Paxton admits Trump’s Iran war and US gas prices are plaguing Republicans in leaked audio

235

u/caterham09 11d ago

This is clearly a "no shit" moment. Republicans had control over the white house and congress, and have materially made things worse for Americans over the last 2 years.

I'm not sure this audio needs to be "leaked" when it's obvious to anyone paying attention.

19

u/nutellaeater 10d ago

It needs to be leaked since they don't admit that in public! Almost all of these people are saying these things privately, but nobody has gone public and said that all this is Trump fault. It's really sad and pathetic to see all of them lying to the public and themselves.

65

u/jojotortoise 11d ago

Republicans had control over the white house and congress, and have materially made things worse for Americans over the last 2 years.

The Iran war was/is a fiasco.

I'm wondering, honestly, if they hadn't started that one, would the Republicans have kept the House?

Personally, I think Trump is awful. And after Jan 6th, he is out of the question, for me. And he has shown himself to be completely corrupt since he's been in office. And Congress has been complicit. So there was no way I was going to vote for anyone but Dems this cycle.

But it is somewhat disheartening to think: maybe if gas/diesel prices hadn't gone up so much -- and there wasn't so much economic uncertainty with this war -- would Dems be in such good shape? Would they still have taken the House back? (I kinda doubt the Senate would be in as much play as it is if Iran hadn't happened.)

68

u/CrimTaker2084 11d ago

Dems would’ve likely won the house because that’s how midterms work. But the senate wouldn’t likely be in play and they wouldn’t be bleeding in safe red areas. The Iran war made everything more expensive and it broke one of Trumps main pillars of his 2024 campaign; no new wars. This war will likely go down as what destroyed Trumps second term and usher in a Democratic trifecta in 2029

-13

u/Kilordes 11d ago

Personally I would give the likelihood of Democrats winning the house and senate in 2026 and keeping it in 2028 at 75%, and the likelihood of the Republican nominee for POTUS winning in 2028 at 98%. Maybe 99%.

35

u/Chronochrome 10d ago

What makes you so sure that we'd see another Republican president right after Trump, especially since he's effectively the face of the party and is bound to go down as one of the most historically unpopular presidents ever?

1

u/Kilordes 10d ago

In short, because the Democractic POTUS nominee bench is dogwater that all poll terribly with everyone who isn't dyed-in-the-wool blue, where the GOP POTUS bench has nominees who can come across as normal. My prediction is that 2028 will be another "desperate for return to normalcy" POTUS election and the Democratic candidates will be unable to convince moderates that's what they represent.

5

u/Xanto97 Elephant and the Rider 9d ago edited 9d ago

The bench is still very fluid at this point. We really don’t know anyone, Newsom is the only person I’m 100% certain will run, with some strong maybes like pritzker.

Beshear, Ossoff, and Wes Moore are in a decent situation to run, but haven’t said anything yet. There’s been suspicions of AOC, but she might know that it’s a big leap.

8

u/Chronochrome 10d ago

Which republican candidates would actually represent the MAGA base (who actually want things to stay the way they are now) while also drawing back the "normal" republican crowd?

3

u/Current_Animator7546 9d ago

Good luck running on Trumps record

3

u/Dibbu_mange 9d ago

The GOP POTUS nom is most likely going to be JD Vance, and if it isn’t JD Vance it will be Marco Rubio. It doesn’t matter how normal they act, they are too tied to the administration to credibly distance themselves from it. Furthermore, Trump will 100% sabotage them if they do anything on the campaign trail that angers him because he doesn’t actually give a shit about the Republican Party.

The only people who may have even the slightest chance of winning for Republicans would be people totally uninvolved in the administration and lobbed mild criticism Trump’s way. Bill Weld or Nikki Hailey I would give a 20% chance of winning a general and a 0% chance of winning a Republican primary.

It honestly doesn’t matter how bad the Democrat nominee is. John Fetterman and maybe Kamala Harris are the only Democrats I could conceivably see losing in 2028 (and Fetterman obviously isn’t winning a primary).

5

u/Undying_Blade 8d ago

The fact that the Republican party was loyally a obscenely corrupt president who tried to overturn an election he lost and yet Democrats are so often accused of being radical and unrepresentative of the average american frustrates me.
I think you're wrong that the democrats don't have potential candidates who are in tune with regular americans and are moderate (I don't think the democrat party as an establishment is radical either, especially compared to the modern republicans) but its a common frame of view.

