"What is wrong with Trump’s running mate, JD Vance? Does he think Americans are so stupid that
they’ll believe him when he says, with Ivy League smoothness and a practiced
tone of faux sincerity, that up is down?
“It’s really rich for Democratic leaders to say that Donald Trump is a unique threat to democracy when he peacefully gave over power on Jan. 20,”
The senator from Ohio claimed during the vice-presidential debate
Tuesday night, earning himself a chapter in the annals of disingenuousness.- Eugene Robinson, Washington Post
WaPo columnist Dana Milbank summarized last night's Veep debate perhaps most succinctly and accurately:
"It was a lie on top of another lie, supplemented by a pair of
other lies, in support of an even bigger lie.
That was JD Vance’s modus operandi through 88 minutes."
For example, when Vance whined to moderator Margaret Brennan:
“Margaret, the rules were that you guys weren’t going to fact
check!”
Bwahhaaa! In fact there were no such ‘rules’ it was a media assumption.
That was after she pulled him up for one especially egregious whopper e.g.
“You’ve got schools (in
Springfield) that are overwhelmed, you’ve got hospitals that are overwhelmed,
you have got housing that is totally unaffordable because we brought in
millions of illegal immigrants.”
All of which is utter bullshit, leaving out the point that Springfield arranged to have the Haitians move there to take work-jobs desperately needed but that there weren't enough locals to fill.
The Haitian immigrants in Springfield, as CBS moderator Margaret Brennan noted, have legal status. Their arrival in town, local residents and leaders have said, has helped revive the town, which lost a quarter of its population since the 1960s.
What Vance's petulant whine to Brennan disclosed is his fear of having his cavalcade of planned lies exposed by a moderator. When he thought he'd have free reign to run roughshod over telling the truth for nearly 90 minutes.
But swatting down JD’s stream of lies was almost as daunting as when Biden faced Trump’s barrage of baloney and BS back on June 27th. Worse, Vance had a practiced debater's way of delivering them, with some polish and panache - mixed with lingo -- that sufficed to 'baffle with bullshit' many viewers. Including some columnists at The Baltimore Sun who actually got snookered by Vance into believing he 'won'. Had they paid attention to the response he gave about January 6, and whether he actually believed Trump won the 2020 election, they'd have seen it was straight liar's poker. The inability to acknowledge the truth that Trump lost and that his renegades were ready to hang Mike Pence in the insurrection, cost JD whatever meager creds he had up until then, and the debate.
Other wanton lies included that Trump had actually sought to preserve Obamacare and refine it, when in fact his endless chant was "repeal and replace". Fortunately, Tim Walz came back hard on that one to clarify especially for those voters who may have short memories and be unable to separate fact from fiction. Or were taken in by Vance's smooth delivery and snake oil salesman's patter.
Then there were Vance's incessant references to Kamala Harris did this, and Kamala Harris did that. Like saying "Americans had their lives destroyed by Kamala Harris’s open border”. Newsflash there is no Kamala Harris open border because she doesn't run the border, and isn't president. She was appointed Biden's "Border Czar" but that wasn't to control the border but to go on a fact -finding mission to Guatemala, Salvador etc. to find out what was driving the mass migration of so many.
Fortunately, Walz accused Vance of trying to “dehumanize and villainize other human beings” when he made false claims about Springfield, Ohio. But he also should have slammed Vance's mouth shut on tagging Kamala Harris with every kind of permutation or policy decision when such claimed ‘policies’ either never existed or did exist but she had no control of formulating in the first place. Since she is not the POTUS. she doesn't have the power to exercise any such decisions.
Other Vance-bytes:
Vance said that Donald Trump supported states making their own abortion laws. The imp claimed that Trump said “the proper way to handle this … is to let voters make these decisions, let the individual states make their abortion policy,”
That’s not quite right: Donald Trump declined to say whether he would sign a national abortion ban during the last debate with Kamala Harris. He knew damned well he'd lose more female votes if he admitted that, just like Vnce knew if he came clean about it. So he lied.
Vance also denied that a Trump administration would create a federal pregnancy monitoring agency. Actually, it's a menstrual cycle monitoring policy which would come into effect if voters are dumb enough to vote Trump in again, and he implements his Project 2025 fascist dreamscape. See:
by Thom Hartmann | October 1, 2024 - 5:57am | permalink
“Menstrual police?” you may be thinking. That’s not possible! Not in America!
Read on.
The Comstock Act is an 1873 law that, if enforced, would outlaw all abortions in America by banning the shipping via mail, UPS, FedEx, etc., of any device, drug, or instrument that can be used to produce an abortion. It would even shut down hospital abortions.
It could also be used to empower new state or even federal police agencies specifically overseeing women violating its provisions. Like the menstrual police, which a Trump senior advisor just said was a very real possibility.
First the background.
Vance also said that he and Donald Trump were endeavoring to be “pro-family in the fullest sense of the word”, that he supports fertility treatments (like IVF) and that he wants mothers to be able to afford to have babies. But when Trump was pinned down on the IVF issue and asked to specify a policy he waffled and veered into the disconnected realm of taxes on tips. See e.g.
Jon Stewart: Trump Is The Opposite of Who His Supporters Claim He Is | The Daily Show (youtube.com)
Vance was also asked about his previous attacks on Donald Trump, including saying that he could be “America’s Hitler”. And here he was just as disingenuous to try to show it wasn't really him, but the media which put those errant thoughts into his brain.
Vance said he has disagreed with Trump but that he was wrong
about the former president being another Hitler because he “listened
to too many in the media” about him.
