Red Mosquito

I think you can make a pretty good argument the left cares more about trump than the right actually does.

Paul's an idiot sometimes, but sometimes he isn't.
Fucking "guard rails".

he is part of the government and i agree, i dont trust him

You shouldn't trust any politician, much less trust them to create agencies that you can trust.

Rob wrote:

washing machine wrote:Hot take: somewhere between the media's version of JD Vance and the reasoned writer/interviewee of old is the truth, and that balance is the future of the GOP.

Regardless, he wants to be a politician so of course he's going to say what he needs to get elected. I believe every single Trump backed candidate won in Ohio on Tuesday. What does that say about the GOP?

I hear ya, but listen to his podcast/interview with David Axelrod some years back. He was a genuine guy and that was a pleasant interview. That’s not him anymore.

He strikes me as still a genuine guy, but I absolutely could be missing a lot of new context. I haven't followed his recent gaffes because I pretty much just assume the outrage machine is churning out low-information noise and bias these days. I'm basing my opinion of Vance off of a Dreher interview TAC republished after his election this week as well as a Rubin Report interview he did less than a year ago.

He reminds me a bit of Dan Crenshaw, another thought leader in the GOP who isn't afraid to escalate the MAGA on a campaign trail if it will get him the votes. You listen to his podcast today and he's a perfectly rational, gracious and contemplative host with interesting guests. I'm willing to give these guys the benefit of the doubt after a campaign cycle and see them settle back in to a more reasoned groove once they're out of the spotlight.

Politicians suck, but the smart ones are an engaging listen from time to time.

Blink twice if bi_3 is in the room with you right now.

Seems to me he chose some pretty specific examples of "disinformation." Goes right up to the dossier and then "we'll debate" there after I suppose.

Also, he calls the American people stupid. By asking if they're too stupid he implies that they already are stupid and wants to gauge Mayorkas's opinion of just how stupid he feels they are.

No wonder his neighbor beat him up.

Are you in favor of a federal government disinformation board?

I don't even know what you're arguing. It sounds like you're trying really hard to get to a joke about beating Rand Paul up. Cue rimshot!

"By asking if they're too stupid he implies that they already are stupid"

What?

2:1 odds that the actual future of the GOP is Madison Cawthorne.

Near-term, the future of the party appears to be about refinding a way to red meat your constituents on abortion, such that you still remain viable in the generals.

Unfortunately for the party and us all, the modern ‘culture wars purity test’ GOP is going to elevate a lot of people like Rebecca Kleefisch, Ted Budd, and JD Vance, who oppose any exceptions for rape or incest in abortion laws.

How a return to hardline abortion legislation and messaging play in a red state senate or governor race is obvious. How those stances might (or might not) impact state legislature races or purple state general elections, we’ll see.

How can someone be anti-abortion but ok with rape exceptions? If you believe abortion is killing babies, then rape or incest changes nothing. That argument makes no sense to me, and this compromise of conservative values is exactly the kind of GOP moderate compromise I find to be so loathsome and cowardly.

Hardline stance on abortion never went out of style with actual conservatives, regardless of old guard GOP politicians wishing they could bury it.

BurtReynolds wrote:How can someone be anti-abortion but ok with rape exceptions?

I dunno, but it describes a majority of pro-life voters

compromise of one's values or beliefs is exactly the kind of GOP moderate compromise I find to be so loathsome and cowardly.

That’s what I said, Burt: the modern culture wars purity test GOP.

Hardline stance on abortion never went out of style with actual conservatives, regardless of old guard GOP politicians wishing they could bury it.

I agree, which is exactly why I said

(the) GOP is going to elevate a lot of people like Rebecca Kleefisch, Ted Budd, and JD Vance, who oppose any exceptions for rape or incest in abortion laws.

How a return to hardline abortion legislation and messaging play in a red state senate or governor race is obvious. How those stances might (or might not) impact state legislature races or purple state general elections, we’ll see.

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:How can someone be anti-abortion but ok with rape exceptions?

I dunno, but it describes a majority of pro-life voters

Are they lumping medical exceptions together with rape exceptions? Very different things. (Edit: not that it would be surprising that most people's beliefs are determined by tribalism.)

McParadigm wrote:

compromise of one's values or beliefs is exactly the kind of GOP moderate compromise I find to be so loathsome and cowardly.

That’s what I said, Burt: the modern culture wars purity test GOP.

I wouldn't call that a purity test. Rape exceptions to abortion is plain nonsensical from the anti-abortion perspective. I don't see any reason anyone who is against abortion would be ok with it because the woman was raped, at least if they've thought about their position at all.

No exceptions for medical reasons would fall under a purity test I think. Maybe bans against Plan B or contraception would as well.

BurtReynolds wrote:Rape exceptions to abortion is plain nonsensical from the anti-abortion perspective.

I mean, if you truly believe in ensoulment, then I’m not sure how you even justify living peacefully next door to a state that is providing abortions to your citizens. South Dakota babies are being murdered by Minnesota doctors, etc.

Are they lumping medical exceptions together with rape exceptions? Very different things.

And yet they are similar in one key way: they have both been exceedingly popular ever since Gallup added them as questions to their routine abortion polling in 2003. Which brings us back to

How a return to hardline abortion legislation and messaging play in a red state senate or governor race is obvious. How those stances might (or might not) impact state legislature races or purple state general elections, we’ll see.

BurtReynolds wrote:How can someone be anti-abortion but ok with rape exceptions? If you believe abortion is killing babies, then rape or incest changes nothing. That argument makes no sense to me, and this compromise of conservative values is exactly the kind of GOP moderate compromise I find to be so loathsome and cowardly.

Hardline stance on abortion never went out of style with actual conservatives, regardless of old guard GOP politicians wishing they could bury it.

Lmao

What are you lmaoing about?

Your post dumbass

Why?