Thread by @SethAMandel

1. I have work to do and there's playoff baseball, and I don't normally like to give Vox liars the attention they crave when trying to inject their toxic stupidity into the political bloodstream, but since they made me the star of this vomitous mass, I'll do this briefly:

2. Beauchamp has a piece here titled "Brett Kavanaugh proves the Never Trump movement was a sham all along." Link: vox.com/policy-and-pol…

3. His second sentence: "Even elite Never Trump writers have started lining up to defend the nominee and the president behind him."

He then quotes my piece in the Atlantic to back this up. My piece

Except...

4. While Beauchamp cites my piece to back up his assertion that Never Trump writers are lining up defend Kavanaugh and Trump, here's what I actually wrote: "I have said multiple times that the White House should not advance Kavanaugh’s nomination any further."

Hm. Plus:

5. The writers I was talking about, I said, "are horrified by Trump."

So we're two sentences into this Vox piece and already it has fatally undermined its own argument. Which is fairly common at Vox Dot Com.

But wait, there's more!

6. He quotes Eli Lake that Dems' "Kav circus has united the right behind Trump." Beauchamp: "On this analysis, Democrats’ investigation into serious and credible allegations of sexual assault ... are so partisan that they are rallying even sober Republicans to Trump’s side."

7. Except... that ignores the key development, which I wrote about in the piece he read but didn't understand: the difference between the Ford allegation and the others, and specific attacks on Kav's character from them, not "investigation." I wrote:

8. Conflating that description with the picture of some kind of sober Democratic "investigation" into, say, the Ford allegation that began this, is the kind of dishonesty you can rarely get away with outside Vox.

He then returns to a point already debunked:

9. He writes: "What the elites won’t admit is that when push comes to shove, and it becomes a question of Republicans versus Democrats, elite conservatives will hold their noses and side with their team."

Except... the ppl I'm talking about *didn't vote for Trump.*

Moving on:

10. Beauchamp goes to town on a strawman, citing polling that "shows Republican approval of the president from the beginning of his presidency, through many of its major controversies" remained high and steady.

This ably demolished a point I didn't make, of course:

11. My piece wasn't about voters. It was about anti-Trump writers/commentators. A few I was able to name publicly: @EsotericCD, @NoahCRothman, @BenHowe. Jeff knows I love him, but a couple of tweets about Kav aren't going to give Trump's approval rating a sudden massive boost.

12. Next, he says: "Mandel, in his Atlantic piece, argued that the Kavanaugh allegations are a defining moment in solidifying conservative support for Trump." And he gives the following quote of mine as proof that's what I was saying:

13. Hm. Doesn't sound quite right to me--the guy who wrote that. Let's check the tape and see what I said immediately before that line to set it up:

14. Ah, that makes more sense. I was talking about conservatives *training their fire on other conservatives.* The constant arguing and sniping we see as conservative writers and pundits fight amongst ourselves. Not supporting Trump. Sigh.

Believe it or not, there's more.

15. Beauchamp actually writes this sentence: "Most Never Trump conservatives refuse to admit what Kristol has: that the problem isn’t just Trump, but the Republican Party and conservative movement in general."

Most NT refuse to admit that "the problem isn't just Trump"? Huh?

16. It leaves you wondering, "who is Beauchamp talking to, that he comes up with this picture of Never Trump?"

And the answer is obvious: No one. He's talking to no one.

Almost finished!

17. He writes: "But when the choice is put out before Never Trumpers so starkly — either aid and abet Trumpism, or else side with Democrats — they choose the former, time and again."

Right. Because NT were such reliable beacons of support for Roy Moore, or Corey Stewart.

18. Indeed, here is @NathanWurtzel writing in the NY Post just days ago: "Yet I didn’t vote for Trump, and I do not intend to vote for my party’s nominee for Virginia senator, as he seems determined to continue fighting the Civil War — on behalf of the Confederacy."

19. All of which is to say: it would be very easy for Beauchamp to say something true, if he were so inclined. Alas, he is not.

Sorry to interrupt baseball! /fin