Chuck Schumer Slams Trump's 'Incredibly Bad Choice' of JD Vance as Running Mate: Low Popularity and Controversial Views

Middletown, Ohio, Ohio United States of America
Despite low popularity and controversy, Trump has stood behind Vance as his vice-presidential pick
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer criticized Donald Trump's selection of JD Vance as running mate
Vance has a low popularity rating among voters with a minus 16-point favorability rating
Vance underperformed other Republicans in his 2022 Senate race in Ohio
Chuck Schumer Slams Trump's 'Incredibly Bad Choice' of JD Vance as Running Mate: Low Popularity and Controversial Views

July 28, 2024 / 12:22 PM EDT / CBS News

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has criticized former President Donald Trump's decision to select Senator JD Vance as his running mate, calling it an 'incredibly bad choice' for Republicans. During an appearance on CBS's 'Face the Nation', Schumer suggested that Trump may consider changing his mind in the coming days due to Vance's perceived erratic and extreme behavior.

Schumer's comments come as Democrats have seized on new revelations and resurfaced comments from Vance since he joined the Republican ticket. According to a CNN analysis, Vance has a 28% favorable rating and a 44% unfavorable rating among voters surveyed in the Midwest, resulting in a minus 16-point favorability rating.

Vance's popularity is far below where he needs to be in order to win over swing voters in key states like Michigan and Wisconsin. In GOP-leaning Ohio, Vance vastly underperformed other statewide Republicans on the ballot during his 2022 Senate race, winning by only 6 percentage points while Republican Gov. Mike DeWine won reelection by 25 points.

Despite these concerns, Trump has stood behind his vice-presidential pick. Vance is known for his best-selling memoir, 'Hillbilly Elegy', and was elected to office less than two years ago. Many Republicans have viewed him as a future face of the party due to his Midwestern background and appeal to MAGA adherents.

However, a CNN analysis revealed that Vance is the least-liked non-incumbent vice-presidential nominee in at least 44 years. In addition, Vance has a minus 5-point favorability rating among undecided voters in the presidential race.

Democrats have criticized Vance's views on issues like abortion, arguing that they will repel female voters. Nevertheless, Trump has stood behind his vice-presidential pick.


Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image

Confidence

91%

Doubts
  • The article mentions a CNN analysis that reveals Vance is the least-liked non-incumbent vice-presidential nominee in at least 44 years, but it does not provide a source for this information.
  • The article states that Democrats have criticized Vance's views on abortion, but it does not specify which Democratic figures have made these criticisms or what exactly they have said.

Sources

95%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Schumer says Trump's VP pick may be "one of the best things he ever did for Democrats"

CBS News Site: https://www.cbsnews.com/articles/about-us/ Kaia Hubbard Sunday, 28 July 2024 22:28
  • Unique Points
    • Sen. Chuck Schumer believes Trump’s selection of Sen. JD Vance as his running mate may be ‘one of the best things he ever did for Democrats’.
    • Schumer called Vance an ‘incredibly bad choice’ for Republicans and suggested Trump might consider changing his mind.
    • Democrats have seized on new revelations and resurfaced comments from Vance since he joined the Republican ticket.
  • Accuracy
    • Sen. Chuck Schumer calls on former President Trump to replace Sen. JD Vance as his running mate.
    • Schumer claims that Trump should swap out JD Vance due to Vance’s increasingly extreme and erratic behavior.
    • JD Vance had a 28% favorable rating and a 44% unfavorable rating among voters surveyed in the Midwest in July.
  • Deception (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Fallacies (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

70%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Schumer calls on Trump to pick new running mate, claims Vance is 'best thing he's ever done for Democrats'

