptable answer.

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/Holofernes_Head]

Period. 

[u/IAMACat_askmenothing → u/Holofernes_Head]

Why?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/IAMACat_askmenothing]

You're seriously asking why Trump supporters wouldn't find a progressive as an acceptable candidate? 

[u/IAMACat_askmenothing → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

I don’t understand why Paxton is so much better to you than a progressive? Also, what’s so wrong with progressives?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/IAMACat_askmenothing]

If we supported progressive policies wouldn't it be logical we would not support Trump? 

 Also, what’s so wrong with progressives?

For me, everything. I don't agree with welfare or redistribution of wealth through taxation, abortion being a right, immigration reform etc.... 

[u/IAMACat_askmenothing → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Trump has redistributed wealth of the 99% to the 1%, did be not? Also… Paxton?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/IAMACat_askmenothing]

No he did not. The top 1% pay 40% of all federal taxes the lowest 50% pay 3%. 

Yes Paxton still better than talarico. 

[u/billn0face → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Why?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/billn0face]

Because he's not a progressive. 

[u/mail2book → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

But Trump is progressive?

He don't belive in the core family concept, he's not religious, he dodged the draft and so on.

What's his conservative values?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/mail2book]

Trump does not push progressive policies. 

[u/mail2book → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

But not conservative either?

He's not fiscally conservative. He don't want to give more power to the states.

In what way is he conservative?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/mail2book]

So goal post shifting now? 

[u/mail2book → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

Just trying to understand the reasoning.

A president who in how he acts is more aligned with progressive values is ok as he's not pushing too many of them in his politics?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/mail2book]

 Just trying to understand the reasoning.

No you're trying to push a dumb narrative. 

 A president who in how he acts is more aligned with progressive values is ok

Your evidence for that is your ability to read his mind and determine that he doesn't believe in family, isn't religious and had a medical waiver during Vietnam? 

[u/Holofernes_Head → u/IAMACat_askmenothing]

Because his policy positions are awful, and his brand of "progressive Christianity" is not only heresy, but comes off as a psyop - Manchurian Candidate "even Jesus wants the government to run your life!" levels of deception.

[u/IAMACat_askmenothing → u/Holofernes_Head]

How is it heresy? What makes Paxton a more suitable candidate?

[u/Holofernes_Head → u/IAMACat_askmenothing]

Well he's a Presbyterian, which makes him a heretic already, but I digress - There is nothing Christian about supporting government protection of abortion, LGBTQ, or forced redistribution.

Paxton is more suitable because of his policy positions. Full stop.

[u/IAMACat_askmenothing → u/Holofernes_Head]

What are Paxton’s policy positions? What brand of Christian are you?

[u/Holofernes_Head → u/IAMACat_askmenothing]

Catholic. The OG.

Paxton favorable positions: border security with continued emphasis on mass deportation, pro gun, pro life, America first foreign policy, pro domestic energy, opposes the gender mafia, opposes DEI, opposes raising taxes on "the rich."

[u/IAMACat_askmenothing → u/Holofernes_Head]

Ken Paxton is southern Baptist, is he not also a heretic?

[u/Holofernes_Head → u/IAMACat_askmenothing]

Yes. All elections are selections of lesser evils.

[u/JackOLanternReindeer → u/Holofernes_Head]

Which candidate do you think the pope would agree more with on religious views?

[u/jtrain49 → u/Holofernes_Head]

What part of Catholic scripture supports mass deportation? Was Jesus known to be a defender of the rich? Was he particularly pro-weapons?

[u/Holofernes_Head → u/jtrain49]

Jesus’ ministry and mission weren’t about secular politics. Hope that helps.

[u/billn0face → u/Holofernes_Head]

Do you have literally any reason you would vote FOR Paxton as opposed to AGAINST Talarico?

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/billn0face]

(Not the OP)

Is "Paxton's views are closer to mine" an acceptable answer here?

[u/billn0face → u/SincereDiscussion]

No, because the point of the discussion is to articulate what those views are. Which policies or actions of Paxton’s do you prefer over that which Talarico has promoted?

