THURSDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2024
Yes, his running-mate won: We bring no expertise to such matters, but we'll stand by the speculation we've offered in the past:
In all likelihood, you can't grow up the way JD Vance was forced to grow up and emerge from those years fully well. That's our way of building a framework around the answer the candidate has finally bestowed on the world.
Did Candidate Trump win the last election? Mediaite is providing the tape as Vance clearly says that he did. At that site, Alex Griffing provides the play-by-play of this strange man's belated claim:
JD Vance Says Trump Won The 2020 Election...
GOP vice presidential candidate JD Vance was grilled by comedian Jason Selvig about who actually won the 2020 presidential election in a clip posted to X on Thursday.
Selvig, who is best known for his comedic man-on-the-street interviews, asked Vance repeatedly if Donald Trump won the 2020 election—a hot topic surrounding Vance after Tuesday’s debate in which Vance said he would have helped in Trump’s “alternative electors’ scheme to overturn the election.
“Who won the 2020 election? Could you just answer? Did Donald Trump win?” Selvig asked Vance as he walked.
“Yes,” Vance clearly replied.
“He did win?” shot back a surprised Selvig. Vance then added, “Yep.”
Selvig followed up, "So will you, will you concede?”
“Will you concede if your opponent gets, if your opponent gets more votes, will you concede?” Selvig pressed.
“I really feel bad for you, man,” Vance replied as Selvig again asked, “I just want to know if your, if your opponent gets more votes, will you concede?” Vance then walked into a room without answering the question.
Our lord and master Candidate Vance feels sorry for Jason Selvig? Under the emerging circumstances, we feel sorry for the whole human race!
You can see the tape of the exchange at the Mediaite post. Over at The New Republic, Ellie Quinlan Houghtaling provides her report of the matter, and provides the Selvig tape, under this headline:
JD Vance Finally Answers That Crucial V.P. Debate Question
We bring no psychiatric expertise to this particular matter. But our current imitation of discourse is littered with the behavior of people who grew up in very unusual circumstances—in ways which may conceivably wreck the soul and damage the human heart.
A final guess:
Viewers of the Fox news Channel won't be told about any of this. We expect to have more in the next few days about some of the things those neighbors and friends already aren't being told about events out here in the world.
At Tuesday evening's debate, Vance wouldn't answer the question when Tim Walz asked. When Vance refused to answer several questions, two moderators from CBS News decided to take a pass.
Were we humans built for life in this modern "democratized" world? Later on, we'll answer your questions about the frequency of hurricanes—about what Greg Gutfeld angrily several million viewers on last evening's Gutfeld! show.
As we noted this morning, there he went again! Gutfeld—he's 60 years old!—routinely tells viewers that climate change is a "major hoax." All across Blue America, our major news orgs, our beloved journalist stars, all agree to avert their gaze as such lessons are taught.
At Tuesday evening's debate, two moderators kept taking a pass. The New York Times takes the same approach every day of the week!
"Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past". - 1984
ReplyDeleteVance is unusually unpopular and weird, he is aware of this and has no solution other than to lean into it.
ReplyDeleteYes, corporate media is garbage; it has always been this way. Thanks to the democratization of media we now have a wealth of independent media generating worthwhile content. This is likely why Vance is so unpopular, and will likely play a significant role in Trump losing and unable to implement a coup.
"In all likelihood, you can't grow up the way JD Vance was forced to grow up and emerge from those years fully well. "
ReplyDeleteThis is incorrect. Children are resilient and there are circumstances that support that coping when kids grow up in difficult circumstances. The idea that adversity always makes kids grow up unwell is unsupported by evidence. It is a myth that Somerby keeps repeating.
For example, a child who has a close older sibling, an aunt or uncle, an interested adult at school, church or in the neighborhood, a role model in a book, will be better off than a child abandoned, even when there is abuse happening. Drunken or drug addicted parents do not always harm their children, if there are sources of support that the kids can draw upon while growing up. Often, the children learn how to cope and how to avoid becoming affected themselves, which strengthens their character and personality. Similarly, there are children who grow up in favorable circumstances who become troubled because they do not have support, resources or someone to guide them when parents are self-involved, narcissistic or unloving. Trump is an example of that, not of a child in abusive circumstances. He grew up wealthy, spoiled, but whether he was deprived of love is unclear, only Somerby's speculation (contradicted by Mary Trump). Judging a child's experience from their observed circumstances, especially from outside the family, may not provide a good explanation of how that child got so messed up as an adult.
JD Vance feels very sorry for himself but that doesn't mean he had a hard time growing up, as claimed. More resilient kids in worse circumstances turn out better than Vance. Is that Vance's fault? There are examples of celebrities claiming abuse whose relatives deny their claims, and many examples of people who were provably abused who have turned out well. Oprah is an example of the former category, Steve Martin, an example of the latter.
Somerby is not on solid ground when he claims that Trump or Vance or any of his favored few (Tucker Carlson) suffered hard times. Most children from divorced homes are not like Tucker or Vance. Trump's parents did not divorce. The riddle of why some children become so messed up while others do not, is part of the literature on resilience and coping. It is not straightfowardly a result of the actions of parents or the presence of hardship while growing up. Somerby should read more about how children survive difficult childhoods, before trying to draw a straight line from Vance's fictional depiction of his childhood or from sociopaths like Trump, who might not have been any different with a more normal childhood, given that psychpathy is considered genetic and innate, not situational or the result of parental neglect or abuse.
Somerby is creating fiction here, not talking about science. That makes him a lot like JD Vance and Trump himself, who tells whatever lie will get him ahead.
Freud said that there are no "fully well" people. We all compromise with our life circumstances and do our best with where we find ourselves in life. Fully well is not a psychiatric term any competent mental health expert uses. Maybe "better adjusted" but using the metaphor of well or diseased is wrong when talking about most people.
Delete