JD Vance - A Gift To Biden

[Twilight Hue]

And he wants to force women to stay with the husbands who physically abuse them, and deny abortions to women who have been raped, because that's good for America -- yeah! Uppity women only weaken the country, taking away from all that macho manliness!

Bah!

That claim is only someone elses report saying that he said it, not that he actually said something like that because Vance is denying it.

I'll put that in the category of believe it or not.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You want Trump to refute he is Hitler? Please these comments are ridiculous and don't need to be responded to. He is not going to gas 6 million people. Jeeze.

You are not being accurate. Vance claimed that Trump was "America's Hitler" and you are quite right. Trump cannot refute that.

 

[Revoltingest]

That claim is only someone elses report saying that he said it, not that he actually said something like that because Vance is denying it.

I'll put that in the category of believe it or not.

There are many reports about it.
Is Vance denying the reports of his remarks?

 

[Twilight Hue]

There are many reports about it.
Is Vance denying the reports of his remarks?

That's the way it comes across to me, but of course you would have to get it from the horse's mouth direct. But people are saying it's being intentionally taken out of context.

J.D. Vance denies supporting abusive marriages after viral comments

Republican U.S. Senate candidate J.D. Vance has been under fire after a video clip surfaced of him speaking about violent marriages, but his team said his words were taken out of context and twisted.

www.news5cleveland.com

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

There are many reports about it.
Is Vance denying the reports of his remarks?

Vance's own experience drives his thinking on that -- remember that his parents divorced. Vance has said (I'm paraphrasing) that divorce may be good for the parents, but it leaves the children unhappy, and for that reason, a woman should abandon her own happiness, stay with her abuser, for the sake of the children. His remark about "shifting spouses like they change underwear" is quite telling about his own bitterness.

Vance made the remarks at an event that took place at Pacifica Christian High School in Southern California. Vance faced backlash after the report came out, but previously said his comments had been misconstrued.

“This is one of the great tricks that I think the sexual revolution pulled on the American populace, which is the idea that like, ‘well, OK, these marriages were fundamentally, you know, they were maybe even violent, but certainly they were unhappy, and so getting rid of them and making it easier for people to shift spouses like they change their underwear, that’s going to make people happier in the long term,'” Vance said, according to the 2022 Vice article.

What he doesn't see to realize -- that somebody like me who lived through it does -- is that abuse of spouse is also very, very bad for children, and is (sadly, but glad I'm gay) passed on to new generations. And forcing couples in such circumstances to stay together is hardly likely to lead to reduce violence and increased harmony!

 

[Revoltingest]

Vance's own experience drives his thinking on that -- remember that his parents divorced. Vance has said (I'm paraphrasing) that divorce may be good for the parents, but it leaves the children unhappy, and for that reason, a woman should abandon her own happiness, stay with her abuser, for the sake of the children. His remark about "shifting spouses like they change underwear" is quite telling about his own bitterness.

I saw that remark too. It doesn't reflect the attitudes
of people I've known who divorced. It was a wrenching
decision & process....not taken likely. His misunderstanding
this bodes poorly for Magas crafting public policy.
It portends more authoritarianism.

Vance made the remarks at an event that took place at Pacifica Christian High School in Southern California. Vance faced backlash after the report came out, but previously said his comments had been misconstrued.

“This is one of the great tricks that I think the sexual revolution pulled on the American populace, which is the idea that like, ‘well, OK, these marriages were fundamentally, you know, they were maybe even violent, but certainly they were unhappy, and so getting rid of them and making it easier for people to shift spouses like they change their underwear, that’s going to make people happier in the long term,'” Vance said, according to the 2022 Vice article.

What he doesn't see to realize -- that somebody like me who lived through it does -- is that abuse of spouse is also very, very bad for children, and is (sadly, but glad I'm gay) passed on to new generations. And forcing couples in such circumstances to stay together is hardly likely to lead to reduce violence and increased harmony!

I wonder if he's really that ignorant because he's
damaged, or if he's just playing to the Maga vote?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I saw that remark too. It doesn't reflect the attitudes
of people I've known who divorced. It was a wrenching
decision process....not taken likely. His misunderstanding
this bodes poorly for Magas crafting public policy.
It portends more authoritarianism.

