Eric Swalwell has dropped out of the 2020 Democratic primary.
And just like that, the most unlikely of the 25-plus candidates running for the party’s nomination has become the first individual to exit the primary, failing to hold on for as long as even Oprah’s personal spiritual adviser.
To be honest, this is probably best for everyone involved. Being spared a Swalwell presidency is the simple mercy America deserves.
The California lawmaker is not only a human cringe tornado, but he is also prone to embracing some incredibly dangerous positions, things far crazier and absurd than anything touted by the current White House resident. Remember: Swalwell is the same person who once threatened to go nuclear on gun owners. Literally.
In November 2018, the California congressman defended his support for an “assault weapon” buy back program, arguing that it would be a necessary step in a broader effort to ban “military-style semi-automatic assault weapons.” Enacting the program, he argued, would reduce the number of firearm-related deaths in the United States. The congressman and soon-to-be-one-time 2020 Democratic candidate also expressed support for prosecuting gun owners who refuse to comply with the theoretical buy back program. This prompted one Twitter user, Joe Biggs, to grouse, “So basically [Swalwell] wants a war. Because that’s what you would get. You’re outta your f–king mind if you think I’ll give up my rights and give the gov all the power.”
Now, for the good part.
Rather than address Biggs’ fear, or argue that his concerns are overblown, Swalwell reminded the dissenter that the U.S. government has nuclear warheads and that, if push comes to shove, they can be used on noncompliant citizens. The congressman responded: “And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit. I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities.”
And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit. I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities.
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018
First, this a masterclass in how not to sell the general populace on a controversial gun control proposal. If you want to convince someone of the need for a civilian check on the power of the federal government, putting them squarely in the same camp as pro-Second Amendment and anti-gun control voices, just show them this tweet of a United States congressman threatening nuclear war on disobedient citizens.
Second, nuking gun owners in the pursuit of gun safety is a bit self-defeating. How do we reduce gun-related deaths in America? Ban “military-style semi-automatic assault weapons.” And if those gun-owners refuse to comply, nuke ‘em. To save life, we must end a lot of life. A lot. That is some solid reasoning.
Swalwell attempted to walk his remark back later after social media users noted that he had indeed threatened nuclear war on gun owners.
“No one is nuking anyone or threatening that. I’m telling you this is not the 18th Century,” he tweeted
Swalwell threatening noncompliant gun owners with a nuclear holocaust is only slightly worse thought-out than his bill proposing a state-maintained registry of “real” journalists meant to “protect” journalists.
