Vice-presidential nominee J.D. Vance has said that the “joyful” message presented by the Democratic campaign is masking the “dark and ominous” position it actually holds.
The Ohio senator pointed out that the left-wing party said the word “joy” many times during their national convention last month, using it as a theme for the last-minute nomination of Kamala Harris and her presidential campaign. Vance said that Democrats “say they’re joyful” but then turn around and warn that citizens who vote for Donald Trump are to blame for a falling country.
He explained that the campaign does not focus on positive promises of reducing gas and food prices and “bring[ing] back” manufacturing work from China. The reason, he added, is because “Harris hasn’t done that.” Instead, her team argues that Americans who would like to see a shift in the country moving forward but cast a vote for Trump are “bad” people.
Vance—who is historically unpopular among American voters—shared his opinion that “waging war” on your country’s citizens is “not joyful,” but rather “very, very dark.” He added that those who heard the messages from the convention “didn’t see a whole lot of joy,” despite party leaders emphasizing this theme.
He further said that he does not “want to put words” in the mouth of the campaign and that he does not “know what their vision is.” However, he said the vision “appears to be” categorizing voters as “good” if they vote in favor of Democrats and “bad” if they don’t. Vance continued to praise Republicans for their political “attitude,” which he said recognizes that politics is not the most important thing for “most people.”
Meanwhile, Vance’s lack of understanding of the Democratic campaign mission is not an exclusive opinion. Following her first official media appearance since accepting the party’s presidential nomination, Harris came under fire for her repeated line that her “values haven’t changed” and her lack of ability to articulate why some of her stance on policy has shifted.
Her responses to legitimate questions about her potential administration were met with digital criticism, with several people describing her as a “radical.”
