“More Trump than Trump”: JD Vance becomes more effective Maga messenger | JD Vance

When Donald Trump chose JD Vance, the US senator and never-turned-Trump MAGA superstar, as his vice president, the Rust Belt populist experienced a rude awakening.

In a viral video, Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz called Vance and the MAGA movement “just weird,” an insult that quickly became a meme. The reintroduction of his earlier comments about the inappropriateness of “childless cat ladies” being involved in government spread almost as quickly as an online joke about the Ohioan having close ties to a couch.

Other viral videos of Vance struggling to make small talk and awkwardly laughing at himself at campaign events seemed to create the impression of an untrustworthy candidate. The Hillbilly Elegy author and former Silicon Valley investor seemed to lack his vice president’s charisma, and for much of the summer pundits wondered whether Trump regretted his choice.

But Vance has prevailed, holding swing-state rallies, helping with fundraisers and frequently appearing in combative interviews on popular — and not always friendly — television news shows.

On the campaign trail, Vance has succeeded in highlighting Trump’s most combative campaign tactics, particularly demonizing immigrants, discrediting the press and effectively inflaming the crowd on both issues.

“Journalism in this country is increasingly a disgrace,” Vance said, complaining during a Sept. 23 campaign stop in North Carolina about reporters investigating his claims that Haitian immigrants were stealing and eating residents’ pets in Springfield, Ohio . Two days later, in Traverse City, Michigan, he called for the deportation of “millions of illegal immigrants” and accused Kamala Harris of allowing them into the country.

For many Trump supporters, the Ohio senator’s hardline nativist message and populist record make him an effective ambassador for the campaign’s biggest issues: immigration and the economy. How successful he is with a broader audience will be tested in Tuesday’s vice presidential debate.

Vance, who promoted the “great replacement” conspiracy theory during his 2022 Senate campaign that Democrats are facilitating immigration to increase their electoral advantages, is no stranger to hyperbolic anti-immigrant speech. In mid-September, he toughened the GOP rhetoric.

It began when unfounded claims that members of the Haitian immigrant community in Springfield, Ohio, had killed and eaten residents’ pets began circulating on right-wing social media accounts and gained traction with the neo-Nazi group Blood Tribe, according to NPR. Local Republican Party officials seized on the claims, and JD Vance brought them to the public’s attention by appearing on September 10 on Where’s Our Border Czar?

During that evening’s presidential debate, Trump himself repeated the claims in a now-infamous tirade. Condemnation came quickly, but Vance doubled down — and apparently even justified the practice of lying to make a point.

“If I have to make up stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then I will do that,” Vance said when Dana Bash pressed him on his claims during a CNN interview on September 15.

This week, Springfield officials responded to repeated bomb threats against public buildings in the area, including ones that cited anti-immigrant language. On September 16, local schools had to be evacuated due to the violent threats, and Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican who himself has disputed the claims about Springfield’s Haitian residents, announced that he was appointing Highway Patrol officers as Reinforcements will be sent to security schools.

It didn’t seem to matter how often local officials in Springfield denied the claims or how many journalists traveled to Springfield to investigate and debunk the racist rumors. During a series of campaign events, Vance defended himself and demonstrated his willingness to power through controversy and apparent disregard for the consequences of his rhetoric.

In Wisconsin on Sept. 17, Vance waved off a question about his apparent tendency to “create stories,” saying that he meant he wanted to “create stories” in the sense of news, rather than invent stories in the sense of “making up.” things”. . It was the media’s fault, not his, for misunderstanding him.

During a question-and-answer session with the press in front of the crowd, a reporter asked Vance: “You say you have a responsibility to share what your constituents are telling you, but do you also have a responsibility to fact-check them first ?” Vance pounced.

“Well, I think the media has a responsibility to fact-check the residents!” Vance said, drawing applause from the hundreds who came to hear him. He also appeared to reject journalists’ attempts to check his facts, saying that reporters who traveled to Ohio to investigate alleged reports about Haitian immigrants were “not searching for the truth” but rather “harassing.”

Mac Stipanovich, a retired Republican Party official from Florida, was angered by Vance’s comments about Haitian Ohioans – and questioned the strategic value of openly denigrating immigrants.

“Originally I thought his goal was to win the general election and that he would be a next-generation person who didn’t carry all of Trump’s baggage, who could appeal to a broader audience and help the campaign in the general election. As it turns out, he’s just fighting to win a statewide Republican primary. In many ways he is more Trump than Trump,” Stipanovic said.

Much of the media coverage of Vance has focused on his surprising pivot from outspoken opposition to Trump’s rise in 2016 — he even compared the former president to Hitler — and his leaning toward the “new right,” whose focus on restricting immigration , the promotion of economic populism and the upgrading of the country lies in the heterosexual nuclear family.

Vance’s ideological path and political circles are key to understanding the candidate and how he might govern in office.

But what previous reporting on Vance’s role in the campaign may miss is how effective Vance is playing to the Trump base.

Vance has demonstrated in television interviews his ability to maintain a combative back-and-forth and has chosen a rally format that allows him to demonstrate this.

After delivering his remarks, Vance opens the floor to questions from reporters and offers journalists from local and national media outlets the opportunity to submit a question for him to consider. The format is a crowd-pleaser: Before Vance has a chance to answer the question, his audience often answers for him, drowning out the reporter and leading Vance to debate the topic at hand.

During the rally in Wisconsin, the crowd shouted at a reporter who demanded Vance respond to Harris’ criticism of “hateful rhetoric” about migrants.

“That’s basically my answer,” Vance said. “Loud boos and two thumbs down.”

Later, during a Sept. 23 campaign stop in Charlotte, North Carolina, Vance again linked his defense of claims about Haitian immigrants to attacks on the press.

“My responsibility is to listen to the people I serve, not the biased media,” he told the crowd. He claimed that residents of East Palestine, Ohio – where a train derailed and exploded in 2023 – were treated “like enemies by the American media.” It was not immediately clear what press coverage Vance was describing, but his outraged remarks drew applause.

“I will always listen to you,” Vance said. “Even if the media attacks me, I will listen to you about what is going on in your communities because that is what a leader should do.”

Vance’s influence on the race is not yet entirely clear. He has consistently performed somewhat poorly in the polls, although polls have not shown a dramatic decline in popularity over the last month. Many Republicans who support the ticket enough to attend in-person campaign events told the Guardian they liked what they saw in Vance. Jacob Spaeth, who owns a small business in Minnesota and traveled to Wisconsin this month to see the senator’s speech, said he was impressed by Vance.

“To be honest, I didn’t really know him before,” Spaeth said. “But after seeing everything he said, I think he’s a good choice.”

In a column in early September, Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the conservative think tank Ethics and Public Policy Center, advised Vance to continue “plowing through the maze” rather than bombarding interviews and then giving in to the press like Sarah Palin did during her disastrous disaster In 2008, he made his national debut as John McCain’s vice presidential running mate.

So far, Olsen told the Guardian, he feels Vance has stayed the course.

“Unlike many candidates who are trained to make their arguments over and over again, he actually addresses a question and is able to have an ongoing dialogue or argument,” Olsen said, depending on the tenor of the issue Interviews. “I think this is something special in modern election campaigns.”