Politics & Power Quote by Ed Gillespie

“Unprecedented” is doing heavy lifting here, not as a factual claim but as a weaponized mood. Gillespie isn’t merely criticizing Democratic messaging; he’s staging a moral emergency. By branding opponents’ rhetoric as “a new low,” he pulls the frame away from policy disputes and into the realm of contamination: something has gone rotten in the public square, and it’s coming from them.

The key move is the escalation to “political hate speech.” That phrase borrows the gravity of a category usually reserved for dehumanization and incitement, then repurposes it to describe harsh partisanship. It’s a strategic inversion: the right, often accused of inflammatory language, positions itself as the target of a discourse so extreme it resembles bigotry. The effect is to launder outrage into virtue. If you’re facing “hate speech,” you’re not losing an argument; you’re surviving an attack.

There’s also an intent to discipline the bounds of acceptable criticism. Labeling your opponent’s rhetoric as beyond “political discourse” implies that certain lines of attack (on character, motives, legitimacy) shouldn’t just be rebutted; they should be delegitimized. It’s a call for referees - media, donors, moderates - to treat the other side’s speech as disqualifying.

Context matters: Gillespie is a seasoned party operator, steeped in message warfare. Coming from that world, “unprecedented” reads less like astonishment than calibration, a signal to rally allies, justify counterpunches, and pre-empt scrutiny. When politics becomes a battle over who is “hateful,” the prize isn’t civility. It’s permission.