Has a Presidential candidate ever unilaterally dumped/changed their VP pick between nomination and the election? I mean, if Vance decided to step down, Trump could presumably pick someone else, right? But if Vance doesn't, could Trump still remove him from the ticket if he wanted to, or would he be stuck with him?
As most of us don't cover the full range of American law, that's a tough question. Still, we can at least say that changing out Vance would, at some point, get complicated.
Thus:
• No, I don't think it's ever happened before.
• Both Democratic Biden holdouts and Republican Harris critics have suggested Democrats could not replace Biden at the top of the ticket because of time and process constraints; this is not true. Part of the question involves a plot by Ohio Republicans to try to lock Biden off the ballot according to the Democratic convention date. More recently, CNN actually did some journalism and confirmed, by inquiring of the states, that the DNC and RNC nominees will appear on the ballot.
• The complication of replacing Vance is beyond my particular knowledge, but there are at least two questions: Filing deadlines, and regular communications processes. Filing deadlines are filing deadlines; what I don't know is what happens if the RNC, having informed the states, refiles later with a new veep candidate. If it's before the filing deadline, everything should be okay even if the paperwork is mysterious, and probably laborious. If it's after the deadline, well, states' rights can make a mess of things. (In Missouri, a Democratic wife inherited her husband's office; he was elected posthumously and she received the office. That wouldn't necessarily fly in other states, and it just doesn't translate to a fifty-state election.) I don't think we have a clear historical record on replacing a certified veepnom between convention and election.
The situation between Senator Eagleton and Senator McGovern is the closest I can think of. At a certain point it's always going to be unclear whether a VP "resigns" or is forced to.
The situation between Senator Eagleton and Senator McGovern is the closest I can think of. At a certain point it's always going to be unclear whether a VP "resigns" or is forced to.
Actually, that's closer than I was thinking we had. It's probably sufficient to answer the question: It looks pretty straightforward if Vance agrees to step aside.
In truth, though, I'm thinking Trump almost has to stick with him. This wouldn't go like the Democratic transition; the paperwork is probably a pain, there isn't a next-gen superstar waiiting in the wings, but there will also be the embarrassment of withdrawing Sen. Couchhump Monkeynut (R-OH) for being Booger Dawson's mom's old douchebag is the kind of thing that chafes Donald Trump's egotism.
The first chatter came early, and in truth, I just figured it was socmed noise. But it wasn't immediate. I know that because I was following something even more immediate, which was the white supremacist meltdown. Just transcribing the stuff is depressing; it's an awful read. Nick Fuentes↱, for instance:
And, you know, look, I'm not a racist guy, so I'm not saying, ignorantly, "Oh, you have an Indian wife, F.U." I'm saying, what kind of values―What kind of values does a man have to marry somebody that far outside your race, who isn't even a Christian? It says something about your values.
That's the lightweight version. And notice the notaracist pretense; he even said it↱before Vance was known to be the veep pick:
J.D. Vance also has a nonwhite wife, an Indian wife, and a kid named Vivek. All his kids have Indian names. So, it's like, what exactly are we getting here? And that's not a dig at him just because I'm a racist, or something, but it's like, who is this guy, really? Do we really expect that the guy who has an Indian wife and names his kid Vivek is going to support 'white identity'? Like, there's a white genocide going on in the world: White people are being systematically replaced in America and Europe through immigration and, to a much lesser extent, due to intermarrying. This guy has a nonwhite wife and a kid named Vivek. This guy is going to be a defender of white identity? I don't think so. This guy is going to defend American identity? If he does, it's gonna be no better than any of these other
Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) acknowledged — but did not condemn — white supremacist attacks aimed at his wife, Usha Vance, over her Indian descent on Friday.
“Look, I love my wife so much. I love her because she’s who she is,” former President Donald Trump’s running mate told Megyn Kelly on her SiriusXM show.
He continued, “Obviously, she’s not a white person and we’ve been accused — attacked by some white supremacists over that. But I just, I love Usha. She’s such a good mom, she’s such a brilliant lawyer and I’m so proud of her.”
I don't think it came across quite that way and he did say 'love' a couple of times.
What he glaringly didn't do was condemn the asshole who attacked his wife and child - or anyone's wife and child - for being whatever ethnicity they are. What he glaringly didn't do was stand up to the bully or stand up for innocent bystanders in a political struggle. What he glaringly didn't do was pretend to be a man.