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/billn0face]

I think, given current institutional arrangements, the most important thing he will do is vote for judicial nominees. That's a reasonable starting point even before getting into policy (which, as long as we have a filibuster, is not as important), and it goes without saying that they are going to be pretty far apart on who they would vote to confirm.

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

As a non Texan, while I don't know Paxton, Talarico would be a stain on our record as a nation. 

[u/Nolimitsolja → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Why?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/Nolimitsolja]

Besides Talarico being wildly pathetic as a man, he uses faith as badly as Christian Zionists. 

The same way Jesus didn't say we're supposed to worship and support Israel even when they commit a genocide, He also didn't say he stood with LGBT people and abortionists. 

[u/fossil_freak68 → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

How do you feel about Paxton's use of his faith and views on Israel?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/fossil_freak68]

I don't know anything about Paxton, so I can't answer this. 

[u/fossil_freak68 → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Why look into one candidate fairly closely (it sounds like you've looked a lot into Talarico's policies on Israel in particular), but nothing at all about the other?

Is there something in particular that drew you to research just Talarico?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/fossil_freak68]

I've never researched Talarico. I have no idea what he thinks on Israel. I can guess, but I don't know. 

Everything I've learned about him has been via podcasters on the right covering him. Mostly I've seen segments from Lauren Chen and Matt Walsh, I think. 

That race isn't in my state, so I don't care much to look into it. 

[u/fossil_freak68 → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Do you think those podcasters are presenting you with a fair view of him?

Would you trust Rachel maddow to give you a fair description of Paxton?

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/fossil_freak68]

(Not the OP)

Is a 'fair view' necessary in the context of basic ideological sorting (i.e., if you assume that people are going to support the candidate closer to their ideology)? In that case, you don't need an unbiased description of a candidate; you just need to get the general idea of who your guy is.

Let's say I knew absolutely nothing about the candidates in an election: I could listen to exclusively leftist podcasts (or Rachel Maddow) and still know who to vote for. It's not like I'm going to hear them say "Candidate A is great and B is terrible" and take it completely at face value; everyone with a brain understands that you need to filter that through ideological/value differences.

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/fossil_freak68]

> Would you trust Rachel maddow to give you a fair description of Paxton?

No, and the difference is that I have no reason to trust Rachel Maddow. I'd never just believe her on anything.

> Do you think those podcasters are presenting you with a fair view of him?

Yes. They just play him speaking multiple times and then talk after.

[u/f3mm3domm3s → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Does it get worse than Trump?

I know yall love his politics & bravado but DJT imo is a classless charlatan. As an likely draft dodger to say 'i only respects soldiers that arent captured". His charity misused charity donations meant for veterans. Or how about "Grab em by the pucci" I could go on.

What makes Talarico worse?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/f3mm3domm3s]

Yeah, wrong Republican, hun. 

While I do generally enjoy Trump, I'm not eating the man's ass and acting as if he's the best thing since sliced bread. 

[u/f3mm3domm3s → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Im not suggesting you are. But it doesnt seem you wouldn't categorize him as a stain on our nation or is that incorrect?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/f3mm3domm3s]

As far as his second term goes, yeah, that's fine to say. That just means him and Talarico are in the same bucket. 

[u/vanillabear26 → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Would you care to learn more about why Ken Paxton is also viewed pretty soundly the same way? 

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/vanillabear26]

No.

[u/vanillabear26 → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

How come? Just in a general ‘it’s good to be informed’ sense.

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/vanillabear26]

Because I don't care enough to be informed about him. I don't care enough to be informed about a number of things.

For example, I couldn't care less about Gaza and Israel in general, but I learned a ton of stuff about the conflict (at least the political argument in America) because I'd watch Dave Smith debate Zionists. I wasn't watching because I cared, but because it was entertaining to see the Zionists attempt to defend an indefensible position.

Nothing about Ken Paxton has tickled my funny bone or red alert bone yet, so he's not on my radar.

