Cornyn and Tillis's Self-Serving Incoherence Shows the Political Class Prioritizes Itself
Source: Chris Bray. "Cornyn and Tillis Keep Recording Their Confessions." October 22, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that Senators Cornyn and Tillis say contradictory things that only make sense if you assume they judge everything by whether it favors them personally. From this he concludes that the political class as a whole cares mainly about itself rather than the country or voters.
Conclusion
Cornyn and Tillis's public statements inadvertently reveal that the American political class is primarily focused on its own well-being rather than the country, good policy, or the people it serves.
Premises
- Cornyn says he is a loyal Republican who supports the party ticket, yet also says the primary voters who choose the party's candidates are extreme, which is incoherent since the party is built on that base.
- Republican primary voters chose Cornyn repeatedly for decades, yet he now condemns the same electorate's extremism once they chose someone else, suggesting he judges voters by whether they support him.
- Tillis ended his Senate career after breaking with Trump on policy (refusing to vote for the One Big Beautiful Bill) and then claimed Trump doesn't care about or understand policy, which is a personal verdict rather than a principled one.
- The pattern in both senators' statements is that good politics means agreeing with themselves, and their judgments of others track their own self-interest and self-image rather than consistent principles.
- Both senators proclaim these views proudly and without apparent self-awareness, as if they were virtues.
Assumptions
- Logical inconsistency in a politician's public statements is best explained by self-regard rather than by sincere principle, strategy, or nuance.
- Two senators' statements are representative of the American political class as a whole.
- Cornyn's remark about primary voters refers to Republican primary voters in general and was a condemnation of them, rather than a point about low primary turnout or polarization in both parties.
- Tillis's break with Trump on policy and his criticism of Trump are best read as self-serving rather than as sincere policy disagreement.
- A politician who supports a party can't coherently criticize that party's primary electorate.
- Motives can be inferred reliably from public statements and career choices.