612

Republicans Really Wish Trump Hadn’t Picked J.D. Vance (newrepublic.com)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

181 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Some Republicans are starting to seriously regret Donald Trump’s vice presidential nominee, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance.

It’s been only one week since Vance was nominated at the Republican National Convention, and already his own party members are expressing severe doubts about Trump’s pick. The former president’s allies have acknowledged that nominating Vance was the product of Trump’s absolute certainty that he would be able to defeat Joe Biden in November. While Vance wouldn’t do much for swing voters or independents, he would likely shore up support among Trump’s base.

But ever since Biden passed the torch to Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party’s new presumptive nominee, Republicans have begun to sour on Vance.

“The road got a lot harder. He was the only pick that wasn’t the safe pick. And I think everyone has now realized that,” one House Republican told Axios Thursday, under the condition of anonymity.

Another House Republican told Axios that Vance “doesn’t add much.”

(page 2) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago

It's also so fucking funny when Trump turns on someone. Can't wait to see it happen with Vance

[-] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago

I really think the won’t be happy with anyone for too long. That’s the problem with a cult.

[-] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago

Any second-in-command that was actually popular would be a threat to Trump, so that cannot be tolerated. He's got to find an uncharismatic sycophant smart enough to help him purge enemies, yet dumb enough to be incapable of plotting against him himself.

[-] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago

Is it because the couch had an abortion?

[-] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

It's not too late to swap him out. Eric Trump would be a big step up!

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

Really?

Cause "Some Republicans..." = Bill o'-fucking-Reillys move.

"Some say... {Insert whatever the fuck}"

I don't buy it.

Trump: streams child pornography.

Headline: "RNC secures NAMBLA endorsement!"

[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

The former president’s allies have acknowledged that nominating Vance was the product of Trump’s absolute certainty that he would be able to defeat Joe Biden in November.

I don't understand how they thought Vance be better against Biden.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

Guy from the rust belt against a guy who was there before it rusted

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024

612 points (98.0% liked)

politics

18853 readers

4409 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News