JD Vance, a Republican vice-presidential nominee, has spent his career aligning himself with various influential circles, from academic and military elites to Wall Street, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and ultimately, Donald Trump and the MAGA movement. Despite evolving his stance to fit different influential groups, his strategy has resulted in both meteoric rises and significant unpopularity.
Initially gaining fame through his best-selling book “Hillbilly Elegy” in 2016, Vance positioned himself to liberal media as an insightful commentator on the white working class and a critic of Trump’s demagoguery. This appeal to centrist and liberal elites was marked by messages promoting self-improvement and warning against Trump’s influence without fundamentally challenging the economic status quo.
As Trump solidified his control over the Republican Party, Vance pivoted to align with the former President, echoing hard-right rhetoric and expressing skepticism about vaccine mandates. His efforts paid off, securing Trump’s endorsement for the Ohio Senate seat in 2022 and later elevating him to the vice-presidential slot.
Vance has since embraced a more controversial role as a vocal MAGA proponent. He has made several incendiary remarks, including promoting the false claim about Haitian immigrants eating cats and dogs, and aligning with Christian nationalists like Lance Wallnau.
However, Vance’s strategy of ingratiation has earned him significant disfavor. According to FiveThirtyEight, he holds a net unfavorable rating of minus 11 percent, lower than even Trump’s minus 9.6 percent. Among younger voters aged 18-30, Vance’s net approval is deeply negative at minus 28 percent.
Polls reflect that Democratic vice-presidential nominee Tim Walz is viewed more favorably than Vance in key Midwestern states. Walz has a favorability rating of 44 percent versus Vance’s 42 percent among likely voters in Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
The Trump campaign argues that Vance’s polarizing approach is strategic, aiming to energize the GOP base despite alienating moderates. This tactic mirrors Trump’s 2016 strategy, though the current political landscape differs, with Kamala Harris and Tim Walz generally enjoying better favorability ratings than their Republican counterparts.
Ultimately, both campaigns are taking calculated risks. The Trump/Vance ticket relies on energizing a strong Republican base through culture-war issues, while the Harris/Walz campaign bets on an electorate ready to move beyond such divisive tactics. The outcome remains uncertain, underscored by Vance’s attempt to leverage both his agreeable and combative personas in this highly polarized race.
