humany style

paul/mig:  if it turns out that, 100% for sure, trump knew about (or participated in) sexual abuse of minors (or adults):  then what?  what would you suggest we / republicans in congress do next?  anything at all?  ~a mig:  i agree.  that's a strategy.  but it seems like a "oh shit we're fucked, what do we do" strategy to me.  literally everybody is saying that the democrats caved.  even middle-of-the-road or borderline-pro-liberal news outlets are painting this a terrible for the democrats.  ~a a:  how was it not a strategy?  Even the caving was strategic!  The exact amount of democrats needed to pass the CR crossed and none of those democrats are up for re-election in 2026.  That’s not a coincindence. - mig mig:  you're suggesting this was a strategy decided on by the democrats, when i don't see it that way.  there were many individuals here:  and a majority was unable to come together to make a budget, that's sorta how a budget works.  and is why a shutdown can even happen.  if you want a government, you need to fund it.  one or both sides had to concede to something eventually.  republicans refused to budge even an inch and the dems caved. ~a a:  was that ever a realistic outcome?  Threatening a shutdown to try and get what you want seems like a poor strategy.  Didn’t work for Trump in 2018 or Cruz in 2013.  Not sure why it would work here. - mig mig:  "for fucking nothing".  i mean yeah, that's exactly how i feel too, obviously.  but, i assume they were hoping to get private aca health insurance plans funded.  and failed.  (i agree, it all seems for nothing:  but worse:  now this will happen again.)  ~a a:  yes it was a cave.  if they were going to cave why not cave earlier instead of upending everyone’s lives for fucking nothing? - mig mig:  they caved?  this is caving.  they were trying to keep the private aca health insurance plans funded, but caved.  ~a https://x.com/mkraju/status/1987679515850485822 assuming this is deal that will end the shutdown what in the fucking fuck where democrats holding out for?  The promise of a aca vote was offered pretty early on, and democrats aren’t getting any of their initial demands.  what-the-fuck - mig a: "neither of them are evil" Also fair, although I do think Jones is about as close as you can get through speech alone. Fantasizing about killing somebody is one thing, but extending it to their children... that's pretty dark. -Paul a: "i've *never* told you to vote for the lesser of two evils" Fair, which is why I hadn't brought it up before now. Just thought it was amusing given what people normally chastise me for. -Paul paul:  i've *never* told you to vote for the lesser of two evils.  also, in this case miyares is not the lesser of two evils.  also, i know we're speaking rhetorically, but neither of them are evil.  jones did an evil thing once, and miyares is allowing an autocrat to autocrat.  ~a ok.  ~a a: But here, where there WASN'T a non-evil option to vote for (unless you count a write-in), I decided to vote for the lesser of two evils (which I think Miyares clearly is in this case) and I'm being told: "No, don't vote for the lesser of two evils in THIS case" -Paul a: And I don't know what Miyares has to do with this. The ironic thing is that for like 20+ years people on the left have been screaming at me to vote for the lesser of two evils and I've largely refused because there was a non-evil option to vote for. -Paul a: "maybe, make this argument, like, a week ago?  and make it without miyares" I'm not sure what you're asking here. You're saying I should've argued that fantasizing about killing people who disagree with you is bad earlier? I'm being 100% serious: I thought that was obvious. -Paul a: And I don't know of anybody (including Jay Jones) disputing the contents of the call afterwards. -Paul a: "I didn't question the veracity of the texts.  only the rest" I think it's fair to be skeptical, but as near as I can tell the person making those claims wasn't really enthusiastic about coming out with this info and did it in response to the texts leaking. -Paul I did initially think demanding he drop out felt maybe too much but after repeated “I’ve taken accountability” without really specifying how and his subsequent alleged statements of thinking cops dying was “good” had put me in the “its disqualifying” camp. - mig a:  I did add “I’m sorry also doesn’t feel like enough”. - mig i was elected 6 weeks ago. speaker mike johnson refuses to swear me in.  ~a mig:  ah yes thank you, i had forgotten.  "expecting Jones to drop over this  might be unreasonable also" i do vaguely remember this.  you didn't think he should drop out?  if you didn't think he should drop out, that kinda says something, right?  paul:  you, obviously, do think jones should have dropped out over this?  ~a a:  i *did* actually bring this up around when the revelations happened. - mig mig/paul:  maybe, make this argument, like, a week ago?  and make it without miyares.  ~a paul: I didn't question the veracity of the texts.  only the rest.  ~a paul:  "Does an apology matter?" "is it meaningless to apologize?" "never..." "i'm so sorry"  ~a I don’t believe he’s sorry for his actions, but sorry that they became public. - mig I’ve seen comparisons to the Trump 5th avenue comment, but they aren’t anywhere near the same league.  Trump’s statement obviously a joke and wasn’t singling out specific people to be targets of violence.  Jones did target specific people, including children and did so from a place of malice. - mig a: Also... how is it a defense to say that this guy fantasizes about some guy's children dying because he disagrees with their father's political positions? -Paul a: "it was a fantasy, i do not believe he thinks these things" But why are you giving him the benefit of the doubt here? And would you give the same (pretty tremendous) leeway to a non-Democrat? Hypothetical: Text messages leak from JD Vance saying he wanted to lynch Obama. He apologizes. All is fine? He doesn't believe it? Just a fantasy? No. I think it's a really damning insight into their mind. -Paul a: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/04/virginia-elections-jay-jones-texts-00594261 Is politico better? You can choose your preferred news source (except apparently Washington Post). I don't think his comments about wishing the kids dead is disputed. Does an apology matter? Maybe in terms of forgiveness, but I don't think it changes my opinion on his fitness for office. If Trump apologized for his comment would it matter to you? -Paul paul:  if jones had shot one of gilbert's kids i feel like we would be having a different conversation, no?  ~a paul:  "national review" is a bit far-fetched of a source, i'm pretty worried about that honestly, but pushing past THAT.  does it matter that jones apologized for fantasizing about wanting an opponent's (only technically?!  your article stated he was not running for anything) children to die?  i really think that matters not at all really.  it was a fantasy, i do not believe he thinks these things and i AM comparing them to trump jokes.  ~a a: And I know the texts were before recent violence, but the fact that voters were willing to dismiss this after things like Charlie Kirk and the United Healthcare CEO and Trump assassination attempts.... I dunno, it looks really bad to me. -Paul a: Trump is a bad person. We both agree on this. I have never, and will never vote for him. Miyares is not Trump. He is not remotely my ideal candidate. In almost any other election I would not vote for him. But in an election between a normally bad candidate and one with a scandal like this? Yeah, I'll go with normally bad. -Paul a: Miyares is one degree removed from Trump and his bad statements. Jones is the person who made the bad statements, and sorry, I think wanting a political opponent and his children to die is slightly worse than bragging that you can sexually assault somebody. -Paul paul:  "you can't just say 'this person agrees with trump on stuff!' and automatically dismiss him as the worst possible choice"  i didn't do this.  ~a https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5541374-jay-jones-text-scandal/ "National Review also reported that in a follow-up conversation with Coyner, Jones suggested he wished Gilbert’s wife could see her children die so her husband would reconsider his political views on gun violence." -Paul a: I 100% do not regret my vote. You can't just say "this person agrees with Trump on stuff!" and automatically dismiss him as the worst possible choice. Do I agree with Miyares on everything or even most things? No. But I like that there is no evidence he wants his political opponents dead. -Paul paul:  "I think he wants his political opponents (and their children!) to die".  woof, i guess that's an opinion.  but i've seen no evidence of that.  i've read the texts, but i don't think i've heard from coyner.  ~a paul:  "Coyner said in the phone call after"  nope sorry.  what did coyner say?  ~a a: "i'm not following this part" You're saying it's a joke. I'm saying it's not. My evidence is that even Jay Jones didn't try to claim it was a joke. I think this was his honest belief. Will he actually shoot somebody? Probably not. But I think he wants his political opponents (and their children!) to die. I do believe that. -Paul paul:  if you regret voting for trump-lacky maybe i can regret voting for jones.  maybe we cancel each-other out.  (i'll be donna and you can be jack.  they ended up being coworkers later in the show).  "it's an honor thing, right?"  ~a a: Again, he was texting a Republican who kept telling him to stop and he kept doubling down. -Paul a: "you don't see that as an (in poor taste) joke?" No. Did you read the texts and what Coyner said in the phone call after? "Only when people feel pain personally do they move on policy" -Paul paul:  no joke texts push the envelope to me wanting to vote for a trump-lackey in 2025-q4.  voting for nobody or voting a write-in maybe paul.  ~a paul:  "What about if a Republican was caught joking about lynching somebody? Would it be waved off as some harmless fantasy too?"  YES i already brought up the fifth avenue joke and the grab them by the pussy joke.  both jokes, terrible, in poor taste.  he apologized for NEITHER of them.  he doesn't give two shits about women.  ~a paul:  "his apology didn't claim it was a joke"  i'm not following this part.  "reading back those words made me sick to my stomach. i am embarrassed, ashamed, and sorry".  did it need to claim it was a joke for it to be a joke?  he is sick to his stomach?  it was fucked, and he regrets . . . that his obvious joke made it into the public, but, like, oops?  ~a a: I think you're giving him too much benefit of the doubt because he's on the right team. What about if a Republican was caught joking about lynching somebody? Would it be waved off as some harmless fantasy too? -Paul paul:  you don't see that as an (in poor taste) joke?  you think he's serious?  trump never apologized for the "grab them by the pussy" (joke)  which is far more "real" than literally killing a man and his children on fifth street?  ~a a: I think it's giving him a huge benefit of the doubt there considering the person he texted has said that "Jones later tried to justify his words through calls and additional texts". He followed up to a Republican to explain how he was justified! And his apology didn't claim it was a joke. -Paul paul:  so, he's kinda dumb.  i could have reconsidered and voted for nobody.  but he's no trump lackey:  voting for miyares would have been far worse in my eyes.  ~a a: And then talked about how his children should die too. -Paul paul:  regarding the "kill" thing i meant the "bullets".  if you wanna talk about urination:  that, like you said, was fantasy.  so not literal.  ~a a: "he wanted to kill them himself in front of the world" What? No, I mean the texts "in which he fantasized about urinating on the graves of political opponents and shooting then–House Speaker Todd Gilbert" (of note, he said two bullets so he could spare I believe Hitler and Pol Pot). -Paul the fifth avenue thing was a joke, i mean, obviously.  he's an idiot, and again, they might have literally let him shoot someone on fifth, but i didn't think he was like literally planning where to get the gun and where on fifth to stand.  ~a paul:  wait, you think jones wanted to literally shoot someone?  like not as a joke, he wanted to kill them himself in front of the world.  like on fifth avenue?  ~a a: Which, okay, maybe he can be forgiven, but that still makes him pretty damned unqualified to be the attorney general in my mind. -Paul a: I don't even think his apology claimed they were jokes, instead he tried to justify them as angry statements that he was ashamed of. -Paul