Staff Reports
Former Senator Pat Toomey decided to hop onto CNBC’s “Squawk Box” stage to announce his apparent crusade against common sense by declaring his refusal to vote for Donald Trump in the upcoming presidential election. Instead of aligning himself with the party that has proven time and again to champion conservative values, Toomey seems more interested in taking the scenic route through liberal land, where Kamala Harris and her radical policies await like a well-manicured lawn luring in unwary deer.
During the live grilling by host Joe Kernen over Toomey’s curious stance, the former senator did concede that Harris is indeed a radical leftist, emphasizing her track record that could make even the most stalwart Democrat blush. He pointed out that her voting history positioned her to the left of Bernie Sanders, which ironically, feels like praising a fish for being good at swimming. Toomey rattled off her extreme positions, including support for “Medicare for All” and a fracking ban. However, Toomey’s anti-Trump sentiment overshadowed this moment of clarity, prompting Kernen to point out the obvious: sitting out the vote is essentially a cheerful endorsement of the extreme left.
He nailed it- once again!
Benny Johnson on X: "TRUMP: “This election is not a choice between Democrats and Republicans. It’s a choice between communism and freedom.” pic.twitter.com/nYJJGlpoiR" / X https://t.co/x3KQpMjB1I— Jont Trubek (@JontTrubek) August 30, 2024
The tension between Kernen and Toomey escalated as Kernen laid it down—by not voting for Trump, Toomey was playing right into Harris’s hands. This seems to be the conundrum faced by many establishment Republicans who are more concerned with their own principles than the cascading disaster posed by a far-left administration. Kernen highlighted the absurdity of Toomey and others who chant about the potential horrors of a Harris presidency, yet choose to pull the lever for inaction on Trump. It’s like going to a buffet and loudly declaring, “I just can’t eat the steak,” while choosing to nibble on the broccoli, oblivious to potential food poisoning from the other side.
With the debate heating up, Toomey defended his position, implying his voting history shouldn’t be discounted simply because he’s willing to toss this election under the bus. He noted his previous support for Trump in both the 2016 and 2020 elections, though now he seems to think Trump’s criticism of the 2020 result is just a little too spicy for his palate. Harking back to the Capitol protests, Toomey waxed poetic about Trump’s so-called attempts to “overturn” the election results—an opinion that conveniently ignores the broader context of election integrity concerns raised by many.
Kernen, channeling a bit of common sense, called Toomey out, urging him to acknowledge that refusing to vote for Trump could very well put Harris in the big chair, despite Toomey’s protests that he’s keeping his options open. This is akin to telling a firefighter that it’s okay not to put out a fire because they really don’t feel like it; the flames will only grow. By the end of the exchange, Toomey gingerly acknowledged the binary nature of the election, but hey, who needs winning when one can maintain the purity of their principles?
Toomey’s stance illustrates a troubling trend among some Republicans who seem to prioritize their personal grievances over the repercussions of their choices. While they may think themselves above the fray, losing sight of the binary choice between leftist tyranny and conservative freedom becomes a squandered opportunity for conservatives across the nation who know exactly which side they’ll stand on—preferably not in a fracking ban, government-run healthcare dystopia with a Kamala Harris presidency.
