United States Presidential Election : The Import of J.D. Vance

The stunning news coming from the United States is of course the failed assassination attempt on Donald Trump, and the resulting iconic imagery that ensures his place in history books. A man often suspected of avoiding risk –the issue of his military service and a tendency to shift blame to others– showed immediate bounce back and resolve. This will shape the election result, as sitting President Joe Biden faces an upward struggle to convince the public that he is still physically fit for the job.

But the event with longer lasting consequences is the choice of J.D. Vance as vice presidential candidate. One must go back to Richard Nixon or even to Theodore Roosevelt to find such a consequential candidate with a major chance to become President one day. Other vice presidents have been “surprise” presidents (Lyndon B. Johnson) or had been widely underestimated (Harry Truman, and Joe Biden himself), but J.D. Vance does stand out as a unique case in American political history. His abilities and his inclinations have consequences far beyond a four year term for Donald Trump.

Because he cannot tell the vice president that “you are fired”, it was also widely expected that he would choose a relatively weak character, or one with less audience appeal. Finally, in the hours after he survived the assassination attempt, he spoke about the need to "unite" Americans and explained he had discarded the bellicose rhetoric against the Biden administration at the Republican National Convention.

Beyond these speculations, most election analysts had predicted the election would ultimately depend on the choice of a small minority – typically, middle class and educated whites living in a small number of suburbs, who are comparison shoppers and easily shift their vote. The implication was that both candidates now had to compete “in the middle”, a familiar situation before Ronald Reagan’s election broke that rule.
 
Nothing of the sort has happened, and this shows once again Donald Trump’s ability to surprise all, friend or foe. J.D. Vance fits none of the above requirements. Not only, as often cited, did he start his political career by denouncing Trump "an American Hitler" and, worse, "a fool". He has also seemed recently to pressure Trump as the unavoidable nominee: he would be "disappointed" if he was passed over. An ultimate loyalist should never waver or hint disaffection.

J.D. Vance is also a fabulous story-teller with strong hit lines, a skill  he  used again at the Republican convention. His 2016 book, Hillbilly Elegy, hardly read outside America, was a memorable illustration of the two Americas and, to use a concept also relevant for France, of the invisible periphery – in fact a majority periphery, against the insider minority, and the minorities. Donald Trump has well understood that majority is the law of democracy, and he has swung from one party to another in his past quest for power.

J.D. Vance does provide a class base explanation for workers and disenfranchised regions. His parents voted for Democrats against “big business” but shifted to Republican with Ronald Reagan as a vote for those who work against those who are assisted. But the difference between Trump and Vance is that the former is an actor, starting life as the wealthy son of a real estate promoter and going from one financial trick to the other. Being from Brooklyn rather than Manhattan does not exactly cut it in terms of representing the downtrodden – although one has to recognize this was one of the factors which shaped Trump’s resentments. By contrast, J.D. Vance is for real, pulling himself up by the bootstraps, loyal to his upbringing and to his family, which appears to return the affection. This is not a made-up story. His radical stance against abortion is unlikely to gain him many votes from suburban women, but that doesn’t seem to have attracted much attention.

In this respect, he is still on track from the Ohio Rust Belt. There, the destruction from opioids hit early, and job anxiety reigns together with the sentiment that welfare policies are aimed at others.

His practical concern for America’s white underclass – a term he would hate – is  also shown in some of his tech investments for peripheral regions. In this regard, he does complement Donald Trump, who confines himself to spitting out the anger from that segment of the American population. That is indeed a powerful combination, but also a tricky arrangement for Donald Trump. J.D. Vance now gives repeated signs of allegiance, and yet he puts forward his own narrative. Should the four years of a second presidency unfold, and while Donald Trump gives new signs of his eccentricity and narcissism, Vance will need to create a brand of his own inside the franchise. The relations between the prospective president and vice president will bear watching.

In terms of electoral competition, barring another act of God, one no longer sees how Joe Biden – or Kamala Harris, coming out of left field in every sense of the word – could defeat the team. The only Democrat candidate this writer sees as a viable option is California governor Gavin Newsom, and that in spite of California. The man has the same eloquence , offers a more conventional version of the American dream, melds economic success and social concerns in his speeches, has gone for same sex marriage but seeks to limit California’s handouts. And like Vance, he has recently given every sign of loyalty to Joe Biden. Even in this situation, where 47% of Americans say they fear a civil war, Newsom would still be cast as representative of a privileged minority.

It therefore matters to look at J.D. Vance’s ideas within the Trump tent, and for the long term. To Europeans, there is indeed cause for immediate worry, especially as someone as anti-European as Richard Grenell, the former ambassador to Germany, was the only foreign policy figure having a platform seat at the Republican convention. Vance is at the isolationist end of the Republican spectrum, with justifications that mix disagreement over democratic values and America First themes. Calling Britain under Labour an "Islamist nuclear power", being at Congress one of the staunchest opponents of support to Ukraine, emphasizing re-industrialization and a lower dollar is really a recipe for America alone, relying on its resurrected economic strength and bargaining power.

Not only will he be a force among those who want allies to pay up –with some justification–, but he will join those who want America’s defense to shift towards East Asia in the very short term.

Curtailment of federal programs and employment, along with cuts into subsidies would improve America’s fiscal position. This would make it possible to lower the dollar without having to raise interest rates. It would also create strong trade competition for Europe. If the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 could not decide between industrial public policy and assertive economic liberalism, it is likely that Vance will go for the latter.

Vance will also be among those who advocate decoupling over derisking alone, starting from trade tariffs – which will hit Europe too unless some bargain is reached. And because of Vance’s early awareness of the opioid crisis’ impact on American society, a word of advice one might give to Xi Jinping is to start taking seriously the curtailing of fentanyl precursor exports, and to end the recycling of Mexican drug cartel money. This could be a priority for the new administration before the issue of China’s role in keeping Russia financially afloat.

Values have often differed between American democracy and Europe’s formerly centrist and social-democrat mix. Today, European values themselves are the object of debate, although nowhere near the clash inside America. This is the time to prioritize our interests. And these are to consider first that to others, we in the West form a unique culture and even identity. That we have successfully empowered rules with the rest of the world while representing only a minority is nothing new. That America, under Trump and Biden’s presidencies, has bounced back economically. That it therefore has more, not less leverage than a decade ago.

Donald Trump will likely remain an unpredictable actor, who today must seem even more vindicated by the "act of God" which made him turn his head at the right time. The conversations about the future must also happen with instinctive isolationists of J.D. Vance’s brand, and not only with the internationalists of both parties that we so much relied on in the past.

Copyright image : Jim WATSON / AFP