Well, but I believe there are two aspects of the Republican Party, both evil in their own way. There’s trump’s complete takeover of the party, with all his attendant dictatorish insanity. As absolutely batshit awful as all that is, it’s kind of a distraction from the real Repub agenda.
Then there’s the Republican Party of the 1% and of Project 2025. trump is somewhat in line with their aims, but he’s a loose cannon. Any next Republican President, whether Vance manages to be elected, or some other, will appear sane and ‘normal’, while quietly and diligently working to execute the Project 2025 playbook and the wishes of billionaires like Musk and Thiel.
What’s more important, policy or democracy? Of course, it depends on what the policy is.
Kamala Harris wouldn’t agree to what I’m saying now, when out of power, but in the Biden administration, Harris was an Iran hawk. Some progressives would prefer Vance’s policy there to Harris’s.
Vance would be more consistently anti-Ukraine than Trump. His policy on Israel is harder to predict.
As for Vance’s rhetoric being less divisive than Trump, that is a low bar. His rhetoric towards immigrants would still be hair-raising to me. Remember the repeated outrageous claims about Haitians eating pets.
More rational, yes. Whether a more rational totalitarian would be an improvement is another question. He might actually be more effective at establishing totalitarianism.
This is of course purely conjecture at this point. I think there wouldn’t be much of this anymore. He’s an obsequious little shit who wants to please his boss. He also knows that Trump will turn on anyone in a second if he’s not pandered to. Once there is no Trump to pander to he won’t make stupid comments like this. There will still be stupid comments but not like that.
Vance, sadly, is somewhat intelligent. As I said earlier, with a true ignoramus like Trump, you can occasionally fool him into doing the right thing. But when a smart guy like Vance opposes Ukraine, it means he’s thought it out and knows what he’s doing, and won’t be talked out of it.
The presidency can’t help but be more normal under anyone who isn’t Donald J. Trump. Vance doesn’t really stand for anything nor does he have Trump’s <> charisma, so I don’t think he can control the Republicans to nearly as successful a degree.
The places where Trump has hurt this group or failed to help them are either cases where he made stupid decisions that hurt them along with everyone else, or things that would require nuking the filibuster.
Trump has shown that the appearing sane has little to no political value in modern American politics. Bully tactics and lawlessness from the executive branch are more effective, and part of those bully tactics involves public intimidation. Maybe there’s a third path where that involves simple majority legislation but I don’t see that as a greater risk with Vance than Trump. Plus Vance can’t magic away the economic pessimism coming from Trump’s policies any more than Biden could with the post-covid inflation. Trump’s unpopularity now is primarily a function of people not being happy that cost of living keeps rising and blaming the president. Trump at least has his 30% bitterenders but I don’t think Vance even has that.
very much so. Trump is a level of evil and corrupt that goes beyond normal limits.
I won’t agree with Vances policies but I don’t see Vance trying to subvert democracy wholesale, accepting bribes, raping children, admiring dictators, being wildly incompetent, committing treason, being a felon, being dangerously mentally ill, etc.
vance deep inside knows trump is stupid and evil, which is good. it shows self awareness. it also shows a lack of backbone, but it shows awareness most republican voters lack.
Agree on the raping children. I also agree on the treason, but only because I think aiding and comforting the enemy only applies if Congress votes a declaration of war against said enemy.
JD supports all Europe’s far right parties including the National Rally in France and AfD in Germany. He makes endorsements in European elections. Trump isn’t forcing that. It’s the real Vance.
The danger with Vance is that he’s at least as anti-democracy as Trump, but because he talks a little more calmly, a lot of voters will wrongly see him as a safer choice. One doesn’t know for sure unless or until he gets the top job, but I think Vance is roughly as inclined to be a strongman as is Trump.
I read Hillbilly Elegy. He’s spent his life as a lost little boy, searching for someone’s approval. As far as I can tell, he has no real beliefs or principles of his own. I don’t think that’s going to change. It’s just a question of who that will be next.
The dude faked a religious conversion because he was sure Tradcaths were gonna be the Next Big Thing. Whatever actual beliefs or values he has, he’s willing to compromise any and all of them in pursuit of personal power, which makes me wonder what he’d do if he actually became the biggest dog in the yard and didn’t have to kiss up to a bigger kid.
If Vance became the biggest dog in the yard, he would still have to kiss up to whichever faction was most important for his power. Even in regimes like North Korea, the dictator’s survival depends on what people around him think. Vance would keep extending his antennae to sense which way the wind was blowing and which trend was likeliest to extend his power or end it.
This is, uh, fun, I guess — like reducing a badly-written character to a single predictable response — but: isn’t a person typically more than one ruling passion dictating all of their decisions? Don’t we often find ourselves weighing different competing factors as we internally waver over which choice to make, and isn’t that pretty much the human condition?
> charisma, so I don’t think he can control the Republicans to nearly as successful a degree.