Politics & Power Quote by Ed Gillespie

A line like this is built to do two things at once: scold an opponent and flatter the public. Gillespie’s claim rests on a neat rhetorical swap - “hatred” vs. “passion” - that turns a messy political argument about tone into a moral sorting exercise. If you’re with me, you’re passionate. If you’re against me, you’re hateful. It’s a classic campaign move because it reframes criticism as a character flaw, not a policy dispute.

The “I do not believe” opener is strategic modesty. He’s not barking an accusation; he’s performing confidence in voters’ good sense. That posture lets him imply that the other side is trafficking in ugliness without sounding like he’s the one escalating. The real audience isn’t the opponent, it’s the persuadables: people exhausted by outrage politics who want permission to see harsh rhetoric as beyond the bounds of normal democratic heat.

The subtext is also defensive. Politicians reach for this distinction when their coalition benefits from anger but can’t be seen owning it. By insisting Americans won’t “confuse” the two, Gillespie suggests a bright line exists - and that his side sits safely on the virtuous side of it. The wager is cultural as much as electoral: that voters still crave a politics where intensity is admirable only when it’s sanitized, and where the ugliest emotions can be disowned even as they’re quietly harnessed.