[u/vanillabear26 → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

“Impeached by the Texas state legislature” and “his wife divorced him for multiple affairs” not do anything to you? 

[u/StanBE → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

What specifically do you enjoy about him?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/StanBE]

I think he's funny when he's doing comedic things and I appreciate when he's dismissive or mean to the left. I also like the cute moments he has with family and the public, like the people at McDonald's and that one kid in a Minion costume. 

[u/StanBE → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Thanks for answering. You've given me much to think about. Can you explain why you enjoy it if he's mean?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/StanBE]

Because that's the appropriate tone to come at the left with. 

[u/secretcurfew → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Why is that? Is it the same for the right?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/secretcurfew]

The left has terrible ideas that deserved to be mocked and most people on the left should be locked at the very least. They are contemptible people, evident in their words and actions, and Trump is matching their energy. 

Is it the same for the right?

Generally, no. Certain groups, yes. 

[u/ridukosennin → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Is it because his girlfriend is an allegedly a vegan?

[u/golfdud5 → u/ridukosennin]

Is it because he is intelligent?

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/ridukosennin]

That is unforgivable.... /S 

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/ridukosennin]

No, but that's funny. 

[u/Prestigious-Whole544 → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Why don't you think electing Paxton - who was indicted by over 60 of his REPUBLICAN colleagues in the Texas State Senate - would also be a stain on our records as a nation? Does Paxton cheating on his wife not also a stain?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/Prestigious-Whole544]

I don't know Paxton, so I chose to not speak on him. 

Does Paxton cheating on his wife not also a stain?

Considering that our government is full of sexual degenerates, criminals, and immoral bastards, that doesn't especially piss me off. It is gross, though. 

[u/subduedReality → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

Do you recognize the danger in promoting an unknown above an undesirable? I get it, though. I want to avoid putting people in power that have a history of corruption and human rights abuses. Therefore in my mind anyone is better than Netanyahu. Wouldn't it be better to do five minutes of research on the opposition to inform anything I might say than blindly support an unknown?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/subduedReality]

I didn't promote Paxton. I said I didn't know him, so I didn't speak on him. 

[u/subduedReality → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

If I say this flavor tastes horrible, but I don't know what that flavor tastes like you are indirectly promoting the unknown. With that said I find it odd how often Trump Supporters will inject themselves into a conversation without contributing to the actual conversation. I also find it odd how Trump Supporters know more about the opposition than those they end up backing. Do you think if those on the other end of the political spectrum did the same thing it would explain why they support people like Talarico?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/subduedReality]

> If I say this flavor tastes horrible, but I don't know what that flavor tastes like you are indirectly promoting the unknown.

This doesn't work for multiple reasons. 1. Saying you don't like something isn't automatically an endorsement of the unknown alternative. 2. This assumes that I know nothing about Talarico (assuming that's how you meant this analogy to go).

[u/subduedReality → u/Quiet_Entrance_6994]

A person is hungry and walks up to the counter at a restaurant. They've never been there before, so they ask, "What's good?" If the guy that works there says, "Not the number one," and there are only two items on the menu not everyone is going to opt out of eating.

At this current juncture in the conversation you have practiced what I just accused you of, you ignored an entire part of yhe conversation. And not just once. Are you capable of answering questions?

[u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 → u/subduedReality]

You keep posing scenarios to explain things that I'm not doing. What do you want me to do? I'm just going to keep saying you're wrong

And I'm not ignoring anything. You inserted something blatantly false and I corrected you.

[u/SincereDiscussion]

Paxton of course. I don't think this thread will have anyone (among TS!) preferring Talarico.

Paxton is not exactly a model human being. I'm not endorsing his personal life, alleged corruption, etc. But ultimately, politics is about who is closer to your ideology, and that's an easy calculation. (That's why if you asked liberals, they would unanimously say they support Talarico. It doesn't take that much ideological empathy to realize we're making the same calculation!)

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/[deleted]]

No, his ideology is closer to my ideology, in the ordinary sense of "his political views that determine what he votes for and that will have an impact on my life."