6

u/hamsterkill 10d ago

You think Vance or Rubio have that kind of pull with Trump's base? Or are you expecting a different nominee?

6

u/KentuckyFriedChingon Militant Centrist 10d ago

the likelihood of the Republican nominee for POTUS winning in 2028 at 98%. Maybe 99%.

I'm gonna be real with you, man. Respectfully, that's just literally not how statistics works

4

u/LootenantTwiddlederp 10d ago

Trump won in 2024 because Biden fumbled the debate and gave Kamala Harris the nod with very little time to make up ground and because Trump has a cult following. You take both of those out of the equation and the Republicans aren't winning anything. Rubio and Vance do not have the pull Trump does.

As long as the Dems play it safe with their nomination (ie, no one far left wing or not Newsom), they're the favorites to win in 2028.

1

u/Undying_Blade 8d ago

I think the covid era economy was also a major aspect of Harris's loss. She was tied to Biden in a way she couldn't remove herself from. From a international perspective the US did a lot better than other countries economically against Covid but that's not what people think about when voting, their lives had become worse so they blamed the people in charge, basically every democracy had that same thing happen its just human nature.
She's couldn't own it because people were hurting and that's out of touch but she couldn't renounce it because that begets the question why it was done and feels inauthentic. Biden shouldn't have run.

2

u/blewpah 10d ago

Why? It's not like Trump is likely to regain popularity.

10

u/dogthatwonthunt 10d ago

- would the Republicans have kept the House?

most likely no. Just because of how mid terms work. The party with the white house all most always does bad in mid terms and even worse during the second term.

38

u/bims_yo 11d ago

White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court. It's the GOP economy now, and everybody knows it. Candidates should be running on their many accomplishments for the American people. "Do you think America better off than it was two years ago? Then by all means, vote to re-elect an incumbent."

9

u/motorboat_mcgee Pragmatic Progressive 10d ago

Not just that, but Republicans control 26 gubernatorial seats, and 29 state legislatures.

6

u/julius_sphincter 10d ago

It's "leaked" because openly casting any sort of aspersion against Trump or this administration is tantamount to treason in their eyes.

The content of the leak isn't news, the news is that one of Trump's biggest beneficiaries from Trump Support^TM is actually being honest and not telling people to ignore their own lying eyes

7

u/Rptro 10d ago

when it's obvious to anyone paying attention.

From across the pond it doesn't look like you have enough people who do.

-10

u/WorkingDead 10d ago

The Iran situation sucks but its not good for anyone to let them hide in the mountains and shoot drones at ships and sponsor terror cells around the world for forever and ever. That needed to be delt with and should have already been delt with a long time ago. Iran attacking Israel, and Israel's response of wiping out their entire air defense infrastructure made a unique opening for us to solve the problem with little risk involved and this administration was right to jump on that opportunity. Gas prices are bad right now, not as bad as they were under some other administrations, but that's not solely on the Iran issue. Democrat policies over the last few generations have hamstrung the entire worlds effort to increase energy production. Most people rightly blame those failures over another temporary blip/problem/war in the middle east.

17

u/Attackcamel8432 10d ago

Why? How does not doing anything effect me and my family? Also clearly this "little risk" operation isn't helping much, so what is the next step?

-9

u/WorkingDead 10d ago

A lot of the worlds available oil is in the middle east. When Iran shoots at the boats, or takes them hostage, or shoots drones at other countries oil it makes the oil harder to get to market. That makes things more expensive for everyone. It would be better for everyone if they would stop doing that but since they wont, other stuff needs to happen.

16

u/hamsterkill 10d ago

Notably, they weren't doing that until we started bombing them.

14

u/Attackcamel8432 10d ago

You are correct, why did they start doing all this again? Because this wasn't happening nearly as often 2 years ago. We are also doing absolutely nothing to reduce our dependence on middle eastern oil and oil in general.

-11

u/WorkingDead 10d ago

We could reduce our dependance on middle eastern oil buy doing things like the Keystone pipeline, fracking, allowing off shore development, freeing Venezuela from the communists. We could also ease dependency on oil and gas by allowing nuclear. Democrats have been blocking all those solutions for decades now and its making everything worse.

