Whatever his many failings and outrages, you have to give Donald Trump credit for picking a sound running mate — someone with experience in government, a mild temperament, a belief in democracy and the backbone to stand up to Trump himself. Unfortunately, that was eight years ago, when Mike Pence joined the Republican ticket.
This year, Trump chose JD Vance, who is notable in all sorts of ways that don’t put him in a flattering light. His history of misogynistic remarks and his abrupt conversion from fierce Trump critic to fawning Trump toady only underline why he is one of the worst vice presidential choices of the past century.
The first requirement of a running mate should be the capacity to step into the most powerful office in the world on a moment’s notice, as several vice presidents have done. For Vance to be in that position would be like the office intern taking over as CEO. At 40, he has held only one political office, U.S. senator, and for less than two years. Preparation for the presidency doesn’t get much more minimal.
Pence had spent 12 years in Congress and four years as governor of Indiana. Vance is even less qualified than Sarah Palin, who had been a small-town mayor and governor of Alaska before John McCain elevated her to national prominence in 2008.
Vance’s Kleenex-thin resume matters even more than usual because at 78, Trump is the oldest presidential nominee ever. He has a far higher chance of dying in the next four years than Kamala Harris, who is 59.
Vance has gotten little scrutiny for his inexperience because he has gotten so much for his strange comments about women — sneering at “childless cat women,” claiming that professional women without kids are on a “path to misery” and apparently agreeing with an interviewer who said that helping to raise grandchildren is “the whole purpose of the postmenopausal female.”
To be fair, Vance has a commendable history of pointing out the vile character of the GOP presidential nominee. He used to describe Trump as an “idiot” and “America’s Hitler.” But that makes his capitulation only more degrading.
Trump loves a fawning convert, and Vance’s nasty side is part of his appeal. Vance brings to mind Spiro Agnew, whose selection by Republican Richard Nixon in 1968 baffled party veterans. But it soon became obvious why Nixon chose Agnew: to appeal to angry right-wingers.
As governor of Maryland, Agnew had infuriated Black leaders by blaming them for the 1968 riots that followed the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. As Nixon’s running mate, Agnew used a contemptuous term for Japanese people in referring to a reporter and in a separate incident scoffed that “if you’ve seen one slum, you’ve seen them all.”
Democrats saw him as a joke. One campaign ad consisted entirely of the onscreen words “Agnew for Vice President?” and the sound of a man laughing hysterically.
But his appeal to Nixon was simple. In his book “Nixonland,” historian Rick Perlstein wrote: “They shared the same resentments. They shared the same enemy.” Agnew “was the tribune for those who felt visceral disgust at a society gone too far.” Agnew smeared the Democratic nominee, Vice President Hubert Humphrey, as “soft on communism.”
As vice president, Agnew made vitriolic attacks on intellectuals, “radical liberals,” student protesters and the news media — a tradition that Trump has carried on. (In an unrelated development, Agnew resigned in 1973 amid a bribery investigation and was convicted of tax evasion.)
Like Agnew, Vance has appeal only on the right. But that trait made Agnew useful in 1968. Nixon, a GOP centrist, was distrusted by conservatives, and he faced a serious third-party rival, segregationist Alabama Gov. George Wallace.
Trump bears less resemblance to Nixon than to Wallace, who once said: “We don’t have riots in Alabama. They start a riot down there, first one of ’em to pick up a brick gets a bullet in the brain.”
But voters who relish that sort of rhetoric were already in the MAGA camp. By picking Vance, Trump squandered a chance to appeal to the moderate Americans he needs. His running mate’s chief talent is alienating anyone who is not a diehard Republican.
Vance brings to mind the old joke: Why do people take an instant dislike to him? Because it saves time. Even among men, his unfavorable rating exceeds his favorable rating. His youth is no help: Voters from age 18 to 42 also don’t like him.
Compare him with Kamala Harris’ running mate: In every age group and among both men and women, according to a recent poll conducted by the opinion research firm Big Village, Tim Walz scores better than Vance.
It’s a reliable axiom of political experts that nobody votes on vice presidential nominees. This year, Vance is doing his best to prove them wrong.
Steve Chapman was a member of the Tribune Editorial Board from 1981 to 2021. His columns, exclusive to the Tribune, appear the first Thursday of every month. He can be reached at stephenjchapman@icloud.com.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.