Fox News Media Danielle Wallace Sunday, 28 July 2024 22:32
  • Unique Points
    • Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer calls on former President Trump to replace Senator JD Vance as his running mate.
    • Schumer claims that Trump should swap out JD Vance due to his increasingly extreme and erratic behavior.
  • Accuracy
    • Schumer claims that Trump should swap out JD Vance, whom he refers to as an ‘incredibly bad choice’, for new running mate.
    • Trump has about 10 days before the Ohio ballot is locked in, and must decide whether to keep Vance on the ticket or choose someone new.
  • Deception (30%)
    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer makes editorializing statements about JD Vance being erratic and extreme compared to Trump, implying that this is a bad choice for Trump's running mate. He also states that Vance may be one of the best things Trump has ever done for Democrats.
    • I think Donald Trump, I know him, and he’s probably sitting and watching the TV, and every day, Vance, it comes out Vance has done something more extreme, more weird, more erratic. Vance seems to be more erratic and more extreme than President Trump.
    • And I’ll bet President Trump is sitting there scratching his head and wondering, ‘Why did I pick this guy?’ The choice may be one of the best things he ever did for Democrats.
    • We are effectively run in this country, via the Democrats, via our corporate oligarchs, by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made, and so they wanna make the rest of the country miserable, too.
    • It's an incredibly bad choice.
  • Fallacies (85%)
    The author, Danielle Wallace, commits the fallacy of Hasty Generalization when she states 'Vance seems to be more erratic and more extreme than President Trump.' This is a hasty generalization because the author is making a sweeping statement about Vance based on limited information. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating 'the addition of JD Vance to the GOP ticket' as an 'incredibly bad choice' and that it may be 'one of the best things he ever did for Democrats.' This is inflammatory because it is not based on factual evidence, but rather the author's opinion.
    • It's an incredibly bad choice.
    • I think Donald Trump, I know him, and he's probably sitting and watching the TV, and every day, Vance, it comes out Vance has done something more extreme, more weird, more erratic. Vance seems to be more erratic and more extreme than President Trump.
    • And I'll bet President Trump is sitting there scratching his head and wondering, 'Why did I pick this guy?' The choice may be one of the best things he ever did for Democrats,
  • Bias (75%)
    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer expressed his opinion that JD Vance is more erratic and extreme than former President Trump. He also made a derogatory comment about 'childless cat ladies' in the Democratic Party, which was taken out of context by some media outlets.
    • And I'd like to ask the vice president, what has she done to question my loyalty to the United States of America?
      • But Vance, a Marine veteran who served in Iraq, shot back during a campaign rally with Trump in Minnesota Saturday.
        • It's an incredibly bad choice. I think Donald Trump, I know him, and he's probably sitting and watching the TV, and every day, Vance, it comes out Vance has done something more extreme, more weird, more erratic. Vance seems to be more erratic and more extreme than President Trump.
          • Now, I saw the other day Kamala Harris questioned my loyalty to this country. That's the word she used, loyalty. And it's an interesting word. Semper Fi, because there is no greater sign of disloyalty to this country than what Kamala Harris has done at our southern border.
            • We are effectively run in this country, via the Democrats, via our corporate oligarchs, by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they've made, and so they wanna make the rest of the country miserable, too.
            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication

            89%

            The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
            (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

            A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

            JD Vance is faltering in the Midwest, a big problem for the GOP

            Business Insider John L. Sunday, 28 July 2024 22:32
            • Unique Points
              • Ohio Sen. JD Vance had a 28% favorable rating and a 44% unfavorable rating among voters surveyed in the Midwest in July.
              • JD Vance underperformed other Republicans on the ballot during his 2022 Senate race, winning by only 6 percentage points while Republican Gov. Mike DeWine won reelection by 25 points.
            • Accuracy
              • JD Vance had a 28% favorable rating and a 44% unfavorable rating among voters surveyed in the Midwest in July.
              • JD Vance's favorable rating is just 5% with undecideds in the presidential race. His unfavorable rating is 29%.
              • In his home state of Ohio, JD Vance underperformed other Republicans on the ballot during his 2022 Senate race, winning by only 6 percentage points while Republican Gov. Mike DeWine won reelection by 25 points.
            • Deception (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Fallacies (85%)
              The author makes several statements about the unfavorable ratings of JD Vance among Midwestern voters and his underperformance in the 2022 Senate race. These statements are based on data from CNN and do not contain any logical fallacies. However, the author also includes an inflammatory quote from Harry Enten that implies Vance's popularity will not improve nationally due to his unfavorable ratings in the Midwest. This is an appeal to authority fallacy as it assumes that Enten's opinion is fact and does not provide any evidence or reasoning for why this would be the case. Therefore, I can only give a score of 85.
              • If JD Vance’s popularity in his home region (-16 pts) is any sign, it won’t get better for Vance nationally (where he’s historically unpopular).
            • Bias (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication

            86%

            The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
            (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

