It's "deplorables" all over again, but even worse. Remember, Hillary Clinton only smeared half of Trump supporters are irredeemably bigoted. O'Rourke appears to slime all Trump voters here, stating that it's "really hard" to see a 2020 Trump vote as anything other than a racist act. CNN's Jake Tapper poses the question -- which strikes me as a natural one, given Beto's nonstop racial rhetoric -- and after pausing for a beat or two, the candidate launches headlong into a vast slander:

"President Trump won your home state of Texas by nine points," host Jake Tapper said. "Almost 63 million Americans voted for him. Do you think it is racist to vote for President Trump in 2020?" There was a long pause from O'Rourke before he said, "I think it's really hard...I think it's really hard after everything that we've seen from his time as a candidate in 2016 to his repeated warnings of invasions to his repeated calls to send them back," O'Rourke said. "Sending back people who are U.S. citizens, sending back people who were born in this country."

Democrats are eyeing Texas as a true battleground in 2020 -- with Trump's support habitually lukewarm in the state, and lots of white suburbanites who typically vote Republican considering defecting. It's therefore probably quite unwise for prominent members of the party to insult all Trump backers like this. It's also probably unwise for them to nominate someone with far-left views, like taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal immigrants, but what do I know? Allahpundit also makes a point that immediately occurred to me, too:

What’s also weird about this is that it obviously doesn’t help him in Texas if he decides to bail out of the presidential race and run for Senate there https://t.co/JUHghS62M3 — Allahpundit (@allahpundit) August 11, 2019



Beto is almost certainly going to fail in his pursuit of the nomination, even if exploiting tragedy with hyper-charged racial rhetoric has reinvigorated his campaign for the time being. He'll then return to Texas, where his gallop to the left as a presidential candidate will put him farther out of that center-right state's mainstream. Remember, he ran for Senate as an upbeat, hopeful, sunny uniter. His national campaign has been much darker and more aggressively leftist, and now he's effectively indicted the majority of Texas voters as bigots. Bold strategy. Meanwhile, as we discussed in depth last week, another Texas Democrat has also tried to shame Trump backers as fuelers of "hate" by publishing a harassment hit list. His ugly tactic has yielded predictable, and I believe intended, results (content warning):



With some critics of Castro's move calling for an ethics investigation, his office is striking a defiant tone amid the backlash:

"Their letter is a disingenuous attempt by pro-dark money, far-right legislators to limit Americans’ ability to track money in politics. They would prefer large contributions to be kept secret so that there’s no meaningful transparency in political giving,” said Schneider. “We look forward to hearing from the Committee if the request is considered.” But Castro’s public naming of his own constituents, some of whom are older and retired or describe themselves as homemakers, was met with backlash from Trump, his campaign, Republican leaders, and even some on the left, who warned that the Texas Democrat was using his platform as a powerful lawmaker to target private citizens at a combustible moment in U.S. politics.

I cannot imagine anyone making a more compelling case in favor of "dark money" forces than Joaquin Castro, who has weaponized donor transparency as a means of siccing the mob on donors to the opposing party. As I said in my previous post on this shameful episode, the purpose of transparency laws is for citizens to hold elected officials accountable, and to prevent corruption. It's an abuse of the system for a powerful official to wield that information as a hammer against private citizens. I'll leave you with this:

Before ratcheting up the political rhetoric, consider: 18% of Democrats & 13% of Republicans say "violence would be justified" if the opposing party wins the 2020 presidential election.



We are in dangerous territory. Don’t fuel the fire.https://t.co/iy7SpFYs1u — Nick Troiano (@NickTroiano) August 11, 2019



According to this data, in spite of all the media handwriting about the president's rhetoric, Democrats' anger appears to have been stoked to more dangerous levels than Republicans'. Beto and Castro are tossing logs onto that rage-filled fire.