NYTimes article is titled, “‘He’s Most Authentic When He’s Nasty’: Four Columnists Brace for the Vance-Walz Debate”. The four columnists are David Brooks, Ross Douthat, Tressie McMillan Cottom and Pamela Paul. www.nytimes.com/...
First thing I learned is that Douthat has known JD Vance for years. He says wrt Vance -
In general, not just with Vance, I think it’s a mistake to look at different facets of any public figure and try to discern which ones represent a “real” self and which ones are some kind of politician’s mask. Is the Vance who wades into a thread on social media to argue substantively about, say, family policy the real JD Vance? Yes, absolutely: He’s a smart guy with serious ideas who has a much more nuanced grasp of policy detail than either his running mate or his rivals on the other ticket. Is the Vance who campaigns as an angry tribune of people he thinks have been betrayed by our trade and immigration policies the real Vance? Yes, absolutely again. Of course there is calculation involved in all campaign rhetoric, but I don’t think he’s ended up as Trump’s running mate as a cynical performance.
Douthat spends a lot of time insulting Walz — but maybe if they were best buds also, he’d be more sympathetic?
So has David Brooks known Vance! And he’s served as his life-planning coach!
Like Ross, I’ve known Vance for a long time. In 2018, I gathered some friends at my house to help JD think through his life options. This route wasn’t the one we recommended! (And he didn’t think he’d have a career in politics, at least any time soon.) Nonetheless I don’t think Vance is being totally opportunistic. Yes, he has totally flip-flopped on Trump’s character. But his life mission is pretty much the same: to upend the policies that have favored knowledge workers and, in his view, betrayed other kinds of workers.
The two women haven’t been planning JD’s future and they appear less sympathetic to him.
Anyway, perhaps this is known by everyone already and I just missed it.