So does everything else about this Republican party and platform. This party, that used to be against "big government" has changed to one that is now focused on "strong government." That, to me, implies more "control" than "protection."

I wonder if he's really that ignorant because he's
damaged, or if he's just playing to the Maga vote?

I read his book, "Hillbilly Elegy" some years ago, and the damage was clearly evident to me. (You know enough about my early years by now to understand why.) Actually, not only read it, but discussed it in depth with my book club, a group of highly intelligent, successful men in many professions, including legal, medical, and others.

 

[Magic Man]

I agree it is evidence it is just not convincing evidence.

It is convincing evidence, as long as you look at it objectively.

He has been asked this question many times inthe last couple days. He answers it every time.

Of course he has. He had to know as soon as he made that turn that he better have an answer for this question. Again, he's not just going to admit he did it to cynically gain political power. He's obviously going to make something up.

 

[Magic Man]

Here are a couple of quotes:

I think you can make the case with the American people, people who may have been skeptical of the president back in 2016, who can be skeptical now that we've seen the results?,"

I actually think it's a good thing, when you see somebody, you were wrong about them, you ought to admit the mistake and admit that you were wrong,"

I don’t hide from that. I was certainly skeptical of Donald Trump in 2016, But President Trump was a great president and he changed my mind. I think he changed the minds of a lot of Americans because, again, he delivered that peace and prosperity.

“I bought into the media’s lies and distortions. I bought into this idea that somehow he was going to be so different, a terrible threat to democracy. It was a joke.”

Yes I do believe him because I have no good reason to not believe him. If I ever do then I can change my mind.

There is plenty of good reason not to believe him. The things he said about Trump wouldn't have changed based on Trump's presidency. Trump didn't do anything that countered the bad things Vance said about him. In fact, Trump's presidency should have solidified the criticisms Vance had of him.

For instance, take that last one. That's the worst of them. According to him it's a media lie or distortion that Trump would be a terrible threat to democracy. Now, Vance is supporting Trump's big lie. He's fully on board with the insurrection and Trump's attempts to illegally overturn the election.

If you were skeptical of Trump early in his presidency, you'd still be skeptical (to put it mildly) now. Nothing he did would have changed that. If you thought he might be America's Hitler, then his presidency only confirmed that.

This is supremely unconvincing.

 

[Kathryn]

Well, let's be completely honest about everything. Vance was about 31 years old when he made the comment in a text to his former roommate, saying that to him, Trump was either a cynical arse hole like Nixon, or an American Hitler. My gosh, I wouldn't want everything I said when I was 30 or 31 thrown out there.

 

[fantome profane]

Well, let's be completely honest about everything. Vance was about 31 years old when he made the comment in a text to his former roommate, saying that to him, Trump was either a cynical arse hole like Nixon, or an American Hitler. My gosh, I wouldn't want everything I said when I was 30 or 31 thrown out there.

What does being 31 have to do with anything? It is not like he made this comment when he was 13. He was an adult, he was 31, now he is 39.

I am not saying people can't change their minds, but in this case I do not believe it was a sincere change. And his age has nothing to do with it. Can we hold Trump responsible for things he said when he was a young man of only 59? (grab them by the kitty cat). Can we hold Biden responsible for things he said when he was just a youth of 51 when he made that comment about super predators?





(and let me add that I was just a young child of only 54 years when I said "Donald Trump was a convicted felon, and adjudicated rapists, a fraud, and a racist bigoted xenophobic moron". And you can feel free to hold me responsible for that comment)

 

[Magic Man]

Well, let's be completely honest about everything. Vance was about 31 years old when he made the comment in a text to his former roommate, saying that to him, Trump was either a cynical arse hole like Nixon, or an American Hitler. My gosh, I wouldn't want everything I said when I was 30 or 31 thrown out there.

1) 31 is plenty old enough to be held to what you said. If he had been 12 or even 18 or something, then yeah, you still change significantly after that.

2) It was only a matter or 5-6 years between him saying all the negative stuff and fully supporting Trump. It's not like he said that stuff 20 years ago, and things have changed.