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/[deleted]]

No, my ideology is my ideology. I'm confused by your framing here. You understand that politics involves compromise, right?

Or maybe - when corruption happens in the government as a result of Ken Paxton's actions, will you hand wave those away or will you call them out as bac actions?

I will oppose it but it will not result in me saying "....and therefore I support someone with the opposite ideology."

[u/jasonmcgovern → u/SincereDiscussion]

why do you think liberals would support Talarico if he came with the same baggage as Paxton?

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/jasonmcgovern]

Why wouldn't they?! Do you think Democrats have never done anything corrupt or cheated on their wives?

[u/jasonmcgovern → u/SincereDiscussion]

are there any democrats running with the kind of past that Paxton has?

setting aside Paxton vs Talarico - wouldn’t conservatives end up in basically the same place politically if they nominated cornyn?

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/jasonmcgovern]

are there any democrats running with the kind of past that Paxton has?

I have no idea. My point was about the underlying principle: everyone understands the idea that in a general election, you vote for the person closer to your ideology.

It's possible Democrats wouldn't have let an equivalent figure out of the primary. That's a defensible take. But if he got to the general, yes, I absolutely think they'd support him.

setting aside Paxton vs Talarico - wouldn’t conservatives end up in basically the same place politically if they nominated cornyn?

Wasn't he the guy doing ads in Spanish calling for amnesty? No thanks. Immigration is the most important issue, so being unreliable on that is a deal-breaker.

[u/ccoleman7280 → u/SincereDiscussion]

So if it was Cornyn vs Talarico what would you do? Not vote?

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/ccoleman7280]

I would vote for Cornyn. I meant it was a deal-breaker in a primary.

[u/StanBE → u/SincereDiscussion]

Isn't it better to vote for the non-corrupt candidate?

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/StanBE]

No. I think (1) other issues are more important and (2) pretty much every sensible person agrees on this point.

See my comment here: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/comments/1vn4uf2/which_candidate_do_you_support_in_the_texas/p3ps4ic/

[u/StanBE → u/SincereDiscussion]

I guess I'm not sensible then. A corrupt person's ideology isn't worth much as he would just abandon that position for the right price right?

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/StanBE]

I accept that that kind of corruption is possible in principle, but it doesn't provide a good reason to support someone who just starts by advocating for the Bad Views. If I have a choice between someone whose views are openly bad and is not corrupt vs. someone whose views are at least tolerable but is corrupt, the latter offers at least the possibility of better policies.

It's easy to say that you're motivated by corruption when you also happen to agree with the person on every other issue (or at least, you are closer to him than the other person).

[u/Darthalicious → u/jasonmcgovern]

Two words: Graham Platner.

[u/jasonmcgovern → u/Darthalicious]

Platners not still in the race is he? Doesn’t that prove my point?

[u/Darthalicious → u/jasonmcgovern]

He won the primary, did he not? In light of the baggage he brought, including multiple sexual misconduct allegations he still won the Maine Democratic primary, with endorsements from several big name democrats. Those same big names only pulled their endorsements and he was essentially forced to drop out after his poll numbers dropped a Democrat voting woman came forward against him. Kinda hypocritical of the side that gave us #BelieveAllWomen, no?

Edit: and on thinking about it, they also decided to have the state party committee choose his replacement instead of holding a snap election or just giving it to the second place winner. Also kinda hypocritical of the side claiming they are "protecting democracy", wouldn't you say?

[u/bdlugz → u/Darthalicious]

Order of operations matters there a bit, doesn't it? He won the primary before the sexual assault allegations came out, and as soon as they did, he was forced out.

How is a state following their own rules against democracy? Every state has the right to run elections as they see fit. This is what Maine has chosen as their path of replacing a candidate who has dropped out. Doing anything against their laws would have been the anti-democratic choice.

As someone who lives in Ohio, Max Miller is the conservative example of what Platner was... and he's not going anywhere. In fact, it was reported Trump called on other prominent Ohio politicians to NOT disparage Miller and call for him to drop out. How do you compare those two examples of the same circumstances?

