Five reasons why Trump voters might want to give Vance a Chance
If you appreciate articles like this, sign up for our daily email newsletter and support us with a donation.
To many conservatives, Trump's choice of J.D. Vance for Vice President came as a shock.
For a group that is growing tired of the sellouts, grifters and fake conservatives who have exploited their trust and hope for years, a recent convert like Vance raises all the red flags they are accustomed to seeing.
The concerns center around his changing positions.
Vance hated Trump, until it was convenient to like him. Vance forsook Christianity when atheism was popular, until it was expedient to his political career to convert back. He "White-knighted" for leftist positions; opposed Trump on the wall and immigration; and both bought into and pushed the typical smarmy liberal remarks about Trump being Hitler, and white Americans being racists for wanting to preserve their nation and not wanting an open border.
Selecting someone as the second-in-line, the backup to the leader of the movement, not to mention very possibly a future President of the United States, when only a few short years ago he was parroting the talking points of subversives who want nothing more than the destruction of every conservative voter, idea and center of power in the nation – certainly deserves the skepticism it has received.
Vance's previous positions on his newfound voter base were compounded by the rhetoric of other Trump picks, Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita, that many conservatives and long-time Trump voters saw as opposed to the MAGA cause.
Wiles' derogatory remarks about white voters – the long-time core of the GOP voting base and easy targets in a culture that is increasingly hostile to that same demographic – came across as something MAGA voters would expect from Kamala Harris or "the Squad," but felt like betrayal coming from the Trump campaign.
LaCivita, meanwhile, all but spat on the Heritage Foundation's "Presidential Transition Project" (referred to as Project 2025), a list of conservative recommendations compiled by the conservative organization as policy suggestions for the Republican nominee, which he can take or leave at his discretion.
The proposal is a long-running tradition that the Heritage Foundation has done for every Republican nominee since Ronald Reagan in 1981.
The project itself reads off like a wish list that every Republican would love to see implemented – reducing the size of government, securing the border, removing wokeness from education, reducing inflation, reducing the power of the Deep State, and returning greater control to the people and their elected representatives. Scary stuff, indeed, to any Leftist.
Of course, that is what made LaCivita's vitriolic attacks on the proposal so odd. The campaign could have explained the truth that it is a proposal and they have no intention of utilizing it at this time, which would have been perfectly understandable. But instead, they choose to attack it, playing into a Leftist, fear mongering campaign that even CNN, Politifact and Snopes have since debunked.
We all know by now that you cannot give the Left an inch, much less throw fellow conservatives under the bus to please them. It is bad political strategy, bad PR, but worse still, it acted to demoralize many in Trump's base – leading some to question whether these campaign managers are actually trying to win or are instead acting to undermine Trump's last chance at winning the presidency.
All of these revelations came out over the same few weeks. The weeks that predicated the current slowdown in Trump's polling.
But, there was something that differentiated Vance from Wiles and LaCivita. As soon as he was announced, he became an immediate target of the establishment and media.
If you search the names of Trump's campaign managers, you will get headlines from major publications using adjectives like "mild-mannered" or "strategic." Reading through the few articles that exist on these top campaign executives, you get the impression that these are establishment-approved individuals pitiably helping keep a wild and unstable Trump on a path to victory. They are framed as consummate professionals just doing their job.
Vance, in contrast, was positioned by those same outlets in much the same way Trump has been ever since he dared oppose Clinton in 2016. Words like "populism," "radicalism," "concern," and "weird" grace his headlines.
When the media hates someone, it is usually because they're not on the establishment team. And that reason alone makes that person worthy of deeper consideration.
After looking deeper, I couldn't believe just how good a candidate Vance is. If he is serious and comes through on even half of the positions he has espoused, he will not only be palatable, but someone who can potentially carry the MAGA movement beyond the next four years.
So, why should those who love America and civilization vote for Vance? Let me list a few reasons.
1. STRONG OPPOSITION TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
Vance has championed stricter immigration policies and border security. During his Senate campaign, he emphasized the need for the border wall and greater measures to curb illegal immigration.
He has also made it clear that he opposes any form of amnesty for undocumented immigrants, arguing that such policies would only incentivize further illegal entry into the country. Which, of course, is absolutely right – you get more of what you encourage and allow.
2. PRO-LIFE ADVOCACY
Vance has firmly aligned himself with the pro-life movement, supporting significant restrictions on abortion. Vance welcomed the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, and has since voiced his support for state and federal measures aimed at further limiting abortion access. He supported Ohio's "Heartbeat" law that now bans abortions once fetal heartbeats are detected, as early as six weeks into a pregnancy.
3. ECONOMIC NATIONALISM
One of the big issues in this election is whether Americans will get a return to American manufacturing, and a halt in the insourcing (mass immigration) and outsourcing of their jobs.
Vance has been firm on this topic for a long time. This is one of his foundational political drives.
He has been critical of free trade agreements, arguing that they have disproportionately harmed American industries. And he is a strong advocate for economic nationalism, including incentivizing companies to keep jobs within the United States.
His criticism of corporate outsourcing is a key component of his push for economic policies prioritizing Americans. Policy changes like this would profoundly affect voters in states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Ohio that have suffered tremendously from globalist policies.
4. PROMOTING FAMILIES
For those who have been watching the decline of families in the West, this is an issue that cannot be understated.
Across the West, birth rates are declining at an alarming pace. Meanwhile, the children who are born are increasingly born into single-parent households, or homes where both parents are working and have little time to raise their children.
This is an issue that contributes greatly to the turn, among many young people, toward wokeness – and also has a great effect on the future of the nation.
The angst, the lack of character and morals, the feeling of being uncared for, and the absence of a unified culture and national vision to which to adhere – all create a malaise that has a compounding effect on future family formation.
If Vance's ideas on how to help family were the only differentiator between Harris-Walz and him, that alone would make voting for him worth it.
When the mainstream media complain about your "America First Pro-Natalism," you know you're doing something right.
5. AMERICA FIRST FOREIGN POLICY
Vance aligns with the "America First" approach to foreign policy, advocating for a focus on US interests over international engagements. As a partaker in the last 20 years of war in the Middle East, he, like many others, has expressed his weariness over continued "forever wars."
Of course, this wouldn't be the first time a politician campaigned on ending foreign intervention only to renege on the promise once in office. And the Trump-Vance ticket will have a massive challenge on their hands, right out of the gate, in de-escalating the clashes that exploded under Biden-Harris, including the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East.
Trump and Vance at least claim to want an end to endless foreign wars, something the Biden-Harris team was far too happy to continue over the last four years. If Trump's last term is any indication of the next, he is by far the safer bet for those opposed to continuous intervention.
While imperfect, all these things make Vance worth the chance. While, of course, many will still have concerns and we will never all agree on everything any politician does, says, or thinks, it is important to keep reality in mind.
If even a portion of these promises are fulfilled, every vote for Vance would be well worth the alternative.
Editor's note: To learn how Christians and other conservatives can win back America, check out our book selection by clicking here.
Arthur is a former editor and consultant. Born in India to missionary parents, he spent his early career working in development for NGOs in Asia, Central America, and Africa.
Arthur has an educational background in history and psychology, with certifications from the University of Oxford and Leiden in the economics, politics, and ethics of mass migration and comparative theories in terrorism and counterterrorism. He is currently launching CivWest, a company focused on building capital to fund restorative projects and create resilient systems across the Western world.
Here, here.