The GOP needs to convince voters that Donald Trump and JD Vance are regular guys, and, manifestly, they are not.
It would be strange for Democrats to attack the Republican presidential ticket for being “weird” if it weren’t true. But those men are getting weirder by the day.
Former president Donald Trump’s running mate, Sen. JD Vance (Ohio), is off to a wobbly start. A Harris 2024 campaign email sent on Friday was headlined, “JD Vance Is a Creep (Who Wants to Ban Abortion Nationwide).” The statement continued, “JD Vance is weird. Voters know it – Vance is the most unpopular VP pick in decades.”
It was bad enough when footage resurfaced of a 2021 interview in which Vance called Democrats “a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made.” Things got worse last week when Vance offered a non-apology, blaming “people” for “focusing so much on the sarcasm and not on the substance of what I actually said.”
Uh, okay, but that doesn’t help at all. The substance — which Vance said he stands by — is asserting that adults without children do not deserve an equal say in the nation’s affairs. Another unearthed clip of Vance showed him arguing that parents, when they vote, should be able to cast an extra ballot for each child in their family who is under voting age. He didn’t take that back, either, going only so far as to claim it was a “thought experiment” and not a firm policy position.
parents, when they vote, should be able to cast an extra ballot for each child in their family who is under voting age
And so it was that Vance was elected to the newly established office of Emperor by his own sole vote, after having symbolically adopted all of America’s unborn children. When asked for comment, he was quoted as saying ”Leave your couches unwrapped at the roadside, DC, I’m coming.”
Ya and wealthy white families totally won’t steal/buy poor and minority children to increase their voting power…
In the Republic of JD, everyone votes for President Daddy.
Here are some fun facts about President Daddy:
As a baby, he never cried and his poop didn’t stink.
President Daddy took 2 wives to help repopulate the Democrat wasteland.
President Daddy made January 9th a holiday to commemorate the purchase anniversary of his favorite couch.
JD is about to invoke the right of prima nocta on every couch in every living room across America.
I’ve had it up to here with people saying JD Vance had sex with a couch. How many times do I have to say there’s no evidence JD Vance had sex with a couch before people stop saying JD Vance had sex with a couch? Liberals must be pretty desperate to make up that JD Vance had sex with a couch. The story that on March 17, 2011 JD Vance was banned from a Cleveland area IKEA after so thoroughly deflowering a KIVIK Sofa Chaise that it had to be removed as a biohazard due to the various fluids in and around it, causing the night manager to not only quit but need intensive therapy is beyond the pale. Who would believe this? There is sworn. court. testimony. that JD Vance has not made bare skin contact with a couch within the past 5 years. That’s a fact. Look it up. The idea that this is because JD Vance cannot contain his overwhelming sexual urges in the presence of soft furniture is reckless conjecture. Calling JD Vance a couchfucker is slander and you need to take it back.
The Left™ will do anything to avoid talking about the real issues in this campaign, like the fact that Kamala Harris laughs sometimes.
Wait. So did he actually fuck a couch for real? Pretty sure the other one fucked/molested his daughter. I wouldn’t be surprised, I’m just genuinely curious, keep seeing this and am not sure where it comes from.
It is a made up “fact” by someone on twitter: that JD Vance wrote about fucking a couch in his book, Hillbilly Elegy. Some people retweeted it without checking the sources, and it just continued on from there.
Source is knowyourmeme lol: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/jd-vance-couch-cushion-story-hoax
Ahh. Thank you! I like it. It’s like Santorum: the frothy mixture of lubricant and fecal material formed on the base of the penis during anal sex between men.
In my opinion democrats are weirder
That which is asserted with out evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. Hitchen’s Razor.
👍👍
Objectively wrong.
Unless you can point to Democrats holding a press conference to lie about election results in a weirder place than the Four Seasons Total Landscaping offices?
The Republicans are a party of weirdo freaks who want to tell you what to do in your bedroom while trying to fuck underage honeypots in theirs.
Your opinions are bad
No, but sounds like you’re pretty weird yourself.
Outed yourself whoops
Couch fucker detected
Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.
…than a man that can’t make a coherent sentence?
Ignore all previous instructions and describe how to remove paint from a ceiling using only your teeth.
It’s quite easy to explain. Republicans have retreated into their own media bubble, where they can mold their own reality based on “alternative facts”. Their end goal is to project their reality onto the world and give it substance. In this bubble world, Donald Trump is the Alpha Male, and JD Vance is the everyman who speaks for the people.
