More stories

  • in

    JD Vance is the baby of Big Tech and Big Oil. He’s no ‘working-class populist’ | Jan-Werner Müller

    Initially hailed as an inspired choice to inherit the Maga movement, James David Vance has fast proved a liability to the Trump campaign: Democrats are successfully branding him as a creepy manosphere specimen; his stances on abortion, IVF and women without children have rightly made him a focal point for criticizing the right’s obsession with controlling women’s bodies. Then there’s the issue of whether he’s really the man to mansplain Appalachia to the rest of us, given that he grew up in a city in Ohio.But one story about the junior senator continues to be accepted at face value: Vance as champion of a new “right-populism” that puts the working class first. There are no policy proposals that would vindicate that image; what’s more, Vance’s career has been financed by a nefarious combination of rightwing tech bros and the fossil fuel industry: those who have no problem polluting the public sphere with misinformation and disinformation and those profiting from polluting the atmosphere. Both are prime promoters of the libertarianism that “right-populists” supposedly disavow.Vance claims to want to break with corporate donors who care only about cheap labor resulting from a continuous influx of migrants. No doubt the Republican party’s promise to reduce immigration is real, as is the cruel plan for mass deportations – whether it will result in higher wages is anyone’s guess. One thing is sure, though: the other supposedly populist policy – raising tariffs on cheap imports – will make the already worst-off even worse off.Meanwhile, there’s no talk of raising taxes on the wealthy, in particular closing the loopholes that infamously allow hedge fund and private equity managers to have lower tax rates than their secretaries. Instead, Trump promises to reduce the corporate tax rate even further.Vance touts Hungarian strongman Viktor Orbán as his model; the latter stands for an unembarrassed use of state power to enforce public morality (no same-sex marriages in Hungary!) and industrial policies in the national interest. But Orbán has also introduced a flat-rate personal income tax and the world’s highest value-added tax – which of course disproportionately falls on poorer Hungarians. If this is indeed the model, America’s billionaires will have no problem with Vance’s supposed “working-class conservatism”.Vance talks the talk of extracting the American right from libertarianism; yet, if one follows the money, a different picture is revealed. His career has been financed by reactionary venture capitalists such as Peter Thiel as well as the fossil fuel industry, who share a desire for deregulation wrapped in propaganda about “American freedom”. Vance himself has worked as a venture capitalist and is now part of a Republican ticket committed to abolishing regulations of social media, cryptocurrency, and AI. The party’s platform calls for a repeal of Biden’s executive order on responsible and, not least, worker-friendly development of AI.The irony is that the great champions of freedom and unleashing tech power are at the same time advocates of monopoly power: they really don’t like Biden’s robust anti-trust approach. They also often crucially depend on state contracts. No doubt Palantir, Thiel’s “big data analytics” firm whose central promise is effective surveillance, will want to be helpful with mass deportations.It might not just be a crude desire for taxpayer dollars which animates Silicon Valley’s new Trumpists, though; it can also be a philosophical vision. That doesn’t make things any better. Venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, newly converted to Trumpism, authored the Techno-Optimist Manifesto, which proclaims a belief in “accelerationism – the conscious and deliberate propulsion of technological development”. What many portentous pronouncements on human evolution boil down to is a simple demand: no restraints on developing AI, as well as an all-out commitment to nuclear power and a weird celebration of population growth as, according to Andreessen, “our planet is dramatically underpopulated”.Without naming its source, Andreessen quotes the manifesto of the Futurists – the artists who at the beginning of the 20th century worshiped technology as well as a kind of cleansing of the word through war – and who eventually became major promoters of Mussolini’s Fascism. Declaring himself a conqueror, not a victim, Andreesen rails against “a mass demoralization campaign … against technology and against life”, which supposedly has been going on for “six decades” “under varying names like … ‘sustainability’ … and … ‘social responsibility’”.The representatives of nothing less than life itself want to step on the pedal – and ask us to simply to trust a self-appointed elite of accelerationist visionaries.Vance might be the first champion of accelerationism in the White House – but he’s also an old-fashioned fossil fuel lobbyist who has weaponized climate in rightwing culture war. He’s associated renewables and electric vehicles with China – his (unsuccessful) Drive America Act suggested that buying gas and diesel cars is the only way of being a good patriot. Passively receiving wind and sunshine is also obviously not for real men; drilling makes for what scholars have called “petromasculinity”.Vance is all at once a nationalistic natalist (“breed, baby, breed!” for the nation), a promoter of fossil fuel industries (“drill, baby, drill!”), and a conduit of accelerationism (“break things, baby, break things!”). Given how unpopular he’s proven in polls, it does not seem like this is a vision for which Americans care. It’s also not the break with libertarianism that pundits praising the Republicans’ supposed turn to workers think it is. But there’s a hell of a lot of money backing it.

