Blog Credo

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H.L. Mencken

Wednesday, October 2, 2024

Vance Helped Himself Not Trump

 JD Vance had some of the worst favorable ratings of any modern politician, and his debate performance has helped erase some of that negativity - at least in the short run. Interestingly, one poll found that BOTH Vance and Walz improved their favorability - but Walz was already popular to start with, and Vance is still unpopular.

Debates are kinda dumb, although we have seen arguably two of the most consequential debates in American history with Biden's poor performance causing him to drop out and Harris's effective psychological destruction of Trump. VP debates are typically even less consequential, but Vance and Walz aren't exactly well known.

However, one of the political impacts of a debate is how the post-debate narrative gets shaped. In June, the response from undecided voters was actually more mixed than the press led you to believe. They found Biden old and Trump angry, and they didn't like either of them. However, the relentless coverage of Biden's age shaped the following few weeks and caused him to drop out.

Vance is a very polished media presenter and trained as a lawyer. This is a good format for him. However, he is also a man who was willing to abandon his earlier principles to reshape himself in the image of Donald Trump. He is also - like Trump - a willing and eager liar. In this light, I think two moments stand out.

The first was when Vance complained about being fact checked. This is consistent with Trump's whining about the first debate and it amplifies the idea that they can only operate in this environment when they are allowed to lie. That's an angle of attack that could work well for Democrats.

The second - and this is already being cut into an ad - was when Vance couldn't admit that Trump lost in 2020, and then Walz pinned him down on that issue. The disrespect for American democracy really ought to be the most important disqualifying aspects of Trumpism among all the many parts of Trumpism that are awful. For whatever reason this is not something that came up really in the first two presidential debates.

My guess is that this debate - like most "normal" debates - will fade away in a few days. If anything, Trump's recent statements and actions should become the focus of the media. He's pulled out of the 60 Minutes interview, probably because his brain is pudding and he wilts when challenged. Was this his choice or the people around him? Also yesterday, he denigrated the injuries that American service members suffered during a rocket attack by Iran during his presidency, saying they just had "headaches" when referring to the brain injuries caused by shelling. 

As always with Trump, he says things that should end any other candidacy. I worry at the moment about the press's inability to cover his steep and obvious mental decline - the man can't speak in sentences much less paragraphs. He's now taken to using slurs and insults about his opponents, calling Harris an idiot and so on. That sounds like a guy who's losing and lashing out. That crack about wounded veterans, though, that should be the lead story (it won't be). A quick check of the Times and the Post don't show the story anywhere.

Still, people know who Donald Trump is, I guess. It might not hurt to hammer his negatives though. Walz wasn't great at that. The campaign needs to step up.

No comments: