David French used his latest Sunday column to reaffirm his admiration for Texas Democrat James Talarico, presenting the young politician as a figure worthy of respect—even from conservatives. French’s argument centers largely on Talarico’s rhetoric about faith and compassion, particularly his repeated emphasis on the Christian command to “love your neighbor.” For French, that language appears to signal a kind of moral seriousness in the public square that he believes many Americans should welcome.
"American hatred is growing so great that partisans, perversely enough, often view kindness and tolerance from political opponents as a threat. The only good people are people who agree with them. The supposedly decent person on the other side? We have a name for him or her, a…
— David French (@DavidAFrench) March 15, 2026
But that framing has drawn sharp criticism from observers who argue that rhetoric alone cannot substitute for examining the full scope of a politician’s policy positions and public actions. In the case of Talarico, critics point to several policy stances that they believe conflict with traditional Christian teachings. Among the most frequently cited issues are his support for expansive abortion rights and policies related to gender identity and youth medical treatment. For these critics, the gap between biblical doctrine and Talarico’s political advocacy is not minor or debatable—it is fundamental.
A really long double down on how super Christian and virtuous Talarico is, and how bad anyone who disagrees with David French on this is. No really, read for yourself. https://t.co/niHMS4L8sq pic.twitter.com/pQNBQpBiFV
— Jerry Dunleavy IV 🇺🇸 (@JerryDunleavy) March 15, 2026
That tension becomes even more pronounced because Talarico has publicly identified himself as a Christian minister. Historically, the role of a minister carries expectations of doctrinal fidelity and spiritual guidance rooted in scripture. When a political figure claims that mantle while simultaneously endorsing policies that many believers interpret as contrary to biblical teachings, critics argue that the result can be confusion among congregants and voters alike. The concern is not simply political disagreement but the possibility of theological contradiction.
The way you know when you’re looking at a wolf is not by measuring your feelings about America. It’s by measuring your feelings against scripture. That is the only way to identify a wolf. And that is how we know that yes, James Talarico is a wolf.
And is to such a neon degree… https://t.co/G5rqinyR8x
— Megan Basham (@megbasham) March 15, 2026
French’s defense of Talarico therefore sits at the center of a broader ideological divide. French has increasingly argued that character, tone, and a commitment to pluralism should play a central role in evaluating political leaders. In his view, political opponents who speak the language of empathy and civic respect may deserve consideration, even when their policy agendas differ sharply from those of conservative voters.
David French doubles down on his praise for the demon James Talarico
Shocking absolutely no one who has been paying attention to his own apostasy over the last many years now https://t.co/pBXpd6nDHK
— William Wolfe 🇺🇸 (@WilliamWolfe) March 15, 2026
Opponents of that perspective interpret the situation differently. They contend that French’s praise reflects a shift away from traditional conservative priorities toward a framework primarily defined by opposition to Donald Trump and the modern Republican Party. From that vantage point, support for figures like Talarico appears less about theological agreement and more about aligning with a political coalition that prioritizes distancing itself from populist conservatism.