Kamala Harris ‘ready’ to debate JD Vance

[EasternVol]

He's going to fit right in

There is no real J.D. Vance. He's just a poser.
The debate should be a fun filled contest between two hollow power hungry sociopaths.

 

[EasternVol]

And in his own words he also said that those views were wrong, they are no longer his views, and the reasoning for the change is that Trump proved him wrong.

That’s what happens to men in their 30s. They mature. The beliefs they once held often change. Reasonable people understand that. But hey, y’all keep trying that angle. It’s desperation time for the lefties.

Yeah, that's why he changed his tune, sure.

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

And in his own words he also said that those views were wrong, they are no longer his views, and the reasoning for the change is that Trump proved him wrong.

That’s what happens to men in their 30s. They mature. The beliefs they once held often change. Reasonable people understand that. But hey, y’all keep trying that angle. It’s desperation time for the lefties.

Bullshat. Vance publicly changed his tone to survive politically....

 

[McDad]

I've been doing some reading up on him. Found this. He started a charity to help opiod victims, then immediately sold out to big pharma, and used the money to launch his political career.

Vance's anti-drug charity enlisted doctor echoing Big Pharma

When bestselling author JD Vance founded “Our Ohio Renewal” a day after the 2016 presidential election, he promoted the charity as a vehicle for helping solve the scourge of opioid addiction he’d lamented in his memoir, “Hillbilly Elegy.”

apnews.com

J.D. Vance has a Big Pharma problem

The U.S. Senate candidate, who founded an anti-opioid non-profit, has several close ties to Purdue Pharma

www.salon.com

Haven't read that, yet. Appreciate the thoughts on his "issues".

 

[Sea Ray]

Pretty much every Republican has attacked Trump at some point. That question was going to be something that would come up regardless of who he picked. Not really a good answer to such a question, but I doubt it comes up more than maybe once, primarily because Kamala called Biden a racist in a debate. If the media or Dems tried to make a huge talking point of Vance’s criticism of Trump, that is a really easy “forget about this?” for the Republicans.

Actually this can be spun in Trump's favor. It could be used to show that Trump is not a petty grudge holder. He is someone who forgives and forgets

 

[StarRaider]

so the self described marxist does not like JDV... that is good enough for me.

 

[utvolpj]

Actually this can be spun in Trump's favor. It could be used to show that Trump is not a petty grudge holder. He is someone who forgives and forgets

If you bend the knee

 

[OrangeTsar]

There is no real J.D. Vance. He's just a poser.
The debate should be a fun filled contest between two hollow power hungry sociopaths.

Have you read his book? Written way before anyone even knew who he was?

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

And in his own words he also said that those views were wrong, they are no longer his views, and the reasoning for the change is that Trump proved him wrong.

But how did he do that? And what about the droves of people who loved Trump initially and now no longer endorse him or refuse to work with him? They just not loyal enough? What did he prove to them?

 

[dalton_vol]

JD Vance is very schooled and smooth. KH will not clean his clock and she definitely has her hands full and fans fooled.

She's going to talking in more circles than a nascar race.

 

[McDad]

There is no real J.D. Vance. He's just a poser.
The debate should be a fun filled contest between two hollow power hungry sociopaths.

So lather, rinse, repeat?

 

[volinbham]

But how did he do that? And what about the droves of people who loved Trump initially and now no longer endorse him or refuse to work with him? They just not loyal enough? What did he prove to them?

doesn't that prove people can legitimately change their view of him?

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

doesn't that prove people can legitimately change their view of him?

I mean sure, if that's what you take from this

Former Trump officials are among the most vocal opponents of returning him to the White House

As Trump seeks the presidency a third time, he's being shadowed by a chorus of people who served in his administration who have become sharp critics, some offering dire predictions about his return to power.

www.pbs.org

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

I also grill around 4 days a week. Always charcoal and wood in my grill. I make a mean cast iron steak and egg breakfast.

Hank Hill has you in his bullseye.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

Haven't read that, yet. Appreciate the thoughts on his "issues".

