The Texas Takeaway: Dems “Blue Wave” Is A Washout

The Texas tale for 2018? Republicans are still in the race. In fact, Ned Ryun of American Majority says the GOP is going to keep control of Congress. Is he right?

Texas GOP consultant Derek Ryan tells us how things look on the ground in the Lone Star state.

The one key number you need to know from last night’s primaries.

And forget The Batchelor—this year’s big show: The President And The Porn Star.

Agree? Disagree? Share your thoughts, arguments or obnoxious comments on the Confession Hotline! 617-903-8255. The best calls are played every Friday in the podcast.

Subscribe to Behind the Blue Wall in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Published in: Politics
Please Support Our Sponsor!

ManCrates

There is 1 comment.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
Join Ricochet
  1. contrarian Member
    contrarian
    @Contrarian
    11:07 PM PST ⋅ Mar 7, 2018
    1. I like you. I think you’re a good guy, and I don’t think you’re trying to be jerky. That doesn’t mean you haven’t unintentionally been doing something jerky.
    2. You say some people take the position that (x) ‘there are other things that matter more than personal character’ and  (y) ‘character matters not at all’ and (z) ‘morality doesn’t matter.’ Maybe in your view, Z follows from Y which follows from X. The fact is that the people to whom you’re ascribing beliefs don’t think that.
    3. They think X is right but Y and Z are wrong. For myself, I’ve thought that from the first time I considered the matter. I was still in school during the Clinton years and I remember hearing twice as many people arguing for X as against. I thought they were right.
    4. In fact, in my view your rejection of X is immoral. If you like, I’m more than happy to argue the point that no rational moral theory can reject X. (Supporting a good agenda enacted by a bad person is more moral than doing nothing to stop a decent person enacting a harmful agenda.) I’d be interested in arguments for why that isn’t irrational. In any case, I’m not using this to assign Z to you because it’s obvious to me that your values are different and you don’t believe Z. To claim otherwise is… jerky.
    5.  If Stormy wants to negate the confidentiality agreement, the does she have to give the money back? Of course, I believe that Trump… cavorted with her. What I wonder is why people assume that the lawyer approached her rather than vice versa. (Remember the Dave Letterman scandal?)
    6. I don’t think Daniels will change anything. I think that this was all baked in when he was elected. If there was someone saying they had a liaison after the election that might change things. Someone making allegations of violence (not unwelcome derriere grabbing or unwanted kissing) would make a difference. I’m a little surprised by the Stormy Daniels affair, but only because I thought Trump had better taste.
    • #1