Old McDonald said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

4 said:

---

For all of you conservatives that keep saying Paxton is a horrible candidate, the guy has been staunchly conservative as our AG and unapologetically so.

If his history as AG is any guide, and he is elected to the senate, he would be the most conservative senator Texas has had an over 30 years.

And that includes Cruz.

It may be time to get over the fact that he is a sinner, unlike all of you I'm sure, who are pure as the driven snow and have never done anything wrong in your life.

Or his opponent in this race, who is clearly pure of heart.

---

he would also be the most corrupt senator texas has had in that span, which is a bigger reason he's disliked than anything else in your post

---

What corruption has he been convicted of?

---

sixty republicans in his own house voted he did it. these are people with every political incentive to protect him, and they looked at the evidence and said he abused his office anyway.

---

So by this logic, as long as a jury member votes to convict, someone is guilty. Even if they're in the minority.

Do I have it right?

---

that logic is no more valid than the inverse logic that he's innocent because he was never convicted

---

Aggie97 said:

---

Then why does state have to pay the whistleblowers over 8 million dollars if none of it is true? He literally told the court he would not dispute theur allegations because he did not want to go under oath. I am voting Paxton because we can't have freak Dem representing our state but to say Paxton is not a corrupt POS is not true. Hopefully we will have a better real conservative canindate in 6 years to take him down.

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

4 said:

---

For all of you conservatives that keep saying Paxton is a horrible candidate, the guy has been staunchly conservative as our AG and unapologetically so.

If his history as AG is any guide, and he is elected to the senate, he would be the most conservative senator Texas has had an over 30 years.

And that includes Cruz.

It may be time to get over the fact that he is a sinner, unlike all of you I'm sure, who are pure as the driven snow and have never done anything wrong in your life.

Or his opponent in this race, who is clearly pure of heart.

---

he would also be the most corrupt senator texas has had in that span, which is a bigger reason he's disliked than anything else in your post

---

What corruption has he been convicted of?

---

sixty republicans in his own house voted he did it. these are people with every political incentive to protect him, and they looked at the evidence and said he abused his office anyway.

---

The Speaker, you know, the guy that runs the house, didn't have witnesses under oath. Because the reason for the impeachment was his personal vendetta against Paxton.

In the Senate, where he had zero control, had the witnesses under oath so the testimony changed.

I get that this may be a complicated topic, so I tried to help you out.

---

BusterAg said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

impeachment in the house is the charge, and it carries a finding the conduct warranted removal. one republican chamber said he did it, the other wouldn't fire him. those don't cancel to zero. and if the evidence were nothing, sixty of his own never break his way to begin with.

---

There is no place in the law where a charge ever "carries a finding."

A charge is an accusation, nothing more. To make it out for anything more than an accusation is a lie.

A charge is the beginning of a trial. The House voted for a trial. The House voted to bring a charge. Nothing more.

---

Aggie97 said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

4 said:

---

For all of you conservatives that keep saying Paxton is a horrible candidate, the guy has been staunchly conservative as our AG and unapologetically so.

If his history as AG is any guide, and he is elected to the senate, he would be the most conservative senator Texas has had an over 30 years.

And that includes Cruz.

It may be time to get over the fact that he is a sinner, unlike all of you I'm sure, who are pure as the driven snow and have never done anything wrong in your life.

Or his opponent in this race, who is clearly pure of heart.

---

he would also be the most corrupt senator texas has had in that span, which is a bigger reason he's disliked than anything else in your post

---

What corruption has he been convicted of?

---

sixty republicans in his own house voted he did it. these are people with every political incentive to protect him, and they looked at the evidence and said he abused his office anyway.

---

Nope. The House voted to have a trial where evidence was presented. The Senate voted not guilty after seeing the evidence.

---

impeachment in the house is the charge, and it carries a finding the conduct warranted removal. one republican chamber said he did it, the other wouldn't fire him. those don't cancel to zero. and if the evidence were nothing, sixty of his own never break his way to begin with.

---

WRONG! Impeachment is like a grand jury indictment. It assumes there's enough smoke to warrant a trial.