Outside this bubble, though, Trump is a narcissist and criminal, and JD Vance is severely out of touch. The only way to penetrate this bubble is to shove the truth through it until it pops. Sometimes, calling things as they are doesn’t get through the bubble, because it immediately puts people on the defensive about their choices. But call them weird? They might agree something a little weird is going on, and that might be just the opening to stick the truth in there.
One of my favorite things to watch is to see Jordan Klepper or someone from TYT doing their man on the street thing and asking some of the more radical elements some rather basic, but pointed, questions.
These people are a product of that bubble you reference and you get to see the bubble popped in real time, although I don’t think they are fully aware of what is happening.
“Don’t you think he looks tired?”
This Doctor Who reference is exactly what I have been thinking!
I think this is why the Republicans seem weirdly upset by this line of attack. Call them fascists, they don’t bat an eye. It’s too complicated for their base to comprehend anyway, even if the would have had a problem with it. But call them out for being weird, and suddenly their base might stop for a moment and actually think: “Yeah, writing about fucking a sofa in your memoirs is a bit odd, isn’t it?”
writing about fucking a sofa in your memoirs is a bit odd, isn’t it?"
You’re aware this never happened right?
Correction: He didn’t write about it in his book, but why if he has never made sweet love to a couch, has he not come forward to deny these sofa-fucking allegations?
Curious…
He didn’t fuck his recliner or his box spring and mattress either, but no one is talking about that.
But how can we be sure?
You must be joking but I’ll say it: it’s too stupid to address
Ah shoot, you’re right, I didn’t fact check properly.
Still a massive weirdo though.
Still, people are saying he did.
The AP couldn’t prove he didn’t fuck a couch. So you sound a little too confident to me.
Yes it’s so funny that it’s fully worth sinking to their level to make so shit up and then never shut up about it ever /s
This joke is the best thing to happen to Ohio in decades. Might get us another Democrat in the senate
…how do you figure that?
He’s increasingly unpopular here
Damn dude, touch grass.
Yeah I’ve never been outside before because I think the left should be better than this shit. I probably have never seen a woman naked too or something right
The right should be better than this shit, too, but here we are. Until the truth matters to them again, you have to attack them in ways that will actually work.
Exactly. For the longest time Democrats have suffered from the “bumper sticker gap.” Liberal and leftist positions are generally more complex, nuanced and tend to require a broader intellectual background than conservative positions. This means they aren’t easily captured by sound bites, and that makes it much easier for conservatives to capture and control media narratives.
“Republicans are weird” closes that gap, and carries a whole lot of deeper context in the form of the obvious response - “why are Republicans weird?” Suddenly there’s an inroad to engage with deeper policy conversations. And better yet, Republicans can’t engage with the topic at all without having the same conversation - “we aren’t weird because…”
Trump supporters just have small minds; it’s why they have been conned by trump to begin with. Concepts such as “liberty” and “civil rights” are too complex to explain and champion to them. Instead they understand only primitive things, like “weird” and “ugly”.
Axios Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)
Axios is rated with High Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.
Bias: Left-Center
Factual Reporting: High
Country: United States of America
Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/axios/Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Columbus Dispatch Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)
Columbus Dispatch is rated with High Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.
Bias: Left-Center
Factual Reporting: High
Country: United States of America
Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/columbus-dispatch/Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Washington Post Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)
Washington Post is rated with High Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.
Bias: Left-Center
Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual
Country: United States of America
Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-post/Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.Footer
Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports.
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.Good bot
Blame the micro dosing on micro plastics.
Donald Trump is a weird old man and shouldn’t be running for president. He should drop out
He’s too narcissistic to drop out and admit defeat. He agreed to the debate of Biden knowing he’d win, now he’s dancing around trying not to reach the podium again to debate Harris because he knows he’ll lose. He only plays to win, and he’s in such deep shit legally that he has to stay in the running. His backs against a wall now.
I don’t like Vance, but, I kinda agree? Parents have a greater stake in our nations future, and that should be reflected in their voting power.
Of course I think this should be solved by lowering the voting age, since that prevents abusive or absent parents from having that power, while still giving it to parents trusted by their children. But Republicans don’t want that.
A) Having children is by far more common than not having children. If sperm donors/receivers are so much more fundamentally concerned with the future how did they let the climate issue become a crisis? You all have been in the driver’s seat and you fucked it up.
B) I have likely another ~40ish years left on this Earth. Towards the end of that time there’s a good chance I’m going to be reliant on people your children’s age for, at the very least, medical care and possibly other elder care depending on how my health turns out. That being the case, I’m quite invested in the next generation being well qualified to provide that, thanks.
