Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 07/26/2024 2:51:24 PM PDT by CFW
Former president Donald Trump’s selection of Ohio senator J. D. Vance as his running mate has generated much commentary. The mainstream media has tried to frame Vance as a postliberal “threat to democracy,” while Trump’s supporters have celebrated him as a bridge to a new generation.
But there is a deeper story here. The Vance selection is not a gambit to secure a particular demographic or region—white men are Trump’s base; Ohio is a safe red state—but an effort to cultivate an emerging counter-elite that could make the second Trump administration substantially more effective than the first.
This story is built into J. D. Vance’s biographical arc. He was the all-American kid who rose from humble beginnings to make his way in the world: the Marines; Yale Law; venture capital; a best-selling book. He learned the language of the prestige institutions, cultivated powerful patrons, and quickly climbed the ladder in academia, finance, and business. He had made it.
Then, his story takes a turn. Having entered the ranks of America’s elite, Vance became disillusioned and disenchanted with it, correctly identifying it as a force of hypocrisy and corruption. He defected—first, by parting ways with the respectable conservatism of the Beltway, and then by embracing Donald Trump.
Some have criticized this as a cynical move, but my sense is that it is the opposite. A cynic would have continued to build an elite résumé; Vance sacrificed his respectability within a certain stratum, assumed considerable risk by moving toward Trump, and, in my view, was genuinely convinced that the establishment, both Left and Right, had exhausted itself and had to be opposed.
Now, not only has Vance been selected as a vice-presidential nominee; more significantly, he has charted the path for an emerging new conservative counter-elite.
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Maybe you should have read the entire interview instead of seizing on a media morsel. Vance made his position crystal clear.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/vance-abortion-rape/2021/09/24/c3007318-1d32-11ec-8380-5fbadbc43ef8_story.html
Excerpt:
“I think in Texas they’re trying to make it easier for unborn babies to be born,” Vance said in the Spectrum News interview. “There is a view, common among leaders of the Democratic Party, that babies deserve no legal protections in the womb. That is a common view in the Democratic Party, and all I’m saying is that view’s wrong.”
“If you want much stronger abortion laws then first the Republicans have to win.”
This year’s GOP Platform, “Plank #4” re abortion, is quite long. Maybe it should be edited to:
“That power has been given to the States.”
After the Dobbs Decision in SCOTUS, which is what we wanted, i.e., reversing Roe v. Wade, addressing it again is unnecessary. IMO.
I don’t know... It never will be resolved before the Lord comes.
“does JD Vance really fire anybody up ? Even with MAGA he is lukewarm at best.”
Understanding completely that this is shallow, so no need to point it out thankyouverymuch, but his whiny nasal voice grates on me.
I also agree with Trump on that one. Since people vote for POTUS at the ballot box, the VP should be similar. Grooming someone younger is a good idea. Vance is malleable and basically a blank slate.
In my view, the power always resided with the states and was never ceded to the federal government. The federal government never had the power to give it away.
Exactly. What was it ... ~51 years ago? But they did it (shouldn’t have), then they un-did it.
Even mentioning it in the Platform alludes to the the possibility that it is still a Federal issue.
BTT
I noticed that too!
“It is true that a Presidential candidate usually picks a VP candidate that brings support from a perceived weakness. And, as others have noted, Vance doesn’t appear to have done so. But, as I advocated here and in emails to Trump, America First will only take root in future elections as a movement if Trump picks and grooms a successor. It’s possible that this is what is going on. And Trump has previously said that he thinks VP choices based on perceived weakness is overrated.”
It would do no good to elect Trump as President only to have him select a VP that was approved by the established GOP. That would be like taking a win in the first game of the World Series while promising to lose all the remaining games.
Selecting someone such as Haley in order to appeal to the moderates would be telling the deep state that they only have to stall for four years and then they would be back in control. It would move our country nowhere near back towards where it needs to be in the terms of freedom and prosperity.
FWIW I’m a woman of reproductive age and Vance’s position on abortion doesn’t horrify me. It’s true that some Democrat women will be repulsed by it, but those women were never going to vote for Trump anyway. It’s the independent vote that counts and judging by the link I sent you, independents are not as pro-abortion as the left would have us believe. “Moderate your stance on X or lose” is a tried and true leftist scare tactic.
From https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/oct/12/context-what-jd-vance-said-about-rape-abortion-and/
Jackson asked Vance whether anti-abortion laws should include exceptions for rape or incest.
Vance replied: "Look, I think two wrongs don't make a right. At the end of day, we are talking about an unborn baby. What kind of society do we want to have? A society that looks at unborn babies as inconveniences to be discarded?"
Jackson tried to get Vance to comment directly about exceptions, asking "should a woman be forced to carry a child to term after she has been a victim of incest or rape?"
Vance replied: "My view on this has been very clear and I think the question betrays a certain presumption that is wrong. It’s not whether a woman should be forced to bring a child to term, it’s whether a child should be allowed to live, even though the circumstances of that child’s birth are somehow inconvenient or a problem to the society. The question really, to me, is about the baby. We want women to have opportunities, we want women to have choices, but, above all, we want women and young boys in the womb to have the right to life. Right now our society doesn’t afford that and I think it's a tragedy and I think we can do better."
I would prefer someone who never went to Yale.
You and me both.
Vance’s Yale buddies are coming out of the closet to trash Trump with Vance’s own words.
From the Daily Mail
JD Vance’s transgender classmate leaks trove of private emails and text messages with former ‘buddy’ - including GOP VP pick’s bombshell remarks about Trump
Nothing good ever comes from Yale.
If you are thinking conservative, think Phyllis Schafly.
She SPANKED the Yalie Billy Buckley for being a GLOBALIST sellout before the term even came into common usage.
You can find it on You Tube, where she eviscerates him for condoning the give away of the Panama Canal.
Vance was not properly vetted.
This is as much on his fanboy Don Jr. as it is Trump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.