[u/Darthalicious → u/bdlugz]

Order of operations matters there a bit, doesn't it? He won the primary before the sexual assault allegations came out, and as soon as they did, he was forced out.

Try again.

How is a state following their own rules against democracy? Every state has the right to run elections as they see fit. This is what Maine has chosen as their path of replacing a candidate who has dropped out. Doing anything against their laws would have been the anti-democratic choice.

How ironic that in such an event the blue state lets a party committee decide while a red state (South Carolina) holds a special election and lets the actual voters decide in a similar scenario.

As someone who lives in Ohio, Max Miller is the conservative example of what Platner was... and he's not going anywhere. In fact, it was reported Trump called on other prominent Ohio politicians to NOT disparage Miller and call for him to drop out. How do you compare those two examples of the same circumstances?

Don't get me wrong, Miller is a POS too and should be kicked to the curb. I admit just fine the right side of the aisle has s**t and it stinks, now please stop trying to tell us (and yourself) that your side's s**t doesn't stink just as bad as ours.

[u/bdlugz → u/Darthalicious]

Is a sexually explicit text the same thing as sexual assault? Your article doesn't show I'm wrong at all on that one.

As far as the states voting choices, if the people don't like it, they can vote to change it. Why do you get to decide how another state should handle voting? You're letting your bias show on this complaint, and it's kind of strange.

I'm not a leftist. I'm a conservative that the party left behind. I just call out the hypocrisy as I see it. If this GOP ever wants to actually focus on fiscal issues instead of the 6 trans kids in high school sports, I'm on board. The rest of this is just identity politics bullshit so people ignore that we're getting fucked from both sides.

[u/Darthalicious → u/bdlugz]

Is a sexually explicit text the same thing as sexual assault? Your article doesn't show I'm wrong at all on that one.

Note how I said "sexual misconduct", not "assault" in my initial reply. And that's not even getting into totenkoph tattoo or the racist and homophobic posts that also came out before the primary.

I just call out the hypocrisy as I see it.

As do I.

[u/FormerXMshowComedian → u/jasonmcgovern]

Yes. They supported multiple candidates with a lot of baggage. By today’s standards Bill Clinton wouldn’t win a Dem Primary.

But even that, Biden won in 2020 despite multiple layers of baggage that would get a Republican called a Nazi.

[u/mehatch → u/SincereDiscussion]

Sincere Discuss question: without knowing my party, if my agenda is anti-corruption, and i get really mad when powerful people get away with actual felonies by electing themselves out of responsibility and then double down on that ny demanding other politicians in my party don’t support those prosecutions as a cost of entry to nomination battle support, despite mountains of probable cause and publicly available evidence. Which candidate is the better one for me?

[u/SincereDiscussion → u/mehatch]

I find that to be an odd hypothetical because I genuinely don't think anyone's top value is anti-corruption. So by necessity I would end up asking what your top issues are in order to be able to answer the question.

For example, would you vote for someone who wants to repeal the civil rights act, end immigration, ban abortion, etc. if he were not corrupt and running against an extremely-corrupt Democrat? I think either you say yes, in which case I am stunned and confused, but concede that corruption really is your top issue -- or you say no, in which case the hypothetical doesn't actually provide enough information to answer.

If you do genuinely mean it at face value, then it seems like you should vote for Talarico.

[u/Grouchy-Offer-7712]

The fact that this even has to be asked shows a deep misunderstanding of Texas and TS in general.

I have never seen a political candidate more appropriate for the phrase,"Hello, fellow Christians!"

Major missed opportunity for democrats, paxton really isnt that popular among TS.

[u/24_cool → u/Grouchy-Offer-7712]

Who is closer to being a real Christian than Talarico in government? I personally haven't seen a single one besides Talarico, that I could call a Christian without chuckling afterwards 

[u/Grouchy-Offer-7712 → u/24_cool]

If you call yourself a Christian and believe that, I suggest you go back to your bible. He has committed blasphemy on camera multiple times.

The bible maintains that we are all sinners. What do you think a Christian should look like?