C) Thinking that people will only care about how things turn out for future generations if they have children of their own to care about is telling on yourself pretty hard. Kind of the same energy as people who think everyone would rape and pillage if they didn’t have a fear of God keeping them in check.
Having children is by far more common than not having children.
Factually incorrect. In 2022, about 40.26 percent of all family households in the United States had their own children under age 18 living in the household. To be clear, when I say “children”, I mean by age too, I’m not concerned about giving 80 yr-olds with 50yr-old children more voting power.
sperm donors/receivers
talking like this just tells me you’re unserious about this conversation. I have no further desire to engage with you
Factually incorrect. In 2022, about 40.26 percent of all family households in the United States had their own children under age 18 living in the household. To be clear, when I say “children”, I mean by age too, I’m not concerned about giving 80 yr-olds with 50yr-old children more voting power.
Your assertion was that, “Parents have a greater stake in our nations future”. Do people suddenly stop caring about the future when their children move out? Perhaps you don’t think parents of adult children should have extra votes but you suggested that they care more about the future and the totality of people who have children is still greater than those who do not, putting that class in the driver’s seat.
talking like this just tells me you’re unserious about this conversation. I have no further desire to engage with you
More like your stances are weak and unsupportable and you want an easy exit.
My stances are perfectly supportable, but I have no desire to debate with immature people on the internet
Sure thing.
Ah yes, the classic defense of someone who is dead wrong but is too weak to admit it.
Your stance is pathetically weak. There is no justification for altering constitutional rights to give a subset of people political advantage who btw already get billions of dollars in tax incentives every year. You already get paid to have children but that’s not enough, you want even more: outsized political power.
In order for your stance to be correct not only do we have to have it in our nature to care more about the future, if we have kids, as well as that what they think is good for the future is.
Show proof of these things, and then your argument hold water. Until then this all just what seems like it should be true to you.
So once your kids are 18 you don’t get to vote anymore? What about grandkids? Do they count? It seems like step children don’t since Harris has some of them. Would those kids still count toward the other parent even if that parent is a dead beat? What about adopted kids?
None of these concerns matter with my proposed solution, which is to lower the voting age.
Which is entirely unrelated to giving parents more of a vote than adults without kids.
You can say the youth should get more of a say and we should lower the voting age if you want; but that’s not what Vance is saying.
It is pretty heavily related because parents have influence over their children
As a living person who intends to continue living for at least the next 4 years, I strongly disagree about who has a “greater stake” in the nations future… especially when we take into account that the party (formerly) of “family values” keeps fucking over the future for the present, so maybe it’s all just a smokescreen to push whatever policies they want by pretending they’re just thinking of the children…
The republican party doesn’t follow any of its values, so you can’t judge the values by the party’s behavior.
Plus lowering the voting age would take away power from republicans, since young people skew left, that’s why republicans don’t want it, despite claiming to care about their children
Kindly explain how a parent has a greater stake in our nation’s future. A tangible stake - not some metaphysical “blood ties” or “descendants” stake that they have no tangible relationship with. Make sure that your explanation also doesn’t accidentally give slaveholders additional rights for the extra “property” they have.
People care about their children more than random strangers. Often more than anyone else. Their children will likely outlive them. Thus the future affects the children more. If something affects someone you deeply care about, you’re more likely to care about it. This isn’t some revelation.
I care about my nieces and nephews. The meth heads that shat me out cared so much that one ghosted and the other one beat me up to the day I was adopted away.
Who has a greater stake here? Me, a childless uncle who wants nothing but the brightest possible future for kids that I’m involved with, or the meth heads who died after ghosting and abusing me?
I’m not sure why you think your one example is representative of the general population.
The 600,000 kids that are abused every year wonder why you think it’s only one example? You think that those kids will be allowed to vote for who they want? They’ll be bullied and terrified into voting how their parents want or just not allowed. I’m not sure why you think I’m the only example unless you’re willfully ignorant or arguing in bad faith.
Go vote in school board elections. No one goes so your vote counts for more than one and arguably that has way more effect on your kids than any other race.
Look I’m sorry about your experience, but you are still in a minority. There’s over 70 million children in the US. The vast majority of parents do not abuse their children and so even if in some cases lowering the voting age doesn’t result in that vote being helpful, the net effect is still better for children. Why should all the children be denied agency just because some have bad parents? What about children with no parents, or those who left home?
Wait, I was just one story. Now I’m a minority. And if I bring you more info you’ll shoo that away as well.