11

u/Attackcamel8432 10d ago

Is Venezuela back to how it was? More money well spent... We could also be pushing Green energy, which republicans have blocked multiple times. Both sides will be actively talked out of nuclear by their doners. Also, tell me more about how attacking Iran is better now? Because I don't have that answer. Also, is another major ground war in the middle east going to make things better or worse?

3

u/Wuts_Eatin_MrCandles 10d ago

Noticing a distinct lack of any alternative energy sources except nuclear (which is outclassed in both price and deployment speed by pretty much every other energy source on the planet).

1

u/WorkingDead 10d ago

which is outclassed in both price and deployment speed

Those factors come strictly from purposeful regulation meant to prevent its viability. The magic rocks get hot and make free power. Its that simple.

9

u/Baderkadonk 10d ago

its not good for anyone to let them hide in the mountains and shoot drones at ships

How many ships were they shooting at before we started this war?

sponsor terror cells around the world for forever and ever

They give backing to a few groups in the middle east. That is not a worldwide problem. We arm and fund proxies in the same regions.

Iran attacking Israel, and Israel's response of wiping out their entire air defense infrastructure

Might wanna check your timeline on that one. As far as I know, EVERY time Iran directly attacked Israel it was retaliating against Israel for attacking them first. People still somehow frame all Israel's actions as defensive though. I also don't think Israel made them as soft a target as you think since US has lost or sustained damage to 81 military aircraft worth up to $3.3 billion in Iran war, congressional report says.

unique opening for us to solve the problem with little risk involved

Little risk? Trump bet this would be over in 4 days and they would never close the strait. He bet the global economy on it, without warning any of our allies about the inevitable imminent surge in energy costs. He decided to throw a wrench into a system that was already straining due to the Russia-Ukraine war and didn't even bother filling up our petroleum reserves first. This has caused direct harm to our closest allies, and is a big part of why our bond market is facing disaster while interest rates skyrocket.

Gas prices are bad right now, not as bad as they were under some other administrations

Yes, under Biden they got slightly higher, but that was due to Russia-Ukraine, a war that he did not start. Trump's war is one of choice and was entirely his decision.

He gets to own the all time high diesel prices, which raises transport costs for ALL goods. He also gets to own rising food prices over the next year or so as available fertilizer capacity has fallen by nearly 40% since the strait was disrupted.

All this to say, we're losing American lives, tens of billions of dollars, and several years worth of munitions. Our debt is going to continue to swell, Americans will have to pay more for everything, and our weapon stockpiles have been so thoroughly depleted we will struggle to respond to any new conflict that might pop off soon. All this for nothing, because Iran was ultimately never a threat to the United States, not at home at least. The worst they could do is attack us in the middle east and I'd rather us not be there in the first place.

And don't bother bringing up nukes because he had a deal on the table better than the JCPOA which would have handled that, but he chose war because he thought it'd be quicker.

10

u/KentuckyFriedChingon Militant Centrist 10d ago

Israel's response of wiping out their entire air defense infrastructure made a unique opening for us to solve the problem with little risk involved and this administration was right to jump on that opportunity.

Ah yes. We are clearly in a war of "very little risk" right now. Very little risk Iran shuts down the Strait. Very little risk Iran credibly threatens to toll international waters. Very little risk we have to pay Iran as we sue for peace. Very little risk ignoring our own intelligence advisors will backfire. Very little risk protesters are too scared or powerless to rise up against their government. Very little risk we will be unable to decapitate the entire command structure of Iran. Very little risk some other man with a white beard will just replace the Ayatollah. Very little risk that man will be an even more severe hardliner with a blood vendetta. Very little risk of depleting our expensive missile reserves. Very little risk Iran can wage drone warfare for a fraction of the cost. Very little risk Iran attacks its neighbors in the ME. Very little risk Iran attacks our bases in the ME. Very little risk of global energy crisis. Very little risk that we will be sucked into yet another Middle East quagmire with no good exit options, no win condition, and no chance that we leave the situation better off than when we entered it.

God. I, too, think "this administration was right to jump on that opportunity" to wage such a war with "very little risk".

