Ian Ward of ‘POLITICO Nightly’ offers a diagnosis of JD Vance…

Newspaper Reader.

stephenkmacksd.com/

Jun 20, 2026

Ian Ward of ‘POLITICO Nightly’ offers a diagnosis of JD Vance, as a possible contendor for ‘Reagans Welfare Queens’ ?

Posted on December 26, 2025 by stephenkmacksd

Political Observer

stephenkmacksd.com/

Dec 19, 2025


Similarly, some researchers have found that foreign-born Americans are slightly more likely native-born ones to express cold feelings toward Jews, though the same researchers stress that the difference is very minor and does not establish a causal link between foreign birth and antisemitic sentiment. Perhaps more significantly, Vance’s attempt to pin rising antisemitism to immigration conspicuously overlooks the role played by openly antisemitic figures on the right — people the white-nationalist commentator Nick Fuentes, who recently sat down for a friendly interview Vance’s close ally Tucker Carlson — in boosting anti-Jewish views.

But it’s fair to assume that Vance isn’t making these comments in the spirit of actually identifying the multivalent causes of these problems. Instead, they’re best understood as Vance’s attempts to manage an increasingly fractious coalition. And as windows into Vance’s own understanding of the primary fault lines dividing the Republican Party, his recent comments are actually quite illuminating.

Vance, who has readily stepped into the role of mediator between MAGA’s various competing factions, seems to have identified the cost-of-living crisis and the rise of antisemitism as two of the major issues splitting Trump’s coalition — with good reason. On the cost-of-living issue, the administration is increasingly coming under fire from populist conservatives who claim that Trump has focused on foreign policy issues at the expense of addressing the affordability crisis at home. Trump has struggled to come up with a compelling rejoinder to this line of critique, instead waffling between assuring voters that he’s taking the cost-of-living crisis seriously and dismissing “affordability” as a “Democrat scam.”

Similarly, the administration has struggled to address the growing divide on the right between stalwart supporters of Israel and “America First” critics of the U.S-Israel alliance — a group that also includes out-and-out antisemites like Fuentes. Trump’s response to this fissure has been to float ambiguously above the fray, publicly doubling down on his support for Benjamin Netanyahu’s government while also reaffirming his backing of Israel critics like Tucker Carlson — a posture has left both camps feeling unsatisfied. Vance, meanwhile, has stayed mostly quiet on the controversy.

At the same time, Vance seems to be betting that opposition to immigration remains the one stance that can unite a movement that is otherwise divided over economics, foreign policy, tech and AI policy, healthcare, the Epstein disclosures and more. Linking these more divisive issues back to immigration offers one strategy for smoothing over the fault lines. It also allows the administration to claim progress on issues where the GOP lacks consensus: If immigrants are causing the housing crisis, then what does it matter if Republicans don’t have a plan for building more housing so long as Trump ramps up his mass deportation efforts?

The risk for Vance is that voters will see through this maneuver and demand more direct plans to address issues like housing costs and stagnating wages, beyond whatever benefits are provided by the administration’s immigration crackdown. But if Vance’s recent appearance in Pennsylvania offers any indication, that’s a danger he’s willing to two-step around. “Why did housing get so expensive, double in price during the Biden administration?,” he asked. “It’s because Joe Biden let in 20 million illegal immigrants who took homes that ought by right go to American citizens.”

Newspaper Reader.

Unknown's avatar

About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.' https://www.lrb.co.uk/v15/n20/perry-anderson/diary
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.