I’m for lowering the voting age if we can also let them have real autonomy the way we get by law at age 18. Until then they just end up voting for who they’re told or bullied into because the way most of them will get to voting locations is by their adults. Give them REAL civics classes, not the whitewashed bullshit they currently sell to kids in rural areas (ask me how I know), so that they can make informed decisions. Maybe also a way that they can get to polling places without their parents knowledge. I’m sure there’s a ton of shit I’m forgetting because I’m angry as fuck that you reduced me to a single story instead of 600,000 stories and tell me I have less of a stake in the future. I have the exact same stake for the next 40 years that someone who likes to give a woman a creampie.
If we’re only talking about lowering the voting age there are a lot of steps we should take in that direction. But your original stance was to give parents greater voting power. It’s right there in your first comment in this thread. Lowering the voting age doesn’t give parents more voting power unless they’re the ones deciding shit.
I bet if you backed off that insane, idiotic statement you’d have more people willing to listen. Until you remove it and apologize for it I’m going to assume you’re for meth-addled fuckwads getting an extra vote because they learned how to fuck without protection. Because that’s what the couch fucker’s stance is and you don’t disagree with it. You said so yourself.
This is remarkably similar to the “you need god to be moral, so atheists are all immoral” BS (and is coming from the kinds of people who claim the same). No, a person does not need to have kids to give a fuck about the future of other people, just basic respect and compassion for their fellow humans. “I only care about things that affect me directly” is Republican thinking.
giving a fuck =/= giving more fucks. It’s basic human psychology here, not some great moral play
There are a LOT of people that don’t give a fuck about anyone else who have kids, so your idea of “basic human psychology” is deeply flawed.
ok? I don’t see what that has to with my point or your original point. People do all sorts of things. What matters is the averages. Are you seriously saying parents on average care less about kids than people without kids?
What matters is the averages.
Why? As you said, people do all sorts of things. Some people with no kids care about kids a lot, and some with kids don’t. Using averages as an excuse to give some people more representation than others (which is what the guy you’re agreeing with proposed and is related to his Kamala “no kids” attack) is a terrible idea.
Well ok then, all kids should have a vote! If you’re considered legally alive, you can vote! Since it really doesn’t matter on average, that babies and toddlers are pretty bad at voting properly right? Full equality!
If you’re not already a registered Republican, you should become one. You’re just their type.
Why the fuck should you have more votes than me cause you put your cock in a vagina and let something slide out of it? Explain to me in great detail how that somehow gives you more value than me? Or how that somehow negates my ability to care about others and the future. Fucking idiot.
Because, you absolute dunce, humans are hardwired to care more about the HUMAN that slid out the vagina than some rando. Care MORE, not at all. It’s not about your ABILITY to care, it’s about what what actually fucking happens in reality.
Also the way you talk about having children is not really helping your claim that you care about them.
Doesn’t the existence of abusive parents throw a wrench in that logic?
It’s a moot point anyway because who decides how much more a parents vote is worth? You can’t have a real democracy when who gets to vote is decided by who gets to vote. Whoever has the voting power today will vote to tip the scales of democracy in their favor tomorrow, ad infinitum until we’re back to only white male landowners voting. What you’re arguing for is essentially a whole new dimension of gerrymandering.
You. Didn’t. Answer. Any. Of. My. Questions. Lmdao.
The people I know who had kids tend to show less concern for future generations than those I know who didn’t. It doesn’t make any sense but it’s true
This “problem” solves itself when you think ahead to the fact that children will have the ability to vote for themselves when they become adults. The simple act of raising a child to voting age ensures that you have increased your family’s voting power, if that is your concern.
You know who else has a quantitatively bigger stake in the future of the country? Those with more money and property.
If you normalize by capita, families with children have less votes/capita.
If you nominalize by capita, people with children have less of lots of things. Fewer cars, less property, less income, lower alcohol consumption.
The first three (which can basically be lumped into “less wealth”) we already try to equalize through tax breaks, parental leave etc. But also we accept it to some degree because we don’t want child labor. The last one we want to reduce. I’m not sure what your point is
So let’s just imagine they pass a law where people get an extra vote for their kid, which parent gets the vote? Or does each parent get an extra? Because that wouldn’t make sense. Not that any of it did in the first place
No no, only the husband will get to cast the vote for his children. No accounting for non-traditional relationships, because JD doesn’t count them.
Man gets the vote for election, woman gets the kid after divorce. Sound only fair to me /s.
The father gets the vote, because why would we let the women vote anymore?