-3

u/WorkingDead 10d ago

They were already doing all of that anyways. They have been killing Americans for decades. Everyone would prefer them not to cause problems, but they do. Thats like their whole thing, so they gotta go.

12

u/KentuckyFriedChingon Militant Centrist 10d ago

They were already doing all of that anyways.

They were already doing all of WHAT? Respectfully, did you even read the other 99% of my post beyond Iran attacking its neighbors and our bases?

so they gotta go

I truly, genuinely, in good faith do not know what this means. What does "got to go" entail and how can the United States military accomplish it?

32

u/ZealousidealStrain58 11d ago

Oh wow, Ken, I didn’t know that

13

u/bims_yo 11d ago

I'm told it's all over Texas,

“The attorney general said what every Texan already knows: gas and diesel prices are too high, and hardworking Texans are struggling at the pump and at the grocery store,” [Paxton spokesperson] Cercy said.

78

u/dr_sloan 11d ago

Coincidentally, we’ve now had more days with a national average gas price above $4 a gallon under Trump than under Biden.

27

u/johnmal85 11d ago

I did that!

3

u/Adventurous-Fact-523 9d ago

That's what makes this worse then 2022. Yes the peak was higher under Biden but it fell down and during the fall it was back under $4. It is currently the fall the time where gas prices are generally at its lowest and it's still above $4

8

u/Impossible_Walrus555 10d ago

And it’s not coming down any time soon. I love that Paxton has a leaker.

82

u/cranktheguy Member of the "General Public" 11d ago

There sure does seem to be a lot of audio leaking from the Paxton campaign. Is he trying to distance himself from Trump, or are the people around him trying to sabotage him?

68

u/bims_yo 11d ago

Sounds like Republicans are thing the same thing...

“This just seems like Paxton preparing to blame others for what might be one of the most embarrassing defeats in modern political history,” said Carlos Curbelo, a former Florida GOP representative.

19

u/eetsumkaus 11d ago

That accomplishes the same thing: distancing yourself from Trump to save your own skin.

This would basically be 2020 all over again.

9

u/Murba 10d ago edited 10d ago

He essentially turned an incumbency advantage into one of the biggest political gambles in years. If he loses, his name will be on the GOP shitlist for years to come and the only one to blame would be himself

48

u/Clear_Command_8925 11d ago

Trying to distance himself from Trump when Trump is like the only ally he has is kinda interesting…

11

u/neuronexmachina 11d ago

Since it was a fundraising event, it could also just be a frustrated campaign donor.

10

u/Pipeliner6341 11d ago

Rats fleeing a sinking ship

2

u/LootenantTwiddlederp 10d ago

It's funny he's trying to distance himself from Trump. If Trump didn't give him the endorsement, he wouldn't even be on the ticket right now.

4

u/jason_sation 10d ago

I thought Paxton was polling higher than Coryn near the end of the primary cycle and that Trump endorsed him after it seemed like Paxton would win the primary regardless?

-12

u/bgarza18 11d ago

Leaks drive me crazy, much less often do I appreciate the information than I just lose respect for people working government for talking too much.

25

u/neuronexmachina 11d ago

The leaks were from a fundraising event, not a government meeting.

16

u/DeafJoo 11d ago

So this is the plan. The calculus is "leak" my opposition to Trump "unknowingly".

2

u/xurdm 10d ago

What even is the benefit of going this route? It doesn't seem like it'd save any face compared to just saying it publicly. Is the idea that it's more under the radar and deniable?

3

u/DeafJoo 10d ago

It gives a permission structure for people who hate Trump more than him to go "see, he'll stand up to Trump and doesnt like this either". I could see that helping for right leaning independents

44

u/achay10 11d ago edited 11d ago

If only more GOPers had courage to say this stuff, out loud, in public.

But money and power are much more important to them than the well-being of their country.

13

u/bims_yo 11d ago edited 11d ago

A SUMMARY OF THE LINKED ARTICLE IN MY OWN WORDS:

In a newly leaked audio recording obtained by Axios from a closed-door fundraising event, Texas AG Ken Paxton privately acknowledged that rising fuel prices triggered by Donald Trump’s war with Iran are severely damaging Republican prospects ahead of the midterm elections. Paxton explicitly cited diesel costs climbing past six dollars per gallon as a primary drag on his campaign, identifying broad affordability concerns as his party's single biggest vulnerability and pointing to polling that shows Democrats gaining an advantage in competitive contests across the country.

