If you nominate this candidate — this person whose views are extreme and hurtful, who is personally off-putting to me, who has all kinds of wild, expensive and downright bad plans I don’t consider to be based in reality — I will have to do something I don’t want to do. It will pain me, but I will do it.
Keep in mind: I am loyal, 100 percent, as a matter of principle.
I can’t believe it is nearly November of 2019 and all we have are these dozen-plus candidates with whom, at least in July, voters seemed broadly satisfied, to a greater degree than in years past. People are enthusiastic about some of them, which upsets me, and not about others, which upsets me, also. These candidates are too hot and too cold and too porridge generally, and I want new ones.
Look, I get it, though. It stinks that all the news is bad. It’s like, surely the administration must be doing something right? Just by random chance, an administration could not be getting so many things wrong on so many fronts, to the point that the Wall Street Journal’s editorial defense of its approach to Ukraine policy is that, sure, Donald Trump was trying to do a quid pro quo, but he was Read original
It certainly came as a surprise to me that he hoped to create a space where people could share their ideas and connect about opposition to the Iraq War! I am glad he told us. As he testifies today on the Hill, I have taken the liberty of revising some key moments of “The Social Network” to reflect this truth.