For the record, per multiple sources what he said went like this:
“Obviously, she’s not a white person, and we’ve been accused — attacked — by some white supremacists over that.
But I just — I love Usha. She’s such a good mom, she’s such a brilliant lawyer and I’m so proud of her.”
So I'd agree that the issue isn't that he's coming across as racist, but that he's not condemning rascist attacks.
For the record, per multiple sources what he said went like this:
“Obviously, she’s not a white person, and we’ve been accused — attacked — by some white supremacists over that.
But I just — I love Usha. She’s such a good mom, she’s such a brilliant lawyer and I’m so proud of her.”
So I'd agree that the issue isn't that he's coming across as racist, but that he's not condemning rascist attacks.
Vance has supporters?
Well, one, anyway, because he doesn't seem capable of walking unassisted. The way I read this guy is as a kind of Play-dough figure, with no independent personality, molded into whatever his sponsor wants.
That said, the fact that he didn't condemn the racist attacks does make what he said read as though he implicitly accepts the premise that the white supremacist is pushing. Which would seem to make him implicitly racist, right?
The misrepresentation would then be in how he excuses himself from adhering to it in this instance, i.e. not because he considers her "such a good mum" but because he loves her.
That's how I see it, anyway. No issue if you see differently.
Nothing about this guy rings true.
Anyone I can recognize as a fellow human would have been angry. Not making excuses for why he married a non-white person, but mad as hell that some idiot was mocking his family, picking on a child's name, ffs!
That said, the fact that he didn't condemn the racist attacks does make what he said read as though he implicitly accepts the premise that the white supremacist is pushing. Which would seem to make him implicitly racist, right?
The misrepresentation would then be in how he excuses himself from adhering to it in this instance, i.e. not because he considers her "such a good mum" but because he loves her.
That's how I see it, anyway. No issue if you see differently.
No I agree entirely. He is ducking calling out naked racism because the Repubicans don’t want to alienate the racists. But I think it’s important to keep the grounds for objection honest, especially as Trump makes such a habit of propagating falsehoods.
Maybe I should skip Peters and Stockes, because if Fuentes was the lightweight version, then we're going to need more than a trigger warning for people who can't tell the difference.
Anyway, yeah, ¡achtung!
Peters: This all started because J.D. Vance wrote a book about being a hillbilly and was able to position himself as some kind of a champion of the white working class, some guy we're supposed to follow into the future. But in reality, he's a coattail rider, a dick rider, who married a Hindu Indian. People thought that we dodged a bullet not having some kind of dung-eater like Nikki Haley or Vivek Ramalamadingdong on the ticket, but instead, we've got a white guy who's married to an Indian: What the hell is going on, here? Why are we being subverted by Indians?
But guess what? Indians aren't the only ones who've subverted J.D. Vance. He's a massive supporter of Israel. Yep, he embraces the mainline GOP approach. He loves talking about how great AIPAC is, which, by the way, gives him money, and after Trump named him as his VP, a very bizarre video surfaced: J.D. Vance at some kind of a Jewish ceremony where there were a bunch of Jews in full regalia singing a song in his honor before bringing him up on a stage. Take a look.
[video of Hasid singing "When You Believe" (Babyface/Schwartz), at Tzedek Association event; voiceover introduces J.D. Vance]
Vance: Good evening, everybody. Wow! I have so much to say, but first, let me thank Rabbi Margaretten, am I getting that right? This great organization …
[end video segment]
Peters: You got that right. It's the guy in the tiny hat, over there. These guys were like caricatures of the stereotypical Jew. I mean, it was like a Saturday Night Live skit. It's like, "No, here we are, showing all of you who we serve." It's all very strange.
So, anyway, after this pick was announced, right on cue, the corporate media goes into this fake tailspin, claiming that some right-wing, white male, Christian theocracy was about to take over our government, but unfortunately, that's not the case. No, because J.D. Vance is married to a Hindu, who likely eats shit and brushes her teeth with the same. He's beholden to the Zionist political operators that are steamrolling us into World War III, but we're supposed to believe that he's some kind of fire-breathing populist.
Something about that outburst sounds familiar, like a manner of resignation, as if they're saying these things just to have said them, and are already prepared to line up and dutifully vote for Donald Trump. American parents might recognize the furious sulk of a child who already knows he just isn't getting his way. That is, it's more about the satisfaction of saying it. And while it's not necessarily apparent from half a world away↑, the truth is that for Americans this isn't really new or shocking unless one pretends it rare like astatine.