    Jan-Werner Müller is a professor of politics at Princeton University and a Guardian US columnist More

  • in

    ‘Cat ladies’ come together to show support for Kamala Harris

    A group of pet lovers and self-described “cat ladies” came together for the latest in a series of Zoom calls in support of Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign. The Tuesday evening call was hosted by Christine Pelosi, a political consultant and the daughter of Nancy Pelosi, and Nikki Fried, the chair of the Florida Democratic party.The call was not organized around racial and ethnic identity, but as a rebuff to comments made in 2021 by JD Vance, Donald Trump’s running mate, who told the then Fox News host Tucker Carlson that the US was being run by Democrats, corporate oligarchs and “a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made, and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable, too”.Tuesday’s meeting began with a slideshow of pet pictures that played over Dancing Queen by Abba. Nancy Pelosi, a surprise guest, bopped along to the tune before telling the audience that the purpose of the gathering was to show support for women’s freedom to “love how they wanna love, and live how they wanna live”.“When JD Vance couched his opinion on our freedom, we decided that the cat ladies are striking back,” Pelosi said. “He didn’t realize what an opportunity he was giving us, and what he would unleash.”The digital conference was organized by a group called Pet Lovers for Kamala. Originally, the group was focused on cat owners in particular, but Christine Pelosi said they found solidarity among dog owners, so they formed an inclusive group that includes owners of all animals.That included Donna Brazile, a former chair of the Democratic National Committee, and Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois congresswoman. Both appeared with their dogs.Christine Pelosi and the call’s other organizers gave tips for how to engage people via social media posts, phone and text banks, and by volunteering on behalf of Harris. Fried, who also served as Florida’s commissioner of agriculture from 2019 to 2023, said Harris winning was the only thing stopping the rest of the US going the way of her home state.“I had to sit next to Ron DeSantis for four straight years and see up close and personal the strangeness of Ron DeSantis,” Fried said. “We have been living under Project 2025. We have been the lab rats for the Heritage Foundation.”The Tuesday call also follows several other Zoom rallies put on by affinity groups to raise money for the presumptive Democratic nominee.Within 24 hours of Joe Biden announcing he was ending his campaign, nearly 100,000 Black people logged on to Zoom calls with the groups Win with Black Women and Win with Black Men in support of Harris’s campaign.Last week, Shannon Watts, best known for founding the gun violence prevention group Moms Demand Action, corralled more than 160,000 white women, and on Monday, a White Dudes for Harris call attracted more than 190,000 people and raised $4m for the vice-president’s campaign.A virtual meeting of Latino voters is slated for Wednesday and will be hosted by comedian George Lopez. More