3) That one comment was not a public one, but he did have plenty of public ones that said similar things, so it's not like it was a cherry-picked example from his private life.

 

[Kathryn]

1) 31 is plenty old enough to be held to what you said. If he had been 12 or even 18 or something, then yeah, you still change significantly after that.

2) It was only a matter or 5-6 years between him saying all the negative stuff and fully supporting Trump. It's not like he said that stuff 20 years ago, and things have changed.

3) That one comment was not a public one, but he did have plenty of public ones that said similar things, so it's not like it was a cherry-picked example from his private life.

None of his public comments mentioned Hitler from my recollection. Links please. Thanks.

 

[Kathryn]

What does being 31 have to do with anything? It is not like he made this comment when he was 13. He was an adult, he was 31, now he is 39.

I am not saying people can't change their minds, but in this case I do not believe it was a sincere change. And his age has nothing to do with it. Can we hold Trump responsible for things he said when he was a young man of only 59? (grab them by the kitty cat). Can we hold Biden responsible for things he said when he was just a youth of 51 when he made that comment about super predators?





(and let me add that I was just a young child of only 54 years when I said "Donald Trump was a convicted felon, and adjudicated rapists, a fraud, and a racist bigoted xenophobic moron". And you can feel free to hold me responsible for that comment)

Like I said, I wouldn't want to be held responsible for everything I said in private when I was 30 or 31.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I'm under that impression. I think Vance wants to see this country prosperous and strong again the same as Trump , and is likely not very happy with things as they are now and realized the need for America to once again realign with the principles that had made America so appealing and respected in the first place. So yeah, I think he is likely sincere and deserves a chance to prove it and am willing to accept it provisionally.

Did you know the word gullible isn't in the dictionary?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Vance's own experience drives his thinking on that -- remember that his parents divorced. Vance has said (I'm paraphrasing) that divorce may be good for the parents, but it leaves the children unhappy, and for that reason, a woman should abandon her own happiness, stay with her abuser, for the sake of the children. His remark about "shifting spouses like they change underwear" is quite telling about his own bitterness.

Vance made the remarks at an event that took place at Pacifica Christian High School in Southern California. Vance faced backlash after the report came out, but previously said his comments had been misconstrued.

“This is one of the great tricks that I think the sexual revolution pulled on the American populace, which is the idea that like, ‘well, OK, these marriages were fundamentally, you know, they were maybe even violent, but certainly they were unhappy, and so getting rid of them and making it easier for people to shift spouses like they change their underwear, that’s going to make people happier in the long term,'” Vance said, according to the 2022 Vice article.

What he doesn't see to realize -- that somebody like me who lived through it does -- is that abuse of spouse is also very, very bad for children, and is (sadly, but glad I'm gay) passed on to new generations. And forcing couples in such circumstances to stay together is hardly likely to lead to reduce violence and increased harmony!

I wish my parents had split sooner than they did.
Then I might not have had to develop an anxiety disorder from having to listen to them constantly fighting all the time and my mom threatening to leave and take the kids with her. Do people not realize what that teaches their kids about healthy relationships?

 

[Magic Man]

None of his public comments mentioned Hitler from my recollection. Links please. Thanks.

Yes, none of them mentioned Hitler. Links to where I said they did please. Thanks.

 

[Revoltingest]

None of his public comments mentioned Hitler from my recollection. Links please. Thanks.

He does mention Hitler, but it's the "American Hitler", ie, Trump.

Someone had to go there.
It fell to me.

 

[Magic Man]

Like I said, I wouldn't want to be held responsible for everything I said in private when I was 30 or 31.

Neither would I. Of course that's not what's happening here. He said a lot of very negative things about Trump in public. That one private comment was just part of the overall opinion he had no problem with announcing publicly.

 

[Revoltingest]

Neither would I. Of course that's not what's happening here. He said a lot of very negative things about Trump in public. That one private comment was just part of the overall opinion he had no problem with announcing publicly.

I'll tell ya....the effort expended to explain away...to
excuse...to deny what Vance believed about Trump
is predictable, but still fascinating to watch.
Vance was no kid when he said this. 31 years old
is fully adult. Law school graduate too.