            A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

            Inside the powerful Peter Thiel network that anointed JD Vance

            The Fixing Site: A Summary of the Article. Elizabeth Dwoskin, Sunday, 28 July 2024 10:05
            • Unique Points
              • Peter Thiel, David Sacks, Jacob Helberg and other tech figures lobbied Trump to add JD Vance to his vice-presidential ticket.
              • Thiel saw potential in Vance a decade ago and took him under his wing, joining a roster that included Mark Zuckerberg and Sam Altman.
              • Vance impressed Silicon Valley with his omnivorous intellect, mild manner and outsider story after the 2016 election.
            • Accuracy
              • Vance is seen as an emissary for the tech industry in Washington.
              • Some in Thiel’s network would benefit from having Vance in the White House.
            • Deception (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Fallacies (95%)
              The article contains several informal fallacies, but no formal ones. The author uses inflammatory rhetoric by describing the tech elites as 'euphoric' about Vance's rise and 'invigorated' by Harris' ascension. They also use an appeal to authority when they mention that Thiel, Sacks, and Helberg implored Trump to add Vance to the ticket. However, these fallacies do not significantly impact the overall quality of the article.
              • ]Delian Asparouhov, a partner at Thiel’s Founder’s Fund, wrote on X after the announcement of Vance’s nomination: ‘WE HAVE A FORMER TECH VC IN THE WHITE HOUSE GREATEST COUNTRY ON EARTH BABY[', 'The author describes the tech elites as ‘euphoric’ about Vance's rise and ‘invigorated’ by Harris' ascension.
            • Bias (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication

            80%

            The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
            (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

            A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

            JD Vance Stumbles in His Debut, as Democrats Go on Offense

            The Name Of The NZ Prefix. I PWA NZI.P.Was Dropped. Jonathan Weisman, Sunday, 28 July 2024 01:47
            • Unique Points
              • He has also been criticized for supporting a federal response to stop abortion in Democratic states
              • Vance promoted a higher tax burden for childless Americans in the past
            • Accuracy
              • Senator JD Vance was selected as former President Donald Trump’s running mate
              • JD Vance has been criticized for past comments deriding ‘childless cat ladies’
            • Deception (70%)
              The article contains selective reporting and emotional manipulation. The authors focus on the negative comments made by JD Vance in the past that have been unearthed by Democrats and the media, while ignoring any positive statements or context that may exist. They also use emotive language to describe how these comments have 'threatened to undermine' his campaign and 'dented' the sense of invulnerability of the Trump campaign. Furthermore, they quote Democrats criticizing Vance without providing a counter perspective from Vance or his supporters.
              • A stream of years-old quotes, videos and audio comments unearthed by Democrats and the news media in recent days has threatened to undermine the Trump campaign’s outreach to women, voters of color and the very blue-collar voters Mr. Vance was supposed to reach.
              • His past comments deriding ‘childless cat ladies,’ supporting a ‘federal response’ to stop abortion in Democratic states and promoting a higher tax burden for childless Americans have yielded a chorus of criticism from Democrats.
            • Fallacies (85%)
              The authors make an appeal to authority by implying that the unearthed comments and criticism from Democrats are significant enough to threaten the Trump campaign's outreach efforts. They also use inflammatory rhetoric by describing Mr. Vance's struggles as 'stumbles' and 'denting the sense of invulnerability'.
              • > The selection of Senator JD Vance as former President Donald J. Trump’s running mate reflected the confidence of a campaign so sure of victory in November that it could look beyond a second Trump term to the legacy of his movement.
              • , 'But in less than two weeks, Mr. Vance has found himself on the defensive, and his struggles have dented the sense of invulnerability that only a week ago seemed to be the overriding image of the Trump campaign.', 'A stream of years-old quotes, videos and audio comments unearthed by Democrats and the news media in recent days has threatened to undermine the Trump campaign’s outreach to women, voters of color and the very blue-collar voters Mr. Vance was supposed to reach.'
            • Bias (95%)
              The authors of the article, Jonathan Weisman and Shane Goldmacher, demonstrate a clear bias against JD Vance by repeatedly highlighting his past comments that have been criticized by Democrats and the media. They also use language that depicts Vance's struggles as significant setbacks for the Trump campaign. The authors do not provide any counter-arguments or context to balance out their portrayal of Vance.
              • A stream of years-old quotes, videos and audio comments unearthed by Democrats and the news media in recent days has threatened to undermine the Trump campaign’s outreach to women, voters of color and the very blue-collar voters Mr. Vance was supposed to reach.
                • During an appearance in his hometown, Middletown, Ohio, he tried to explain how his critics would call his drinking Diet Mountain Dew racist
                  • His past comments deriding ‘childless cat ladies,’ supporting a ‘federal response’ to stop abortion in Democratic states and promoting a higher tax burden for childless Americans have yielded a chorus of criticism from Democrats.
                    • Mr. Vance’s fresh efforts to explain them have provided Democrats more material, with the Harris campaign promoting one short clip in which he seems to suggest that when he spoke of childless cat ladies, he meant no insult to cats – ‘I’ve got nothing against cats,’ he said.
                      • The authors' repeated use of the phrase 'threatened to undermine' and 'dented the sense of invulnerability' implies that Vance's past comments are significant setbacks for the Trump campaign.
                      • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                        None Found At Time Of Publication
                      • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                        None Found At Time Of Publication