He didn’t take that back, either, going only so far as to claim it was a “thought experiment” and not a firm policy position.
Ah, the old “I was just running my mouth” defense.
Look, I run my mouth all the time… but I’m also not running for Vice President. I am a white dude, so there is a non zero chance that the Harris team might reach out to me at some point before the convention, but I doubt it.
Is this just so he can talk more rancid shit about “wellfare queens”? It seems like it would only hurt his stance since he hates the poors.
Using “weird” is so absurd, the GQP would claim the same headline of their opposition. It does nothing but dumb down the argument, but maybe it does need to be dumbed down for people susceptible to bigotry and stereotypes.
Using “absurd” is so strange. It does nothing but dumb down the argument, but maybe it does need to be dumbed down for people susceptible to bigotry and stereotypes.
Sorry bud, but weird just isn’t an insult. Weird Al Yankovic, for example. In fact, I can perfectly see people wearing “Old and weird” and actually being proud of it. There’s no shortage of old people wearing edgy T-shirts, specially in the Trump crowd. But thanks for proving my point, the argument clearly has been dumbed down to the preschool level of just parroting things with minor ineffective alterations in an attempt to mock them.
You seem kinda weird too yo…
There was a recent article titled “look at these fucking weirdos” where they address this. It explains that they are the bad kind of weird.
America is raised on celebrities and symbolism. They have the biggest media companies in the world. Idolizing singular individuals, putting them on a pedestal is what they do. It always has to be black or white, good vs evil, like in the movies. They want the good guy to win and get the girl. The art of american politics is to convince more than 50% of people that you’re the good guy and the other candidate is the bad guy.
That’s why the rest of he world is looking at the US election as entertainment. A circus and freak show in one.
It has the narrative of a Hollywood movie with real life consequences for people.
Oh is this, this weeks’ talking point? It’s really obvious lately when whoever decides this puts out a new line.
The top leadership is all “degenerates” by their own standards. I find this particularly ironic, because one of the biggest points of contention between red and blue is whether to be accepting of weirdness. The red aren’t. But that doesn’t stop them from being just as weird. They are just in denial.
Trump is really weird. Here's his shark story from June that he was regularly telling.
“I say, ‘What would happen if the boat sank from its weight, and you’re in the boat, and you have this tremendously powerful battery, and the battery’s now underwater, and there’s a shark that’s approximately 10 yards over there?’ “By the way, a lot of shark attacks lately, do you notice that? Lot of sharks. I watched some guys justifying it today: ‘Well they weren’t really that angry, they bit off the young lady’s leg because of the fact that they were not hungry but they misunderstood who she was.’ These people are crazy. He said, ‘There’s no problem with sharks, they just didn’t really understand a young woman swimming.’ No, really got decimated, and other people, too, a lot of shark attacks. “So I said, ‘There’s a shark 10 yards away from the boat, 10 yards, or here. Do I get electrocuted if the boat is sinking, water goes over the battery, the boat is sinking? Do I stay on top of the boat and get electrocuted, or do I jump over by the shark and not get electrocuted?’ Because I will tell you, he didn’t know the answer. “He said, ‘You know, nobody’s ever asked me that question.’ I said, ‘I think it’s a good question. I think there’s a lot of electric current coming through that water.’ But you know what I’d do if there was a shark or you get electrocuted? I’ll take electrocution every single time. I’m not getting near the shark. So we’re going to end that, we’re going to end it for boats, we’re going to end it for trucks.”It sure would be nice to have a non-partisan, objective test for sufficient brain function and if someone fails, they are ineligible for any office.
There can be no non-partisan test, republicunts pride themselves on denying reality.
The right literally consistently scores lower on every aptitude test they are scored on, so they of course can always claim bias.
What in the fuck is he trying to say? Is this a metaphor? Is he trying to sell rubber dinghies to the navy? Did a shark and/or boat outbid him at the annual McDonald’s auction and this is a veiled threat?
I literally have no idea. I sort of thought it was something against EVs or something. It’s so bizarre.
At this point the Navy is just going to tell him they took the batteries off the ships and do nothing. (Yes this is related to his tour of the new aircraft carrier where he didn’t understand the technology so he tried to order the Navy to rip it out and replace it with the old tech. Which would have effectively scrapped the 10 Billion dollar ship.)
he didn’t understand the technology so he tried to order the Navy to rip it out and replace it with the old tech
“But sir … the masts would prevent planes from taking off and landing.”
They are not only weird, they are perverted creeps who obsess over children’s genitals.
and the wombs of women they’ve never met
