United States Senator J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), the vice presidential running mate of former President Donald Trump, has responded to Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Democratic candidate for president Kamala Harris by blasting Swift for being a billionaire — despite the fact that Trump is also a billionaire.
Moments after Harris and Trump finished their debate on Tuesday night, the music superstar posted her endorsement for Harris on Instagram, noting that she “watched the debate” herself before deciding to make her views public.
Swift based her decision to support Harris on her support for LGBTQ rights, reproductive freedoms, and other issues. Swift also rebuked Trump for sharing AI-generated images of herself earlier in the campaign season that falsely purported she was backing him instead.
Trump’s posts of those images, and his views in general, “brought me to the conclusion that I need to be very transparent about my actual plans for this election as a voter,” Swift wrote in her missive. “The simplest way to combat misinformation is with the truth.”
The musician signed the Instagram post, “Taylor Swift — Childless Cat Lady,” a dig at Trump’s running mate Vance, who made misogynistic comments against career-minded women in the past by using that term.
Asked about her endorsement the following day, Vance said on Fox News that he believed it was unimportant to most voters.
“I don’t think Most Americans…are going to be influenced by a billionaire celebrity who I think is fundamentally disconnected from the interests and the problems of most Americans,” Vance said.
Notably, Vance’s description of Swift also applies to his running mate Trump.
Trump himself has been a billionaire celebrity for longer than Swift has even been alive — he first expressed interest in a presidential run two years before she was born, though that was to promote his book “The Art of the Deal.” In addition to his name being plastered on dozens of buildings throughout the world, Trump has cameoed in over 26 movies and TV shows since 1989, including “Home Alone 2” and “Zoolander.” He also hosted a reality television series called “The Apprentice” for more than a decade before deciding to run for president in 2015.
Although he belittled Swift for being a billionaire, Vance is very friendly with many Silicon Valley personalities who have attained that kind of wealth, many of whom helped propel his political career through donations or super PACs in his run for senator just two years ago — including venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya, PayPal developer David Sacks, and most notably, investor Peter Thiel.
Notably, Vance has failed to generate any positive momentum since being picked by the former president for the position. Indeed, during the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, an Economist/YouGov poll found that he had a net favorability rating among registered voters of -4 points. In the nearly two months since that time, his rating has remained stagnant, at -5 points favorability.
Much of his difficulties stem from comments like the one Swift referenced, in which Vance expressed his preferences for a so-called “traditional” family structure in the United States — one that diminishes women’s role in society in favor of a stronger patriarchal system. Additional polling has revealed that the more voters learn about these kinds of statements, the less they like Vance as a candidate.
Those statements include telling people who choose to have smaller families or no children at all that they will become “sad, lonely, pathetic person[s],” as well as telling his right-wing supporters that they need “to go to war against” the beliefs of people who want to pursue that kind of life.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.