This, along with him doing a 180 on where he stood with Trump....kind of seems like a total sellout

 

[volinbham]

I mean sure, if that's what you take from this

Former Trump officials are among the most vocal opponents of returning him to the White House

As Trump seeks the presidency a third time, he's being shadowed by a chorus of people who served in his administration who have become sharp critics, some offering dire predictions about his return to power.

www.pbs.org

I don't see why people can't legitimately change their view of a person after having a working or other close relationship with them. That change could be either more or less positive. You posted examples of people that experienced negative change. There are plenty who went the other way. Human nature.

 

[McDad]

This, along with him doing a 180 on where he stood with Trump....kind of seems like a total sellout

It's hard to get a handle on the sellout aspect. All politicians do it. Biden did it to join Obama. Kamala did it to join Biden. Pence did it to join Trump.

I guess, from their POV, they have a better chance to be a catalyst for good (as they define it) as a VP and the platform it gives them, compared to being out of politics for a cycle or in a lesser known cabinet position.

The tragedy is, and this is big assumption on my part, is that we never are privy to the pols who stick to thier convictions because the likely are signing NDAs to start the vetting process by the candidate's advisors. So we never get to hear those who turned the position down and why they did so.

 

[Vol8188]

I've been doing some reading up on him. Found this. He started a charity to help opiod victims, then immediately sold out to big pharma, and used the money to launch his political career.

Vance's anti-drug charity enlisted doctor echoing Big Pharma

When bestselling author JD Vance founded “Our Ohio Renewal” a day after the 2016 presidential election, he promoted the charity as a vehicle for helping solve the scourge of opioid addiction he’d lamented in his memoir, “Hillbilly Elegy.”

apnews.com

J.D. Vance has a Big Pharma problem

The U.S. Senate candidate, who founded an anti-opioid non-profit, has several close ties to Purdue Pharma

www.salon.com

Those just seem like hit pieces to me. Hiring someone who did studies that were funding by corporations is just another way of saying you hired someone who do studies. The extra qualifier is understood. And unless he owned the law firm in question, the firm representing a pharmaceutical company isn’t anything he could help

Edit: I’ll add this. One of the attacks was that the studies “downplayed the role of overprescribing in the opioid epidemic”. It should be downplayed. We have overprescribing because we have an opioid epidemic, not the other way around

 

[hog88]

This, along with him doing a 180 on where he stood with Trump....kind of seems like a total sellout

Can you name a politician that isn't a total sellout? I can't.

 

[BernardKingGOAT]

Hank Hill has you in his bullseye.

Haven't you heard, Hank told Buck to go get f***ked awhile back

 

[EasternVol]

Have you read his book? Written way before anyone even knew who he was?

I haven't read it, no.

 

[OrangeTsar]

I haven't read it, no.

I don’t know your geographic background; but as a native of a small rural East Tennessee coal town that has fallen into poverty and unemployment; this book rings home to me. It isn’t even really all that political. It does examine the helplessness and poverty cycle that Appalachia and the rust belt have fallen into and why that made Trump so appealing.
Some reviewers at the time called him the „Trump Whisperer“ because he really seemed to get it. His recommendations were for both parties; but unfortunately for the Democrats, they still don’t „get“ Trump and his appeal.
Trump’s actual policies aren’t really all that far right. But a lot of people see him as giving hope. Populism can come from the left Just as it can from the right. But except for Bill Clinton, I can’t think of any prominent Democrat who has really made an extended effort to connect to the people receptive to it.
Not in terms of policy; but in terms of the way he makes people feel hope; Trump is actually closer to FDR than just about anyone else.
Just my two cents from where I come from.

 

[volbeast33]

Those just seem like hit pieces to me. Hiring someone who did studies that were funding by corporations is just another way of saying you hired someone who do studies. The extra qualifier is understood. And unless he owned the law firm in question, the firm representing a pharmaceutical company isn’t anything he could help

Edit: I’ll add this. One of the attacks was that the studies “downplayed the role of overprescribing in the opioid epidemic”. It should be downplayed. We have overprescribing because we have an opioid epidemic, not the other way around

This article was nonsense but overprescribing by some doctors is an issue.

 

[Vol8188]

This article was nonsense but overprescribing by some doctors is an issue.

Doctors prescribe a lot of opiates because people want opiates. The desire for opiates isn’t coming from the doctor but rather from the patient. It’s a backwards way of looking at to problem to believe the issue started with doctors.

That narrative exists because it’s easier to blame your doctor for your problems than admit the truth.