  • in

    JD Vance writes glowing foreword to Project 2025 leader’s upcoming book

    JD Vance endorses the ideas of Kevin Roberts, leader of Project 2025, as a “fundamentally Christian view of culture and economics” and a “surprising – even jarring” path forward for conservatives, the Republican vice-presidential nominee writes in the foreword of Roberts’ upcoming book.The foreword was obtained and published in full by the New Republic on Tuesday. Roberts’ book is out in September. Its title was watered down recently to remove references to “burning down” Washington.In the foreword, Vance finds parallels between his upbringing and that of Roberts, and between their visions for what the US needs. Both grew up in poor families in parts of the country “largely ignored by America’s elites”, with Roberts in Louisiana and Vance in Ohio and Kentucky. They’re both Catholic, with Vance as a convert in his adult life. Both had grandparents who played big roles in their upbringing.Now both are in DC, with Roberts “just a few steps” from Vance’s office.Vance praises Roberts for using his perch as the president of the Heritage Foundation, a rightwing DC thinktank, to advance a more radical conservative vision rather than resting on the foundation’s laurels.“The Heritage Foundation isn’t some random outpost on Capitol Hill; it is and has been the most influential engine of ideas for Republicans from Ronald Reagan to Donald Trump,” Vance writes. “Yet it is Heritage’s power and influence that makes it easy to avoid risks. Roberts could collect a nice salary, write decent books, and tell donors what they want to hear. But Roberts believes doing the same old thing could lead to the ruin of our nation.”The Trump campaign has tried to distance the former president from Project 2025, a conservative roadmap for a second Trump term that includes policy ideas unpopular with the voters Trump needs to win. But Vance’s ties to Roberts, like the foreword, make it harder for Trump to make the case he doesn’t know what the project is.In the hours before the foreword was published by news outlets, Project 2025’s director, Paul Dans, said he was stepping down from his role and that some of the project’s work was winding down, though it’s not clear what that means. The project consists largely of a 900-plus-page policy manifesto and an effort to find potential staffers for a second Trump term. Roberts said the plan to create a “personnel apparatus” for all levels of government would continue.Roberts has faced scrutiny in recent weeks for comments that the US is “in the process of the second American revolution, which will remain bloodless, if the left allows it to be”. His ties to a radical part of the Catholic church, Opus Dei, and belief that birth control should be outlawed were also revealed by the Guardian.Vance has previously said Roberts “is somebody I rely on a lot who has very good advice, very good political instincts”, he told news outlet Notus in January. He said that Heritage, under Roberts, went from a “relatively vanilla” thinktank to one willing to participate in the fights and debates on the right about where the party should head.On two subjects in particular, Vance praises the way Roberts lays out the stakes and his goals: reining in large tech companies and focusing on a Christian view of the family.He notes that Roberts argues the US founders would not have envisioned the way companies like Apple or Google would amass power to “censor speech, influence elections, and work seamlessly with intelligence services and other federal bureaucrats”, saying this “deserves the scrutiny of the right, not its support”.And Vance agrees with the way Roberts recognizes that “cultural norms and attitudes matter”.“We should encourage our kids to get married and have kids,” Vance writes. “We should teach them that marriage isn’t just a contract, but a sacred – and to the extent possible, lifelong – union. We should discourage them from behaviors that threaten the stability of their families.”This belief in the family also means that conservatives need to ensure that families aren’t just for people with wealth, which calls for creating better jobs and listening to young people when they say they can’t afford homes or families, he writes.“Roberts is articulating a fundamentally Christian view of culture and economics: recognizing that virtue and material progress go hand in hand,” Vance writes.In order to create the America Roberts and Vance envision, conservatives need to go on offense – not just remove policies they don’t like, but rebuild the country in what Roberts has referred to as a “second American Revolution”.“The old conservative movement argued if you just got government out of the way, natural forces would resolve problems – we are no longer in this situation and must take a different approach,” Vance writes. “As Kevin Roberts writes, ‘It’s fine to take a laissez-faire approach when you are in the safety of the sunshine. But when the twilight descends and you hear the wolves, you’ve got to circle the wagons and load the muskets.’“We are now all realizing that it’s time to circle the wagons and load the muskets. In the fights that lay [sic] ahead, these ideas are an essential weapon.” More

