“Look, Tim, first of all, 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 January the 20th, as we have done for 250 years in this country.”
JD Vance at last night's debate
Wow.
That was the low point for JD Vance in the minds of post-debate pundits.
I see it as a high point for Vance. Vance was demonstrating his skill as a sycophant, an actor, a con man, and a worthy successor to Trump. What we saw there was the perfect example of "gaslighting."
Vance told us not to believe our eyes. Don't believe our memories. It takes skill and practice to create an alternative reality that others will believe. Step number one is to stick to the story. Don't give away the game by looking away or hesitating. Say it with the same matter-of-fact declarative confidence that you would say that one-plus-one-is-two. Practice the line until it feels natural and true: "He peacefully gave over power on January the 20th, as we have done for 250 years in this country."
If you do it right, people believe you. Or sort of believe you. Or doubt what they remember.
I presume the Harris campaign will make an ad out of this, with an insert of a clip of Trump saying he won and urging the crowd to "be strong." There will surely be images of rioters pushing barricades against the police and people breaking windows. The ad might be the thing with makes the vice presidential debate a draw in its net result. Vance had to know the question was coming so he had his answer prepared, and he handled it as well as it can be handled.
But the debate itself was a win for the Trump-Vance team. Democrats should stop fighting what they saw with their own eyes and not gaslight themselves. Vance won. He looked good; Walz less good. Vance looked younger and sharper than Walz, who grimaced and looked down at the notes he was writing. Vance looked like a TV news anchor. Walz looked like a man in the breakfast diner in Iowa or New Hampshire.
The debate won't matter. We are not picking a team. We are picking a symbol, an archetype, and that means choosing between Trump and all he represents (which we know full well) or Harris and what she represents (which we know much less well, except that she isn't Trump.) For a couple of days Democratic punditry will focus on Vance's bit of election gaslighting because it reveals Trump at his most dangerous. Republican punditry and the Trump campaign will celebrate Vance for one day and then put the focus back on Trump. Trump is the center of attention. Vance is an understudy, not the co-star. Trump is the indispensable man, the only one who can save us. The Vance debate "win" shines a poor light onto Trump, who lost his debate. Vance's success undermines the Trump story of indispensability, so we will see little of it.
But mostly, the vice presidential debate won't matter.
If Trump loses this November, Vance won't go away. He knows he looked good. Better than Trump.
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your emai go to: https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe. Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]
21 comments:
For me, the Vance low point followed the featured quote, after Walz asked him, “Well, DID Trump lose the 2020 election?”. Vance tapdanced with, “Tim, I’m focused on the future, not the past”, or somesuch.
Overall, though, agreed that Vance carried the night, on style and presentation, and in my opinion it was a push on substance. That said, Vance is not the key player. Unfortunately.
The debate isn’t going to change anyone’s mind about anything. The race for president remains a contest between a candidate who believes in our Constitution and the rule of law and one who doesn’t. That so many support the latter is a reflection of our failure to teach students civics. Hell, we haven’t even taught them how to tell fact from fiction. That makes our politics a fertile field for con men and would-be dictators. It can happen here.
Vance has defended demonizing Haitian refugees by asserting that his grotesque lies are justified if they help achieve his goal. That would be true if his goal is to seize power by any means necessary. Trump better watch his back.
J. Deviates eyes are the giveaway. He has the same eyes my sociopathic late brother did, and you could see the flashes of anger when the moderators tried to shut his most egregious lies down.
That said, neither "moderator" was worthy of the title, starting with the first question. Why didn't they ask what either candidate might do to de-escalate a war rapidly spiraling out of control ?
A debate between Harris and Vance would be amazing. Too bad it isn’t going to happen.
In simple terms, Vance could have simply answered that question with, "It's very clear who has occupied the White House for the last 4 years, and their team is responsible for the good and the bad over that timeframe."
A truthful statement that minced no words.
Does the debate matter? Perhaps. Could Walz do a good job as Harris's VP if she's elected? He would not be any better than what Harris has been doing as VP.
On the other hand, Vance could and would do a lot better if Trump were to win.
Just remember, it's not just the President and VP who will be running the country next year. The winner will be bringing 5,000 people into the federal government to run the country. We don't know who they will be.
Harris did say, however, that she would retain Biden's current Cabinet members
Vance did the full Ivy League debate team thing, was slick, confident and fluid in his delivery. He’d be great at representing corporations who sell toxic products. I couldn’t help but think that if he were a Democrat, Republicans would have hated him for his education and elitism (poor beginnings notwithstanding). But because he’s on their team, they’re thrilled to have someone who can articulate Trump’s dark vision without so much darkness. I also felt like Vance was much very interested in protecting his own political future. You are right that he now represents the future of MAGA.
The choice of Vice President has never influenced a single vote, one way or another. The VP's job is to support the presidential candidate, period. Vance once said Trump was terrible. Now he's his daddy. Funny how that works.
Tim Walz impressed me as a decent person, owning up to muffing a question with the comment: “I’m a knucklehead,” again when asked about being in China during the Tiananmen Square incident, Tim said, “I misspoke.”
He showed humility and honesty in admitting his error and taking full responsibility for his words. Tim also reminded me of my Kansas cousins, who are all honorable, decent people.
Only in America can a pathetic liar be declared the winner.
I thought Walz did fine and he will be a great VP!
As M2inFLA said, the person who occupied the Whitehouse is responsible for the good and bad that happens on their watch. Thus, Trump is responsible for his catastrophic mishandling of the pandemic, resulting in the collapse of our economy, and Biden is responsible for our strong economic recovery. Trump is also responsible for trying to overturn the 2020 election. Hopefully during the Harris administration he’ll finally be prosecuted for it. And let’s not forget that Trump dismissed climate change as a Chinese hoax, as we watch Florida get washed and blown away by it.
This VP debate will make no more difference in the election than all those that went before. Republicans say Vance won because he so glibly rattled off more and worse lies than Walz, which is why they think he’ll make such a fine flunky for the compulsive liar he'll be indulging.
I agree, Governor Walz is so honest I find it amazing he's been so successful as a politician.
After J. Deviate made that despicable claim about a "peaceful transfer", the next question should have been
" Senator, do you not have a television? Did you not see the events at the Capitol on January 6, 2021?
Tim Walz is scrupulously honest about all the times he has, er, misspoken….
Serial biographical puffery is for some reason the mark of top politicians….
LD- “serial biographical puffery” is pretty much the mark of most anyone with ambition these days (as anyone who reviews resumes can tell you)
There's a big difference between "serial biographical puffery" and claiming Haitians are eating our pets.
Peter, it appears that an offensive remark got past your review process. Another Jennifer on this site posted a comment, and although the person that replied was anonymous, it was probably Curt. The comment started with "Jenn, Baby"..... I think this crosses a line and I hope you will consider not posting this type of comment going forward. Thank you.
Vance "oozed charm like grease from a sizzling sausage", borrowed from Timothy Egan referring to David Stephenson, who masterminded and drove the resurgence of the KKK ,circa 1922. Even resulted in an Oregon Governor who was an ardent Klansman
Evans book is "A Fever in the Heartland", should anyone be interested.
I can not picture any of the other candidates for VP who I would rather have standing with Kamala Harris.
Post a Comment