Since former President Trump announced JD Vance as his running mate, the Ohio senator has become a major thorn in the side of the corporate media. He frequently appears on liberal networks, engaging in heated exchanges with partisan journalists and debunking misleading narratives about the GOP presidential nominee and his agenda. This trend continued on Tuesday night after the debate between Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris on ABC.
Moments after both candidates delivered their closing arguments, a reporter tried to trap Vance with a “gotcha” question about a viral story claiming that Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating wild geese and even dogs and cats. “Regarding the claim about immigrants eating dogs and cats, which was mentioned by Trump on national television, do you genuinely believe these allegations?” she asked.
“Whether they were eating geese or dogs, is that really what we are going to hang our hats on?” Vance responded. “The problem is that this small town in Ohio has been flooded with 20,000 migrants thanks to Kamala Harris’s policies. Now people can’t afford basic goods, they can’t afford food, they can’t afford housing in their communities and their public safety has been completely destroyed. It’s a disgrace, and Donald Trump was right to call it out.”
“Kamala Harris, like so many other issues, she has no way to explain why she is going to be better as president than she has been as vice president,” Vance continued. “It’s her policies that caused the problem, she should have to answer for that.”
CNN’s Kaitlan Collins tried a similar tactic on the same issue, but it also backfired on her.
“This town has been ravaged by 20,000 migrants coming in,” Vance said. “Healthcare costs are up, housing costs are up, communicable diseases like HIV and TB have skyrocketed in this small Ohio town. This is what Kamala Harris’s border policies have done. And I think it’s interesting, Kaitlan, that the media didn’t care about the carnage wrought by these policies until we turned it into a meme about cats. And that’s speaks to the media’s failure to care about what’s going on in these communities.”
Following the debate, ABC’s Jon Karl took his turn challenging Vance, focusing on Trump’s “mean words” about Harris. “Before the debate, Donald Trump referred to Kamala Harris as a ‘low IQ individual,’ ‘someone who doesn’t have the mental capacity to be president,’ and ‘really dumb,’” Karl said. “Did you see any of that on stage tonight?”
“What I saw was a lot of slogans,” Vance responded. “I think the American people are smart and Kamala Harris talks to them like they’re children. She repeats these ridiculous platitudes, where if you actually think about what she said it doesn’t make any sense. The American people don’t get fed on plans. She has failed as vice president, and the fundamental question is, do we want to give her a promotion? I think the answer has to be no.”
In all three instances, Vance’s responses showcased how to expertly sidestep the corporate media’s traps. He understood that the media’s goal was to frame issues in a way that would cast Donald Trump in a negative light. Rather than engaging in their narrative, Vance redirected the discussion to key concerns for voters—such as the economy, crime, and open borders—rather than fabricated liberal criticisms.
Vance’s post-debate performance continued his ongoing media confrontations since his vice presidential nomination in July. During a series of Sunday talk show appearances in early August, Vance effectively countered the “weird” label that Harris and running mate Tim Walz were trying to attach to him. “They can accuse me of whatever they want,” Vance told Dana Bash on CNN’s State of the Union. “I’m running because I believe being vice president will improve people’s lives. I accept their attacks, but it seems to be more projection.”
Vance went on to highlight that it was Walz who had signed a bill placing feminine hygiene products in boys’ bathrooms in Minnesota schools, supported child drag shows and transgender surgeries for children, and displayed an odd fixation on communist China. Since then, the “weird” attacks have notably diminished.
The media’s reaction to Vance’s combative approach underscores his effectiveness. “JD Vance has become Trump’s human bulldozer,” declared The Bulwark. The New York Times noted that Vance’s “combative style confounds Democrats,” while Politico labeled him “Trump’s attack dog,” suggesting that his media appearances were a response to criticism of his early performances.
Yet, it is the media that has struggled since Vance entered the scene. There was considerable concern among Republican consultants when Trump selected Vance as his running mate, with many preferring a more conventional, establishment figure to “balance” Trump.
Trump, however, wisely chose the opposite. Compared to the 2016 and 2020 elections, 2024 presents unprecedented challenges with the media-Democrat alliance’s array of hoaxes and fake narratives. Vance, with his intelligence and eloquence, stands as the perfect counter to this. He comprehends the rigged game the media plays and refuses to participate in it.
Despite the decline in legacy news viewership, millions of Americans, including independents and undecided voters, still tune in daily. Vance’s capacity to introduce truth into this programming is a significant asset for Trump and the Republican Party.