  • in

    Kamala Harris and Donald Trump neck and neck in new poll – live

    Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are neck and neck in the presidential race, according to a new Reuters and Ipsos poll.The poll, which was completed on Sunday, showed that the vice-president was supported by 43% of registered voters while the former president was supported by 42%.Last week, a Reuters and Ipsos poll showed that Harris was leading by 44% to Trump’s 42%.Reuters and Ipsos’s latest poll was conducted among 1,025 adults, including 876 registered voters, from 26 to 28 July.Kamala Harris will announce her vice-presidential pick as early as Monday before embarking on a multi-state battleground tour with her new running mate later in the week, two sources familiar with the planning said on Tuesday, Reuters reports.The high-stakes decision on who will run with the current vice-president as the wingman on her presidential ticket has taken center stage since she became the Democratic frontrunner for the 5 November election.Kamala Harris is expected to announce who will be her running mate in her campaign for president as early as Monday, the Reuters news wire is reporting this evening, as an exclusive, citing sources but as yet giving no more detail.This echoes what Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of Michigan, said yesterday, that Harris would choose and announce “in the next six, seven days”, as we blogged earlier.But anything that echoes or strengthens that prediction is fascinating, so we’ll watch closely.Harris is the presumptive Democratic nominee for president in this election, after Joe Biden withdrew from his re-election campaign nine days ago and anointed Harris as his chosen successor at the top of the ticket.At this rate, she can expect to be officially voted in as the nominee at the party’s national convention next month, in Chicago.Kamala Harris will not attend the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) conference in Chicago, according to a source familiar with her schedule, citing logistical challenges getting to Chicago days after launching her campaign.The vice-president is heading to Houston this week to attend the funeral of the late Texas congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee as well as conducting a rapid search for her running mate.The source said Harris’s campaign offered to participate in a virtual fireside chat, or to host an in-person fireside chat with Harris at a later date, but the request was denied. The source said Harris’s team will continue to work toward a possible solution with the NABJ board.On the sidelines of the centrist WelcomeFest in Washington DC, Will Rollins, the Democratic nominee in a competitive California House district, said Republicans would have a “tricky” time trying to paint Kamala Harris as “dangerously liberal”.“Somebody who goes into law enforcement is not a leftwing ideologue,” said Rollins, a former prosecutor. Already he said she was having a positive impact on down-ballot races. His campaign alone raised a six-figure sum in the 48 hours after her ascent, he said.Rollins noted that when Harris came up in California politics, she was criticized by activists as too conservative, despite the image Republicans are portraying of her as far-left.“She in fact was branded as much too conservative for San Francisco. So I think as voters actually learned more about her actual record it’s going to work well for us,” he said.To underline the point, Rollins said he first met Harris when she was the state’s attorney general at an event with the then Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, whom he worked for at the time.“That kind of proves or disproves their attempt to paint her as an extremist. Here you have this Democratic statewide attorney general, who was working with a Republican governor in California at the time,” he said. “I actually think that’s one of the more underreported parts of her background, what she was able to do across party lines.”He also weighed in on who Harris might choose as her running mate. His choice was for fellow millennial, transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg, who he called an “incredible communicator”.Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are neck and neck in the presidential race, according to a new Reuters and Ipsos poll.The poll, which was completed on Sunday, showed that the vice-president was supported by 43% of registered voters while the former president was supported by 42%.Last week, a Reuters and Ipsos poll showed that Harris was leading by 44% to Trump’s 42%.Reuters and Ipsos’s latest poll was conducted among 1,025 adults, including 876 registered voters, from 26 to 28 July.The departure of Paul Dans as the leader of Project 2025 could indicate the project’s work is winding down or at least will not be taking such a public role in the lead-up to the November election, though the policy ideas outlined in its extensive conservative roadmap remain public.Dans, a Donald Trump loyalist, worked in personnel-related roles in the first Trump administration, including as chief of staff at the office of personnel management.Although Kevin Roberts, the president of Heritage Foundation, claimed the change was always intended and followed a set timeline, the move underscores the unpopularity of Project 2025 for Trump, who has for weeks attempted to distance himself from it.Earlier this month, Trump claimed to “know nothing about Project 2025” and have “no idea who is behind it”. The disavowal from Trump came after Roberts said:
    We are in the process of the second American revolution, which will remain bloodless, if the left allows it to be.
    At a recent rally in Michigan, Trump quipped about the project: “I don’t know what the hell it is” and “they’re seriously extreme.” But the project includes many former Trump administration officials and its aims often align with Trump’s policy ideas, albeit with far more detail.Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, said he has “total confidence” in Kamala Harris’s running mate choice.Asked whether he would support Mark Kelly, the Arizona senator, as Harris’s running mate, Schumer said:
    I have total confidence that Vice President Harris will choose a great vice-presidential candidate.
    Asked whether he was concerned about the prospect of a special election in Arizona, CNN reports that Schumer replied:
    I have complete faith in Vice President Harris’ choice.
    Not even a day after audio of JD Vance telling donors that Kamala Harris was a threat and a “sucker punch” was leaked to the Washington Post, Vance continued to make headlines on Tuesday, as a previously unseen video of Vance was published by the Harris 2024 campaign.In the video, Vance can be seen telling an interviewer that not having “kids in your life” makes “people more sociopathic” and makes the US a little bit “less mentally stable”.This comes as Vance continues to face backlash over comments he made in 2021 that recently resurfaced where he criticized the vice-president and other Democrats as “a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives”.On Monday evening, Donald Trump sat down with Laura Ingraham of Fox News and defended Vance’s comments, telling the host that his vice-presidential candidate was simply trying to show how much he values family life.Republican vice-presidential candidate, JD Vance, made headlines again on Monday evening, after an audio recording of Vance speaking privately to donors on Saturday about Kamala Harris was leaked to the Washington Post.Vance reporedtly told donors that Harris was a threat and “a bit of a political sucker punch” to the Trump Vance campaign.Vance also reportedly said:
    The bad news is that Kamala Harris does not have the same baggage as Joe Biden, because whatever we might have to say, Kamala is a lot younger. And Kamala Harris is obviously not struggling in the same ways that Joe Biden did.
    The comments contradict Donald Trump’s own statements on Harris since Biden withdrew from the race, as he has told reporters that he did not think switching out Biden for Harris “would make much difference”, adding: “I would define her in a very similar [way] that I define him.”Even Vance himself has told reporters that there was in effect no difference in running against Biden versus Harris.The Trump campaign has responded to the news of Project 2025 director Paul Dans’ departure. In a statement, it said:
    President Trump’s campaign has been very clear for over a year that Project 2025 had nothing to do with the campaign, did not speak for the campaign, and should not be associated with the campaign or the President in any way.
    Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should serve as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign — it will not end well for you.
    The work of Project 2025 will continue despite its director, Paul Dans, stepping down from his role, Politico reported, citing a source.The report adds that the source said “the goal of Project 2025 was always to have their work done by the time of the Republican National Convention which ended in late July”.Here’s more on the news that Paul Dans, the director of Project 2025, has stepped down from his role at the Heritage Foundation.Kevin Roberts, the president of the conservative thinktank, has confirmed that Dans is leaving his post.Dans “built the project from scratch and bravely led this endeavor over the past two years” but is now “moving up to the front where the fight remains”, Roberts said in a statement.
    Under Paul Dans’ leadership, Project 2025 has completed exactly what it set out to do: bringing together over 110 leading conservative organizations to create a unified conservative vision, motivated to devolve power from the unelected administrative state, and returning it to the people.
    Dans informed staff at the thinktank this week of his decision to step down, the Wall Street Journal reported. More

