How’s this for contradicting one’s own reasoning within the space of a single paragraph?
First Rachel Rose Hartman says two Democrats voted unsurprisingly to repeal Obamacare because they face tough reelection bids in Republican districts. Then she says the next two Democrat votes are also unsurprising because these two guys are retiring so they do not have to consider the consequences of their votes.
Huh?
Doesn’t she realize she just admitted that two guys who fear nobody went out and voted their consciences? That is a harsh rejection of the bill.
Can’t have it both ways. It can’t be unsurprising because they fear voter rejection and equally unsurprising when they don’t fear voter rejection.
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://spectatorworld.com/.
The offer renews after one year at the regular price of $79.99.
