OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Trump Calls Texas Senate Candidate Paxton a Pain in the Ass

16 sources · updated 2026-10-02
Left 67% Center 0% Right 33%
2 left · 0 center · 1 right

What happened

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate against Democrat James Talarico, was recorded at a private fundraiser saying a Republican midterm convention in Dallas in September, headlined by President Donald Trump, had caused poll numbers to drop. In audio obtained by The New York Times, Paxton said, "when we did that convention — it dropped our numbers. Everybody's numbers dropped. Right now, yeah, not good," after being asked whether "he" was "a little bit of a drag." Paxton's campaign called the recording "manipulated nonsense" and said an internal poll showed Paxton leading by three points, with numbers improved since early September; CBS News said it had not independently verified the audio. Trump said he had not heard the recording, called the convention "amazing," and cited 107 million views; he later campaigned for Paxton at a Peterbilt plant in Denton, Texas, calling him a "pain in the ass" while saying "We need Ken so badly" and "We got to get this guy elected." At the convention, Trump had called Paxton "the greatest attorney general in America" while also saying he "may not dress right," "may not talk exactly perfectly," and "may not be the best-looking guy I've ever seen."
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 3 articles

3 of 3 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 3 of 3
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Donald Trump, President Trump and Ken Paxton
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 1 of 3
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: polling data
Credits another outlet 0 of 3
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
Unnamed sources 0 of 3
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 2, 03:17 UTC by The Hill, naming its source. First document 10 hours later, from Daily Wire (polling data).
Not counted 0
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Left-leaning coverage of the leaked audio omits the campaign's on-record claim that Paxton's polling has improved since the convention, the only statement that directly contests what he is heard saying. The pushback that runs in ABC News is the campaign branding the tape "manipulated nonsense." Missing from that account is the adviser's assertion that a survey from last week has Paxton ahead by three points, a rebuttal Daily Caller does print. Right-leaning coverage, once Trump landed in Texas, leads with the president still boosting his nominee and buries the leak as an unresolved aside. A factory-floor writeup in the New York Post notes only that it is unclear whether tension exists. Left-leaning coverage keeps the private complaint in the foreground, including a Hill piece built around a commentator telling Paxton to "keep it to yourself." What did public polling in the Texas Senate race show the week before the Dallas convention and the week after?
Bottom line

ABC News ran the leaked Paxton tape without the three-point internal lead his adviser was citing the same day. That number is the fight over whether Dallas actually dropped anyone's polls.

The receipts — 5 facts one side's coverage lacks
  • Paxton adviser Nick Maddux said a poll from last week has Paxton leading by three points and that numbers have improved since early September. numberin Daily Caller · absent from left-leaning coverage
  • Before the dropped-numbers answer, a donor asked Paxton, "Do you feel like he's a little bit of a drag?" contextin ABC News · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • When asked whether it was claiming the audio was manipulated, the Paxton campaign did not respond. official statementin ABC News · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • Trump said he had not heard the Paxton audio and called the convention amazing. official statementin Washington Examiner · absent from left-leaning coverage
  • Three other people confirmed Paxton was at the private fundraiser, and two recalled his response about the convention. contextin ABC News · absent from right-leaning coverage
The Left View
Left-leaning outlets presented the leak as a Trump loyalist privately conceding that the president's Dallas event was a political drag, even in a state Democrats have not carried statewide since 1994. They stressed that Paxton had earned Trump's primary endorsement over incumbent Sen. John Cornyn, that the convention included Trump's on-stage mockery of Paxton's dress, speech, and looks, and that ABC News reported three people confirmed Paxton was at the fundraiser while the campaign did not answer whether it claimed the audio itself was manipulated. Coverage placed the remarks against a tight race—a ReconMR poll had Talarico at 49 percent and Paxton at 43 percent—and a wider GOP worry that Trump's approval rating, prices, and the war in Iran could hurt candidates. The Texas Democratic Party called Paxton "loyal to nobody but himself"; Cornyn said "whoops" and that Texas is "at risk."
The Right View
Right-leaning outlets foregrounded the campaign's denial and Trump's ongoing support. Adviser Nick Maddux called the tape "more manipulated nonsense from The New York Times to create a story that doesn't exist," pointed to the internal three-point lead and improvement since early September, and said Paxton would "close strong alongside President Trump." Trump said "other people were helped greatly" by the convention and, in Denton, still described Paxton as "one of the most loyal people" and a "special man" while repeating that Texas needed him elected. Some conservative commentary circulated in the Daily Caller accused Paxton of humiliating Trump after Trump had rescued his primary; other coverage treated Trump's "pain in the ass" line as characteristic bluntness and noted Republican super PACs planning over $100 million in Texas television ads.
Our Take (balanced)
The left's strongest argument is that a Trump-endorsed ally privately attributed a polling drop to the president's convention, with attendees confirming the remarks to The Times, which undercuts claims the event helped Republicans in a suddenly competitive Texas race. The right's strongest argument is that the campaign brands the clip as New York Times "manipulated nonsense," cites internal polling of a three-point lead and improvement since early September, and that Trump dismissed the report then appeared in Texas to demand Paxton's election. The central unresolved tension is whether the audio is a real admission that the Dallas convention backfired and Trump is a drag, or a disputed recording inflated into a rift the two men have not acknowledged in public.

16 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.