But just like when a Grand Jury only sees the prosecution's version of events, Paxton's impeachment took stories - NOT testimony under oath - in order to gain the votes necessary for a trial.

Once those same witnesses were put under oath in the Senate trial, the stories basically evaporated. That's the difference, and that's why a conviction was not secured. That's probably also why a Biden DOJ chose not to indict.

In the end, there was no there, there.

---

Then why does state have to pay the whistleblowers over 8 million dollars if none of it is true? He literally told the court he would not dispute theur allegations because he did not want to go under oath. I am voting Paxton because we can't have freak Dem representing our state but to say Paxton is not a corrupt POS is not true. Hopefully we will have a better real conservative canindate in 6 years to take him down.

---

Danny Vermin said:

---

Quit arguing with this clown. He's paid to be here and make a fool of himself.

---

12%

That’s the percentage of independents saying they would vote for @KenPaxtonTX over @jamestalarico in that @TxPolProject poll.

That is insanely low. Cruz was at 33% with those voters in June 2024 and 25% in June 2018 against Beto O’Rourke who came 219K votes from winning pic.twitter.com/9QvpPQTiIP

— Jeremy Wallace (@JeremySWallace) June 25, 2026

sanangelo said:

---

It's over unless Paxton can turn this around:

12%

That’s the percentage of independents saying they would vote for @KenPaxtonTX over @jamestalarico in that @TxPolProject poll.

That is insanely low. Cruz was at 33% with those voters in June 2024 and 25% in June 2018 against Beto O’Rourke who came 219K votes from winning pic.twitter.com/9QvpPQTiIP

— Jeremy Wallace (@JeremySWallace) June 25, 2026

---

sanangelo said:

---

It's over unless Paxton can turn this around:

---

sanangelo said:

---

It's over unless Paxton can turn this around:

12%

That’s the percentage of independents saying they would vote for @KenPaxtonTX over @jamestalarico in that @TxPolProject poll.

That is insanely low. Cruz was at 33% with those voters in June 2024 and 25% in June 2018 against Beto O’Rourke who came 219K votes from winning pic.twitter.com/9QvpPQTiIP

— Jeremy Wallace (@JeremySWallace) June 25, 2026

---

samurai_science said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

4 said:

---

For all of you conservatives that keep saying Paxton is a horrible candidate, the guy has been staunchly conservative as our AG and unapologetically so.

If his history as AG is any guide, and he is elected to the senate, he would be the most conservative senator Texas has had an over 30 years.

And that includes Cruz.

It may be time to get over the fact that he is a sinner, unlike all of you I'm sure, who are pure as the driven snow and have never done anything wrong in your life.

Or his opponent in this race, who is clearly pure of heart.

---

he would also be the most corrupt senator texas has had in that span, which is a bigger reason he's disliked than anything else in your post

---

What corruption has he been convicted of?

---

sixty republicans in his own house voted he did it. these are people with every political incentive to protect him, and they looked at the evidence and said he abused his office anyway.

---

So by this logic, as long as a jury member votes to convict, someone is guilty. Even if they're in the minority.

Do I have it right?

---

that logic is no more valid than the inverse logic that he's innocent because he was never convicted

---

Sorry. But YOU jumped to the conclusion that he's more corrupt than any other politician based upon a minority vote.

I don't know that he's "innocent" and have not stated as such. That's a blatant straw man on your part. I do know he was not convicted by the Texas Senate, NOR was he indicted by a Biden DOJ.

---

the impeachment passed 121 to 23. the majority of a republican house said he did it. you're calling it a minority by pointing at the senate, but the house impeaching him was the decisive majority action.

---

TEXAS SENATE RACE: Remember, the House didn’t put the staffers who reported Ken Paxton to the FBI under oath, but the Senate did during trial where they admitted they had no evidence of any crime. The FBI didn’t find any either. It was political payback.
pic.twitter.com/9V43bP8lwc

— @amuse (@amuse) June 3, 2026

Stop lying, the evidence was exposed as fake and based on "good faith belief".

---