And while the antisemitism might seem incongruous to the part about eating shit, there is a point at which racism is racism; Peters' guest Frankie Stockes didn't fall out of a coconut tree, but does happen to be a nut off the Alex Jones tree. It's a hell of a transcript; again, ¡achtung!
Peters: And then, at the RNC, we have these rituals being performed, where they're praying to fake gods, like a Satanic séance, of sorts.
Stockes: … You know, this entire RNC, so far, has been incredibly bizarre. You know, you're right, they bring out this Indian to do some kind of ritual to this Indian god who, by the way, they're calling the One True God during this ritual. I find it very hard to believe that the likes of J.D. Vance and Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy, that they weren't, you know, encouraging this kind of behavior. And now I'm wondering, at the DNC, you know, they've got to always outdo each other. I'm wondering if Kamala's going to embrace her Indian heritage, and they're going to build an idol to that three-legged goblin-god they have, and they're all going to get down and worship it. I mean, really, this Indian takeover of American politics is extremely bizarre. I think, you know, I got to be honest, here, a lot of people didn't see this coming, but it's happened very, very fast. And it's also, I just want to throw out there, we talk a lot, and rightfully so, about Israeli foreign influence; there is a lot of concern to be had, here, about the ties back to the Old Country of India, up to and including J.D. Vance. You know, the Indians are a very tribalistic people, they have this caste system, the higher castes have fanned out all over the world, and they have what you could call a mother-ship mentality: They're all contributing back to the mother ship, just like the Zionists. It's no wonder that they're such good friends. Every time you go on, actually seeing some Indian worshiping Israel and vice-versa, so they both seem to have this supremacist mentality where they go into other countries and they get involved in politics, and they contribute back to the mother ship. And, you know, Israel, that video is freaky with J.D. Vance and that Jewish ceremony. This is a guy who's only been in Congress, in the Senate, since 2023. He's already taken six-figure checks from the Israel lobby, I mean, he is bought and paid for. He hasn't even had to face a re-election campaign yet, and he's already raking in the Israel shekels. So there's a lot of red flags.
To let it pass or drive the stake to stand and fight; it ought to be a question of how much power you think they have. Vance sounds afraid of them.
• • •
Note for international neighbors: Yes, this manner of stupidity is kind of common. Americans literally have an old character trope called Crazy Uncle, and the point was that even the people in the family who were included in his bigotry—i.e., one-drop nonwhites, women, queers, Catholics, Jews, atheists, &c.—were expected to shut up and take it because we all know he's fucking crazy and shit goes all to hell if you argue with him. Then conservatives went and made those people media stars. But it's true, even Stockes' delusional-grade racist conspiracism is familiar. And there is an important lesson in that: It is said that Trump gave them license and validation, but the other part of that, the history of what was validated, is that people were tired of keeping it to themselves. So, please understand, this is what people have been protecting over the the last forty years of whining about political correctness, and on through "intellectual dark web" and cancel culture↗. Well, this and the misogyny. You know, like the "spirit of Jezebel"↱ "even more ominous than Hillary" because Kamala Harris will "bring a racial component and she's younger".
It's like a certain argument↗ that goes, "Were they all crazy, motivated by racism or sexism, etc., or is there more to it than that?" There are variations↗, like a two-bit poseur pretense about what Trump's election should have taught liberals, or an NYT columnist wagging liberals about the enduring sources of Trump's appeal. It's one thing if people have other reasons, but as an indignant pretense, in 2024, against discussion of the role of supremacism in American history and politics, "the majority has other reasons" is beyond roadworn. Other reasons come and go, but these remain. They've had time to vote against unions and schools, and blame the results on liberals, but these bigotries persist.
And the platitudes must grate on these people's nerves. For decades, politicians have paid lip service to equality, and justice for all. DEI? CRT? Political correctness? What we're seeing come out among Republicans and the right wing is not new in American culture; it's just, this is what it sounds like when it's not carefully sanitized.
And think about the three Republican women in question, here: Harmeet Dhillon is an RNC hand facing backlash from conservatives about her prayer at the Convention; she is also an also-ran, and her 2023 campaign for RNC chair is said to has faced Christianist opposition to her Sikh faith. Nikki Haley is a Christian former governor and ambassador who has expressed her desire to be a Nazi mom. Usha Vance is a Hindu lawyer who happens to be married to Republican vice presidential nominee J.D. Vance. There is history on this point, just ask Michael Steele.