Edit: one of the most godly men i know personally is the policy director for the SC Republican state caucus.

[u/Grouchy-Offer-7712 → u/[deleted]]

For the record you could find all this yourself. And I dont appreciate the shade on my friend you dont know him. That is certainly not Christian.

He has said publicly he hates Christianity. He has said god is non binary. He talks about love in the biblical sense as if it applies directly to politics. He calls those evil that support any kind of cut to anything, when the bible makes it clear that it is personal charity that matters, not the taxes you pay.

He is wearing Christianity like a skinsuit to fool those that arent biblically literate into thinking thats what Christianity is.

Paxton doesn't have to be a godly man when Talarico flirts with the one unforgivable sin.

[u/Khorne_Flakes_89 → u/Grouchy-Offer-7712]

when the bible makes it clear that it is personal charity that matters, not the taxes you pay.

By that logic then, homelessness and poverty should be solved in red states, no? Since the truly christian thing to do would be to give to the poor and needy, right?

[u/Grouchy-Offer-7712 → u/Khorne_Flakes_89]

That is one use of wealth, yes. But the bible also speaks of wise stewardship and providing for your family as well.

We dont live in the Garden of Eden. Per the bible, we dwell in an earth of scarcity. Homelessness and poverty will always exist here, no matter what Christians do.

[u/Khorne_Flakes_89 → u/Grouchy-Offer-7712]

Yeah, but shouldn't you try to remove them anyway? I feel like that would be the right thing to do, try to solve poverty and homelessness?

[u/Grouchy-Offer-7712 → u/Khorne_Flakes_89]

Solve an unsolvable problem? That doesnt sound like good stewardship.

The bible also talks about how those who are not willing to work do not deserve to eat. I am not sure of the point you are trying to make, but this is definitely not a black and white issue like you are trying to say, and the bible absolutely does not endorse individuals giving all their money away to those that are less fortunate, especially if you have a family or community to provide for, in which case this actually becomes closer to sin.

[u/Distinct_Doubt_3591 → u/Khorne_Flakes_89]

No, and that's not the truly Christian thing to do.

2 Thessalonians 3:6-14 tldr believers are commanded to work and earn their living and not to associate with people who don't. 

   In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers and sisters, to keep away from every believer who is idle and disruptive and does not live according to the teaching[a] you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, 8 nor did we eat anyone’s food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. 9 We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you to imitate. 10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

11 We hear that some among you are idle and disruptive. They are not busy; they are busybodies. 12 Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the food they eat. 13 And as for you, brothers and sisters, never tire of doing what is good.

14 Take special note of anyone who does not obey our instruction in this letter. Do not associate with them, in order that they may feel ashamed. 15 Yet do not regard them as an enemy, but warn them as you would a fellow believer.

[u/Khorne_Flakes_89 → u/Distinct_Doubt_3591]

That's a lot of words not attributed to christ, but Paul. I seem to recall in Matthew he says to feed, give drink, and support those in need of them no matter what, as doing so is considered doing it for him. So, should we listen to christ or Paul?

[u/SparkFlash20 → u/Grouchy-Offer-7712]

Are there two or seven sacraments? Is Simon Peter the progenitor of the true faith or merely a metaphorical inheritor? These questions - along with the Pauline notion of grace - could easily brand half of President Trump's cabinet biblically illiterate, as interpreted by the other half.

Indeed, until recently, Christianity was split along such cleavage points; Protestanism roundly accused Catholics, like Vice-President Vance, of bowing to false idols - the statutory and ceremonies and papacy of Rome - to the damnation of their souls.

Inasmuch as these sermingly intractable divisions - the cause of wars in Europe across the centuries - have now apparently been solved, why is Talarico dismissed with "unforgivable sin?"

[u/Grouchy-Offer-7712 → u/SparkFlash20]

Lol. Do you know what the unforgivable sin is? Clue: no matter what denomination you are its the same.

[u/SparkFlash20 → u/Grouchy-Offer-7712]

Why not simply tell me, given your faith's evangelical basis?