  • in

    ‘Like a diary – only far more masculine’: what JD Vance’s blogs reveal about him | Arwa Mahdawi

    Like many an elder millennial, JD Vance once had a blog. Two, actually. The lawyer turned writer turned senator turned venture capitalist turned Donald Trump’s running mate launched his first blog during his 2005 deployment to Iraq. It was called The Ruminations of JD Hamel, because that was the name he was ruminating under at the time. Vance has gone by a few names. He has also gone through a hell of a lot of political opinions.His second blog, called The Hillbilly Elite, was launched in 2010, when he was a 26-year-old at Yale Law School. It was meant to help him parse his feelings about being an “Appalachian white boy … training at the world’s premier center for elites”. When I say “feelings”, I don’t mean silly little girly feelings. This was serious stuff. “So it’s like a diary,” his first entry explained, “only far more masculine.”Vance may soon become one of the most powerful people in the world, so there is widespread interest in figuring out exactly who he is and what, if anything, he truly believes. His handful of blog posts have been picked through for clues. Do they tell us anything? Well, they certainly suggest that the man who has gone viral for railing against “childless cat ladies” has always had weird views about gender. In a 2005 post about leaving his family to go to Iraq, for example, Vance wrote the following: “Yesterday was incredibly emotional for me. I honestly can say that I felt more like a female than I think I ever have or will.” Females, eh? They are always so darn emotional!Despite him being so tough and masculine, you have to wonder if Vance may be feeling a tad emotional at the moment. Minnesota’s Democratic governor, Tim Walz, has called the senator a weirdo and a bunch of his party colleagues have gleefully followed suit. His debut as Trump’s running mate has been a disaster and polls suggest nobody really likes him. His own party is second-guessing him and there have even been rumours Trump might dump Vance in favour of Nikki Haley. If politics is a bust, perhaps he can start blogging again. More

  • in

    Kamala Harris is the worst nightmare of America’s far right | Robert Reich

    When Joe Biden stepped down in support of Kamala Harris, he didn’t just pass the torch to another generation. He passed it from old white men to America’s future.Consider that women now compose a remarkable 60% of college undergraduates. And that by 2050, it’s estimated that America will consist mostly of people of color – 30% more Black people than today, 60% more Latinos and twice the number of Asian Americans.The power shift has already started.Many of the people who have demanded accountability from Trump constitute a Trump nightmare of strong and able women, including several of color – Letitia James and Fani Willis – along with E Jean Carroll and her lawyer Roberta Kaplan, Liz Cheney and Nancy Pelosi.And now, Kamala Harris.In naming JD Vance as his vice-presidential candidate, Trump feinted a torch pass – but backwards. Vance’s white male belongs in the early 20th century.During Vance’s bid for the Senate in Ohio in 2021, he called Democrats “a bunch of childless cat ladies”, offering as examples Kamala Harris, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.“How does it make any sense that we’ve turned our country over to people who don’t really have a direct stake in it?” Vance asked, suggesting the only way to have a “direct stake” is by giving birth.Even before Vance said this, Harris was stepmother to two teenagers. Soon after, Buttigieg and his husband adopted infant twins.By this logic, no American male – including Vance and Trump – can have a “direct stake” in America.Trump himself – dog-whistling racist; alleged groper, fondler, and sexual harasser; and adjudicated rapist – is hardly respectful of women, especially women of color.Of Harris, he claimed: “They’re saying she isn’t qualified because she wasn’t born in this country.” (Harris was born in California.)Of Willis, the Fulton county district attorney, he charged – also without evidence – that “she ended up having an affair with the head of the gang or a gang member”.Trump has repeatedly denigrated women of color as “angry” or “nasty”.And he views female human beings as almost alien creatures. “There’s nothing I love more than women,” he has said, “but they’re really a lot different than portrayed. They are far worse than men, far more aggressive, and boy, can they be smart!” And, of course, his infamous: “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.”Trump misogyny has infected the entire Maga Republican party, whose recent convention was a celebration of testosterone – featuring the wrestling champ Hulk Hogan shouting: “Let me tell you something, brother … Trump is the toughest of them all, a gladiator!”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTo remind you, Hogan was the protagonist in a sex-tape video scandal. Hogan’s lawsuit over the circulation of the video, which put Gawker Media out of business, was underwritten by the tech billionaire Peter Thiel – the same man who gave JD Vance a lucrative venture-capital job, funded Vance’s senatorial campaign and introduced Vance to Trump.Other pop cultural “tough guy” icons at the Republican convention similarly attested to Trump’s virility. The conservative rocker/rapper Kid Rock performed his song American Badass.Instead of being introduced by his spouse, as have most candidates accepting their party’s nomination, Trump was introduced by Dana White, CEO of Ultimate Fighting Championship – known for its machismo culture and sanctioned violence.Trump, Vance, and their Maga allies are misogynists who want to control women by preventing them from controlling their own bodies – forcing them to have children. Vance is against abortion even in cases of rape or incest.Trump’s Project 2025 “Mandate for Leadership” chillingly recommends that the Department of Health and Human Services “ensure that every state reports exactly how many abortions take place within its borders, at what gestational age of the child, for what reason, the mother’s state of residence, and by what method”.What’s the underlying goal here? The same as in Margaret Atwood’s Handmaid’s Tale – authoritarian fascism organized around male dominance.In this worldview, anything that challenges the traditional male roles of protector, provider and controller of the family threatens the social order. Strong women and LGBTQ+ people also weaken the heroic male warrior. Brutality, force and violence strengthen him.In their eyes, Kamala Harris could not pose more of a threat.

    Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His newest book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com More

  • in

    The Republican party’s obsession with families has taken a fanatical turn | Moira Donegan

