adminTHE DILEMMA OF THE IMPERFECT CANDIDATE
Elections rarely give voters a perfect candidate. Voters must choose between imperfect candidates with strengths, weaknesses, and controversies. Ultimately, the real choice is not between perfect candidates, but between the policies and political direction each would bring to office.
That dilemma came up during one of my recent presentations when a woman asked me, “I’m a Christian woman. I don’t agree with Ken Paxton. How can you expect me to vote for him?”
While voters are entitled to consider integrity, temperament, and personal character, my response to the woman focused on a different question: What policies is each candidate likely to support as a U.S. senator? And as a Christian woman, which candidate’s policies most closely align with your values?
That distinction matters. Senators vote on legislation. They confirm federal judges. They approve Cabinet officials. They influence immigration law, abortion policy, religious-liberty questions, education, health-care regulations, and potentially Supreme Court nominations.
Ken Paxton and James Talarico have markedly different records on these issues.
ABORTION: WHAT WOULD EACH CANDIDATE SUPPORT?
Consider abortion.
Paxton has spent years defending and enforcing Texas abortion restrictions as attorney general. His office has pursued litigation involving abortion providers and abortion medication, and he recently prevailed against San Antonio over the use of taxpayer money to support travel for out-of-state abortions. His Senate campaign identifies protecting unborn life as part of his agenda.
Talarico approaches the issue very differently and explicitly justifies that position with his Christianity.
During his appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience, Talarico argued that there is biblical evidence for a pro-choice theological position. Discussing his studies as a Presbyterian seminarian, he said the Bible is silent on abortion and explained that he supports abortion rights “not despite my faith, but because of my faith.”
More importantly for predicting Senate votes, Talarico’s campaign promises to codify Roe v. Wade through federal legislation and restore abortion access nationally.
IMMIGRATION: TWO VERY DIFFERENT APPROACHES
Immigration presents another significant contrast.
Talarico proposes limiting immigration enforcement against undocumented immigrants who are not considered public-safety threats, creating a pathway to citizenship for certain longtime undocumented residents, spouses, and DREAMers, and allowing recent arrivals to obtain temporary work permits.
Paxton’s record has gone in the opposite direction. As attorney general, he repeatedly challenged Biden’s immigration policies and defended stricter Texas enforcement measures, including litigation seeking implementation of Texas SB 4.
GENDER-TRANSITION TREATMENT FOR MINORS
Then consider gender-transition treatment for minors.
Although Talarico now says he opposes gender-reassignment surgery for minors, he voted against Texas SB 14, which prohibited not only surgical procedures but also puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones used to transition minors. Talarico described SB 14 as dangerous and argued that such medical decisions should be left to parents and doctors rather than politicians.
Paxton, by contrast, has aggressively enforced SB 14, including legal actions against physicians accused of providing prohibited gender-transition treatments to minors.
WHAT THEIR RECORDS TELL US ABOUT THE FUTURE
None of this requires pretending that a candidate’s personal character is irrelevant. Character matters, but so do the policies a candidate is likely to support and vote for once elected.
James Talarico speaks openly about Christianity and frequently explains progressive political positions through his view of Christian theology. But Talarico’s theology does not eliminate the enormous policy differences between him and Paxton.
Talarico’s Senate agenda includes codifying Roe, providing legalization pathways for certain undocumented immigrants, limiting immigration enforcement, protecting LGBTQ+ rights from what he considers government interference, and opposing government restrictions on gender-transition treatments for minors.
Paxton’s record aligns much more closely with conservative positions on abortion, border enforcement, gender-transition treatment for minors, and religious liberty.
THE QUESTION VOTERS ULTIMATELY HAVE TO ANSWER
So the most useful question in the Paxton-Talarico race should not be, “Which man do I like more?”
It should be: When the next abortion bill, immigration bill, judicial confirmation, religious liberty case, or legislation involving children and gender medicine reaches Washington, which candidate is more likely to cast the votes that reflect the policies you believe Texas should send to Washington?
That question moves the discussion away from personalities and toward something much more consequential: policy, power, and the decisions that will follow.
Author: Joseph Vargas