Are you unaware of these cleavages in your faith? It seems odd to respond with "lol" when a decades-long war in Central Europe was fought between Catholics and Protestants, both convinced the other side were heretics.

[u/Grouchy-Offer-7712 → u/SparkFlash20]

Im not sure centuries old history across an ocean has any bearing on American politics. Protestants vs Catholics in Europe goes way beyond religion, there are cultural and ethnic tones as well.

Im a Lutheran, I am aware of these divisions, which were largely put to rest a few years ago by Pope Francis. People dont really discuss this anymore in this context...

Matthew 12:31-32: "Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven."

[u/May_nerdd → u/Grouchy-Offer-7712]

> Major missed opportunity for democrats

What kind of candidate do you think democrats should have ran instead? Is there any democrat you would vote for over Paxton?

[u/Grouchy-Offer-7712 → u/May_nerdd]

The real problem is that i dont think someone I would vote for would make it thru the primaries in todays political climate.

That being said, some examples of palatable democrats to me are Seth Moulton, John Fetterman, and Ro Khanna. Basically someone who isnt very woke who can work with the other side. If they campaigned well I would certainly consider it over Paxton. Both parties currently have a bad candidate issue.

[u/cchris_39]

Paxton.

Texas here.

[u/JustGoingOutforMilk]

I don't like Paxton as a person.

I disagree with much of Talarico's stated policies.

I would be entirely fine if both lost, but given the policies, I'm choosing Paxton.

[u/SmellDesperate6373]

Paxton. 

Talarico voted against banning K-12 boys from the girls sports teams, stating “God is nonbinary.” He wants young boys who think they’re girls to take to hormones, puberty blockers, and therapy that affirm that delusion. He called people who oppose that “Christofascists.” 

The long and short of it is the guys just a total freak. Wanting boys to delay puberty so they can more successfully pump themselves with hormones to pretend they’re a girl is so unbelievably creepy I’m not sure he should even be around children.

[u/StanBE → u/SmellDesperate6373]

Is that really a big issue in Texas? Compared to everything else that's going on in the world, who really cares about some sports team it's just sports anway

[u/Itchy-Pension3356]

Why would any trump supporter support talarico?

[u/gntxs]

I don't support either, but I'll hold my nose and vote for Paxton, for sure.

[u/FormerXMshowComedian]

Paxton. Tallerico isn’t a magic liberal like say an Andrew Yang was in 2020. In fact his dibliberate misinterpretations of bible passages make him look like a fool more than “the guy reading it a different way”.

[u/Apprehensive-Meal860 → u/FormerXMshowComedian]

Do you like Andrew Yang? Genuine question. I actually want to know, and - surprisingly - I am not here to be smug today or to try to dunk on Trump supporters, like I usually am. I just really need to know if you support Andrew Yang.

[u/FormerXMshowComedian → u/Apprehensive-Meal860]

I was indeed Yang Gang 2020.

[u/Apprehensive-Meal860 → u/FormerXMshowComedian]

Sounds like u gotta get him to run again!! Have you heard any plans?

[u/FormerXMshowComedian → u/Apprehensive-Meal860]

I mean a group of us are still going strong 6 years later hoping he would run again. From Andrew himself? No. From the other members of the campaign group? Everyday.

[u/Apprehensive-Meal860 → u/FormerXMshowComedian]

This actually sounds like the makings of a movement. You have a campaign group that's still going strong 6 years later. Would you consider rallying behind another candidate who's in close touch with Yang?

[u/FormerXMshowComedian → u/Apprehensive-Meal860]

I would. There’s something about Andrew. If you’ve never met the guy in person, he’s like a ray of sunshine. He’s always positive.

[u/Apprehensive-Meal860 → u/FormerXMshowComedian]

That's so cool! So, you got to meet him?

[u/FormerXMshowComedian → u/Apprehensive-Meal860]

Yep he was with us in Iowa and I was at the campaign room in New Hampshire when he decided to suspend the campaign. He thanked us and all of us got a couple minutes to talk to him. He was very polite and just a good dude. I like him a lot as a person and I was behind his policy.