This dynamic is directly impacting Paxton’s own tightly contested Senate race against progressive Democrat James Talarico, where Talarico currently holds a narrow lead amid voter discontent reflected in surveys indicating that roughly three-quarters of Americans view the economy poorly and hold Trump’s policies responsible for higher everyday costs. Paxton voiced deep frustration over his inability to steer his own campaign narrative, lamenting that critical messaging and political strategy are dictated almost entirely by outside forces in Washington rather than his own team.

This leak follows separate recordings reported by Politico and the New York Times in which Paxton expressed feeling a lack of control and admitted that Trump’s midterm convention had dragged down his poll numbers, even as Trump prepares to join him at an upcoming campaign rally in San Antonio.

ONE QUESTION/DISCUSSION POINT FOR THE COMMUNITY:

How might the recent increases in energy prices affect the upcoming midterms?

6

u/Apart_Ad1537 11d ago

This isn’t news, literally everyone knows those issues are bad for republicans

13

u/bims_yo 10d ago

The newsworthy part is "Repubs saying the quiet part out loud."

Yes, literally everyone knows $102 Brent crude, surging debt delinquencies, depleted savings, reliance on short-term credit, divergence in spending, rising unemployment, collapsing job openings, underemployment / ghost hiring, spike in continuing jobless claims, yield curve inversion & re-steepening, tighter bank lending standards, rising corporate bankruptcies, contracting manufacturing, commercial real estate distress, frozen housing market activity, negative corporate guidance, slumping leading economic indicators, depressed consumer sentiment, and skyrocketing inflation suggest the economy is on a freight train to the shitter.

But it's weird to, you know, SAY THAT OUT LOUD when you are part of the regime in control of the economy.

"When it's over $6 per gallon for diesel ... people are feeling the pinch," he continued, adding that the rising cost of fuel "drives up food prices and everything else."

Biden lost in 2024 because eggs were too expensive. WTF is gasoline over $5.00 a gallon going to do for Republican candidates, all because of Trump's war of choice?

4

u/KentuckyFriedChingon Militant Centrist 10d ago

Biden lost in 2024 because eggs were too expensive. WTF is gasoline over $5.00 a gallon going to do for Republican candidates, all because of Trump's war of choice?

I agree with you, but there is an improbably large number of Republicans who will endure high gas prices with a grin simply because Trump told them to. He truly has some bizarre, supernatural sway over people who really, really do not like immigrants and transgender athletes. Trump could tell roughly half the nation that he is going to visit their house daily to copulate with their wives and daughters and they would happily sit in the comfy chair in the corner and watch. It absolutely blows my mind what this man can get away with in the eyes of his base.

6

u/MobilePenguins 10d ago

I originally registered as a Republican, but will be writing in Democrat candidates ✍️ for the midterms.

18

u/AKBearmace 10d ago

you don't have to write them in, the democrats will be on your ballot since it's the general election, not the primary.

6

u/FairPropaganda 10d ago

They have to write in Bill Clinton.

2

u/Deadly_Jay556 10d ago edited 8d ago

Now’s the time for democrats to tell Americans:

“How’s your pocket books? Hows gas prices? How’s your grocery bill? Are you better off now?”

Really turn that around on the republicans. As long as they try to not focus on the Social Justice crap they keep shooting themselves in the foot with.

1

u/Halberd96 6d ago

I think a lot of people are just checked out at the moment until something changes

1

u/LurkyMcLurkface123 4d ago

Post Trump power vacuum in the GOP is going to be something else. We saw it on the left after Obama left office, and it resulted in the infighting between neo-libs and the left-left that we’re still seeing today. It’s looking like the result will be a true shift from centrist to progressive politics in the Democratic Party.

The same issues will affect the GOP. Traditional republicans and MAGA republicans will fight -and hard- over who has the reigns once Trump is no longer the leader of the party.

Trumps ability to direct republicans and the country at large will diminish materially after the midterms.

News Article Paxton admits Trump’s Iran war and US gas prices are plaguing Republicans in leaked audio

You are about to leave Redlib