    “It’s possible,” writes Jessica Winter in the New Yorker, “that if JD Vance had his way, citizenship in the United States would be conferred not solely by birthright but by marriage and children.” This is no exaggeration. In a now viral 2021 clip, JD Vance said: “Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of those children. When you go to the polls in this country as a parent, you should have more power – you should have more of an ability to speak your voice in our democratic republic – than people who don’t have kids. Let’s face the consequences and the reality: If you don’t have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn’t get nearly the same voice.”This position now represents large swaths of the Republican party, which has taken on an angry and aggressively prescriptive approach to family life.If you’re a woman in America, Republicans want you to be a mother whether you care to or not. They want you to risk your health to give them more babies. Then, when those babies get bigger, they want to make sure that those children’s fathers – or, excuse me, “parents” – have a near-total control over both them and you.They don’t want you to be able to get a divorce if your marriage turns unhappy or even abusive. They don’t want your daughter to be able to get birth control if her father doesn’t approve of it; they don’t want your other daughter to be able to get the hormone treatment she needs to thrive as her truest self. They want to inspect your kids’ genitals before they let them play on the high school softball team. They want to ban books, and decide what your kids can and can’t read.They want to bar the medical treatments that allow you to plan your family and have children on your own terms – things like egg freezing and IVF. They want to make you have your children young, and they want to stigmatize those of us women who pursue our own careers, interests and ambitions instead of popping out as many children as they deem appropriate.If you say no – if you resist their prescription for marriage, motherhood and perpetual feminine self-sacrifice – they want to let you know, in sneeringly condescending terms, that you’re “childless cat ladies”, that you’re not as good as them, that step-parents are not real parents, blended families are not real families, that women who don’t have children are disgusting, worthless and deserving of contempt. If you say no, they want to denigrate you in public, punish you financially, dilute your vote and lessen your citizenship.As the 2024 presidential election heats up following Trump’s selection of JD Vance as his running mate and Kamala Harris’s emergence as the new Democratic standard-bearer, it is becoming clear that much of the stakes of the November contest will revolve around questions of gender – and specifically, questions of family. And the view of the family that is emerging from the Republicans is a dark one indeed.Because the version of “family” that the Republicans are putting forward is one that can only look a very particular way. In their eyes, family is a compulsory relation of domination, an institution in which marriage and parenthood function to grant men near-total private control over women and children. Women, meanwhile, face a grim fate in the Republicans’ preferred vision of family: they are forced into motherhood, trapped into marriage, and punished for resistance.It’s not just that Vance, the VP pick and heir presumptive to the post-Trump Republican party, has made repeated, creepy remarks disparaging childless women and suggesting that adults without children should pay higher taxes and receive fewer votes. It’s that Vance’s obsessive, invasive and prurient investment in other people’s sexual and reproductive lives is the logical conclusion of the Republican party’s gender politics.Vance’s belief that women must be either compelled into childbirth or denied full citizenship is obviously of a piece with his party’s ambition to impose a national abortion ban. But it also flows from their opposition to no-fault divorce rights; their insistence that teens must not be able to access sexual, reproductive or transition-related healthcare without the approval of their parents; their rejection of IVF, diversity initiatives, and anti-discrimination protections; and their opposition to myriad other public policy initiatives that have helped advance women’s health, protect their safety, and allow them full access to work, education and the public sphere.The Republican plan, in short, is to sabotage or revoke any cultural or policy change that allows women to live as men’s equals. They instead aim to reshape policy, culture and the law to keep women in the home, dependent, without control over their own bodies and at the mercy of men.They aim, that is, to advance so-called “family values” in which birth is mandatory, marriage is inescapable, children are property rather than persons with rights of their own, and men are in charge. There’s a word for this dark vision of a world in which the private sphere is wholly controlled by husbands and fathers. That word is “patriarchy”.But the creepy and unsubtle patriarchal vision of gender and the family that is being advanced by the Trump-Vance Republican party may also present an opportunity for Harris and the Democrats to reclaim the mantle of “family”, and to redefine it for a better future. Rather than a compulsory, inescapable and unequal institution based on sexist domination, a “family” might instead be an alliance of equality, mutuality and care – one in which sovereign individuals can choose one another, and come together in an effort to love one another, respect one another, and help one another to thrive.These are, after all, the kinds of families that many Americans find themselves inhabiting: ones in which romantic partners might be gay or straight, married or not, but view themselves as equal partners; ones in which ties of blood, marriage, love, history and affinity all blend together in layers of connection and mutuality, ones in which children are wholly voluntary, chosen and loved, and in which women are sovereigns over their own bodies and lives, whose ambitions in the public world are neither impeded nor resented in the private one.These non-hierarchical, non-domineering, voluntary families can be encouraged through policy: through free, safe and legal abortion access, through free childcare, through paid family leave, affordable healthcare, high-quality care for seniors, insurance coverage for assisted reproductive technology, access to the full range of healthcare services for children and teens, and a thriving public school system. Such investments would help the sorts of families that most people want to build: ones that honor the dignity and worth of everyone in them.

    Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

  • in

    From rising star to potential liability: how JD Vance’s fortunes have turned

    He was supposed to be his master’s mini-me, his elevation as Republican vice-presidential nominee hailed as a virile celebration of Donald Trump’s near-total conquest of the GOP.Now – days after receiving a rapturous response at the Republican national convention in Milwaukee – JD Vance is being lamented within party circles as a potentially fatal liability in Trump’s quest to recapture the White House.Affirming the maxim – coined by the late British Labour prime minister, Harold Wilson – that a week is a long time in politics, Vance’s poll ratings have been dragged to record lows by a combination of his own past statements resurfacing on social media and embarrassingly awkward performances on the campaign trail.The danger that Vance’s baggage will drag Trump down with him may already be giving the former president buyer’s remorse, commentators believe.Far from being a yin-and-yang pick chosen to counter-balance the senior candidate’s weaknesses, Vance – the first-term senator for Ohio, a state already firmly in the Republican camp – was selected because he faithfully reflected the ideological gut instincts of Trump, despite having previously called him “America’s Hitler” and “cultural opioid”.But there is ample reason to believe the choice was driven by a euphoric belief on Trump’s part that November’s election against an ageing, ailing and unpopular Joe Biden would be a shoo-in.With Biden’s withdrawal – and almost certain replacement as Democratic nominee by the vice-president, Kamala Harris – a very different electoral landscape looms. And Vance, with his hardline anti-abortion stance and sneering contempt for childless women, may be entirely the wrong partner to help Trump traverse it.“Most striking thing I heard from Trump allies yesterday was the second-guessing of JD Vance – a selection, they acknowledged, that was borne of cockiness, meant to run up margins with the base in a blowout rather than persuade swing voters in a nail-biter,” wrote Tim Alberta, a journalist with the Atlantic who has covered the Trump campaign, the day after Biden’s withdrawal last Sunday.  Putting Vance on the ticket defies the basic laws of vice-presidential picks, experienced pollsters say.“The first rule of choosing a running mate is to do no harm, because there’s very little gain that you will get from a running mate, but there’s a lot of harm that can be done,” said Patrick Murray, director of the polling institute at Monmouth University. “In effect, the JD Vance pick may be shaping up to possibly be that kind of harmful pick.“He helps to focus much more on the negative aspects of Trump that turned voters off.“One of the things that gets overstated by journalists is the appeal of a running mate to a bloc of voters – that you think, for example, of the JD Vance idea that he’s going to appeal to white working-class voters outside of his home state of Ohio. That never happens … because voters are looking at the top of the ticket for that kind of message. What it does say is what kind of balance you’re going to bring to your office, what kind of strengths you’re looking for.”What those might be have been scrutinised by a nascent Harris campaign eager to turn the spotlight on the very issues Trump wants to neutralise – namely, abortion and women’s rights, and the threat to general freedoms believed to be represented by Project 2025, a radical blueprint drawn up by the Heritage Foundation, a rightwing thinktank.Exhibit A on Vance is a 2021 interview with then Fox News host Tucker Carlson in which he derided women without children as “childless cat ladies who are miserable in their own lives” – a designation he accorded to Harris and Pete Buttigieg, the transportation secretary. Their supposedly childless status means they have a lesser stake in America’s wellbeing, he added.In fact, Harris is mother to two stepchildren, while Buttigieg, who is gay and married, has two adopted children.Critics say the comments betray a retrograde misogyny and a zealous intent to pursue an abortion ban, which Vance and other rightwing Republicans favour, despite Trump’s insistence that it should be left to the states.Perhaps equally significant for the celebrity-sensitive Trump is a rare political rebuke the comments drew from the actor Jennifer Aniston, who is childless but has publicised her unsuccessful attempts to become pregnant through in vitro fertilisation (IVF), a procedure Vance opposed in a recent Senate vote.Also inconvenient for Trump is Vance’s link to Project 2025, the controversial conservative governing model the former president has lately tried to disavow as he seeks to build electoral support. That attempt has been undermined by Vance having written a foreword for an upcoming book by the project’s author, Kevin Roberts.On the campaign trail, the Yale-educated Vance – despite being heralded, partly thanks to his acclaimed 2016 memoir, Hillbilly Elegy, for a supposedly umbilical connection to white working-classes voters – has proven to be no rabble-rousing orator of the Trump school.An incident at a rally in Ohio last Sunday resembled an excruciating study in social gaucheness, when Vance suggested Democrats might think drinking Diet Mountain Dew, a popular soft drink, was racist, before laughing at his own lame joke; as the audience remained largely silent, Vance laughed awkwardly, saying: “I love you guys.”In another sign that his assent to running-mate status is going less than smoothly, Vance has been beset by bizarre rumours that he once had sex with a couch in his youth, an outlandish suggestion that even prompted an Associated Press fact-check.The unverified claim may pale in comparison with evidence – accepted as fact in court – that Trump had sex with an adult porn actor, leading to his conviction on 34 felony charges of document falsification to cover up hush-money payments. But its very presence illustrates and adds to the difficulty Vance is having gaining traction as a positive addition to the Republican ticket.Exposure to the spotlight seems to be damaging Vance’s poll ratings.“JD Vance is making history as the least liked VP nominee (non-incumbent) since 1980 following his/her party’s convention,” posted CNN polling expert Harry Enten, noting that the candidate had recorded a favourability rating of -6 within a week of his nomination.Vance’s tanking numbers were no real surprise, Enten told the network. “There’s this idea that JD Vance is going to help out in Ohio, those rust belt battleground states,” he said. “He was the worst-performing candidate among Republicans in 2022 up and down the ballot in Ohio. He adds nothing there … JD Vance makes no sense from a statistical polling perspective.”A reckoning may come whenever Trump, facing a resurgent Democrat opposition, reaches the same conclusion. More