Adding;
When you screw up, when you misspeak, when you get
something wrong and you change your mind, you ought to be honest with the
American people.
ROTFL! So let me get this straight: You have zero control over formulating your own thoughts, opinions and decisions. Can we say pathetic?
No wonder Trump made you his VEEP, you're a bigger doormat than even Mike Pence was.
Another great shot by Tim Walz was when he mocked Vance’s statement about how Trump’s economic plans are being attacked by people with PhDs. I.e.:
"Economists, don’t be trusted. Science can’t be
trusted. National security folks can’t be trusted. Look, if you’re going to be
president, you don’t have all the answers. Donald Trump believes he does. My
pro tip of the day is this: if you need heart surgery, listen to the people at
the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, not Donald Trump. And the same thing
goes with this."
To refresh memories, and as reported in The Wall Street Journal ('Economists See More Inflation Under Trump', p. A2, July 13-14):
"Of the 50 who answered questions about Trump and Biden, 56% said inflation would be higher under another Trump term than a Biden term versus 16% who said the opposite."
The reaction of the professional economists were understandable given Trump is proposing to implement a "universal tariff" of 10%- 20% on every country in the world. Contrary to Dotard's "economics" or fringe beliefs, tariffs aren't paid by foreign governments. So he isn't hurting them.
They are paid initially by U.S. companies that import whatever goods - whether baby formula or HDTVs - and then these are passed on to American consumers. Result? Higher cost, more inflation. Thus, Trump's tariffs would push costs up on just about everything and increase inflation dramatically.
Regrettably, as one MSNBC analyst noted, too many people - viewers will be taken in by Vance's slick delivery (though laden with falsehoods) and not be able to recognize the content for what it is, BS. On the positive side, VP debates hardly ever matter in the scheme of elections.
But the main takeaway from this one should be that JD Vance is capable of lying with a straight face, so no one should take anything he says with more than a grain of salt. No matter how many pundits give the freak a 'W' based on style points.
As for Kamala's ask for a 2nd debate with Trump, as MSNBC analyst Michael Steele put it, 'forget about it'. Vance succeeded in repainting Trump for the low IQ, low information voters as a moderate 'winner', and reconstructed Reep prez candidate. So any more debates - with either Trump or Vance - would amount to a lose-lose.
If Kamala wants to project a further voice out there and detail her plans, the best route is doing a Town Hall or two, which she did in 2019.
See Also:
by Peter Bloom | October 4, 2024 - 6:58am | permalink
In the wake of the recent vice presidential debate between Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Ohio Sen. JD Vance, political commentators have been abuzz with praise for Vance's performance. Many have both lauded and critiqued his ability to "sane wash" the extremist positions of his running mate, former U.S. President Donald Trump, presenting them in a more palatable, even respectable light. This phenomenon, while concerning in its own right, reveals a deeper and more insidious problem within our political discourse—one that extends far beyond the bounds of the Republican ticket.
The Illusion of Moderation
JD Vance, the
bestselling author turned venture capitalist turned politician, took to the debate stage with a clear mission: to repackage the Trump agenda in a way that would appeal to a broader audience. Gone were the inflammatory rhetoric and bombastic declarations that have become Trump's hallmark. In their place, Vance offered measured tones, appeals to compassion, and a veneer of reasonableness that seemed designed to make even the most controversial policies sound sensible.
And:
And:
Vance’s debate performance was a breathtaking exercise in sane-washing
And:
by Heather Digby Parton | October 3, 2024 - 6:24am | permalink
Writing about a debate on the morning after always feels more like theater criticism than political analysis. How did they look, how did they sound, did they come off as authentic and real or were they phony and glib? Were they believable to the faceless Real Americans watching being asked to decide which of them to vote for? But that's what these televised debates really are. The substance is usually secondary because they've practiced their lines and have a specific message they want to impart regardless of the topic they're being asked to address. They're political rituals that we use to decide if the person appears to be someone we want to watch perform the role of whatever office they are seeking.
The worst debate ritual we've all ever witnessed happened last June when President Joe Biden was seen to be doddering and incompetent. It wasn't that most Democrats disagreed with his policies to the extent that he articulated them or were unhappy with his record, quite the opposite. It was his performance, and it resulted in him having to withdraw from the race. One of the best debates of the last few decades was the one after that, when Vice President Kamala Harris wiped the floor with Donald Trump. The former president's performance revealed him as unprepared and incompetent while the vice president was effective and commanding. Trump has retreated into a negative feedback loop ever since.
And:
The dangerous brilliance of JD Vance
And:
by Amanda Marcotte | October 2, 2024 - 6:06am | permalink
To know Sen. JD Vance is to dislike him. The Ohio Republican was relatively unknown to most Americans before Donald Trump picked him as a running mate, and few, if any, politicians have garnered such a negative reaction in such a short period. It's not just his rants about "childless cat ladies." Focus groups show that voters are well aware that, while Vance publicly praises Trump like he's a god, he talks smack about his boss behind his back. But I suspect, like Heather "Digby" Parton wrote at Salon Monday, "his nasty, cold personality" is a factor in Vance's unpopularity.
Vance can't seem to speak without whining. Every interview with him is a grievance-fest where he plays the victim of "the media," lies while falsely accusing his opponents of lying, and acts put out by inconsequential nonsense. He's as full of self-pity as Trump. Vance can be even more aggravating because, by all accounts, has a great life well beyond what he deserves: a beautiful family he doesn't appear to appreciate, a Senate seat purchased for him by a tech billionaire, and millions of dollars, despite not offering any real value to society or the economy.
No comments:
Post a Comment