It's kind of like Haley polling well among some Republican blocs. The question is how it will affect certain voters, and whether that would be enough. Those blocs won't get Haley a nomination, for instance. Less clear is whether supremacist hesitation and holdout would be enough to cost Trump an election.
And in that context, it is important to observe that J.D. Vance thinks the supremacists are important and influential enough in Republican politics to acknowledge. It's one thing if the vice presidential nominee's response was awkward, but do not overlook the fact that he responded.
Notes on #394↑ above
@RightWingWatch. "Well, that didn't take long. Christian nationalist Lance Wallnau is already warning that Kamala Harris represents 'the spirit of Jezebel in a way that will be even more ominous than Hillary because she'll bring a racial component and she's younger.'". X. 22 July 2024. X.com. 29 July 2024. https://x.com/RightWingWatch/status/1815392389558669479
That said, the fact that he didn't condemn the racist attacks does make what he said read as though he implicitly accepts the premise that the white supremacist is pushing. Which would seem to make him implicitly racist, right?
The misrepresentation would then be in how he excuses himself from adhering to it in this instance, i.e. not because he considers her "such a good mum" but because he loves her.
Exactly. In that light, I would characterize my rephrasing as equal parts misrepresentation, as well as clarification of his message for some of his supporters who get confused by that kind of talk.
Note for international neighbors: Yes, this manner of stupidity is kind of common. Americans literally have an old character trope called Crazy Uncle, and the point was that even the people in the family who were included in his bigotry—i.e., one-drop nonwhites, women, queers, Catholics, Jews, atheists, &c.—were expected to shut up and take it because we all know he's fucking crazy and shit goes all to hell if you argue with him. Then conservatives went and made those people media stars. But it's true, even Stockes' delusional-grade racist conspiracism is familiar. And there is an important lesson in that: It is said that Trump gave them license and validation, but the other part of that, the history of what was validated, is that people were tired of keeping it to themselves. So, please understand, this is what people have been protecting over the the last forty years of whining about political correctness, and on through "intellectual dark web" and cancel culture↗. Well, this and the misogyny. You know, like the "spirit of Jezebel"↱ "even more ominous than Hillary" because Kamala Harris will "bring a racial component and she's younger".
Really, there are entire cities and towns that are essentially that Crazy Uncle. (I don't know why I'm trying to be generous here by not saying "regions", maybe I'm just in a kindly mood.)
I briefly lived in Richmond, Virginia, back in the late 90s for some crazy reason (something to do with Poe, I think). When you pass through or visit a place you experience things as flukes, perhaps; when you live there you start to contextualize things differently. There was this weekly cultural newspaper for this bougie neighborhood called the Fan--populated almost entirely by doctors and their blonde wives--that was a treasure trove for crazy, racist bullshit. One week a couple of homes had been burgled and some prized jewelry stolen. Some people put up signs on their lawns blaming "gypsies". I couldn't even tell whether or not that was intended as a joke--and would that make it better or worse? For my part, I altered some signs saying "No Dogs Allowed" in various parks to "No God Allowed". I debated over whether to make it plural or not.
Vance has supporters?
Well, one, anyway, because he doesn't seem capable of walking unassisted. The way I read this guy is as a kind of Play-dough figure, with no independent personality, molded into whatever his sponsor wants.
Yes. Vance is bland and rather stupid, so there is no need to fine-tooth comb over everything he says and determine that some bits are potentially racist or deficient in moral outrage. What he really is is a crass political animal who won't condemn any segment that promises votes. The fine-tooth comb routine is part of what drives the fickle voters in the middle away from whichever camp is doing the combing. Watching every word, every syntax choice, every fumble, get parsed just wears out ordinary people. Everyone is somewhat racist - where people differ is in their ability to zoom back from such prejudices in a self-aware way and then defuse those attitudes so they don't harm others. Everyone has paused to wonder about some group that has been defined as some kind of Outsider or Other, especially while they were growing up and impressionable, and those musings are not necessarily representing our best selves. If we're lucky we grow up, meet real people from diverse cultures, and the early prejudices wither and fade. If not, we put on MAGA hats and join a cult that allows us to project all our insecurities and disappointments onto some despised group.
In my case the change was dramatic. I came from a monochromatic society at a young age and was immediately immersed in the public school system of a cosmopolitan city. Every North American child should have that experience. If somebody attacks people of colour, they're attacking my friend Chitra or Selim or Ruby: it's personal.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
