On “creating” stories: J. D. Vance
I was speaking recently to a Democrat I know who is angry about the “eating cats and dogs” remark of Trump’s for a number of reasons. One of those many reasons this person gave – and the one I’m going to focus on in this post – was that, in a later interview, J. D. Vance had actually admitted to lying about the story and not caring that it was a lie.
This was an accusation I hadn’t yet heard. The person to whom I was talking had an actual quote from Vance, though, which went like this: “If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do … ”
It seemed likely to me that what Vance meant there was “create a news story” by bringing it up in a way that would get more media attention. But I didn’t know, because I hadn’t listened to the quote. So I went looking for a clip. Coverage was mostly of the “see, Vance admits he’s lying!” variety (see this sort of thing, for example).
But Politico managed to show the quote in context. Here’s a transcript I made of the following video:
VANCE: The media totally ignored this stuff until Donald Trump and I started talking about the cat memes. If I have to …
BASH: [interrupts] But it wasn’t just a meme [unintelligible word] …
VANCE: … create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do, Dana, because you guys are completely letting Kamala Harris coast.
BASH: You just said that this is a story that you …
VANCE: [overtalks] Yes!
BASH: … created. So, so the [shakes head] eating dogs and cats thing is not [he starts overtalking] accurate.
VANCE … [starts while Bash is still talking] We, we are creating … [closes eyes and shakes head “no” in some annoyance] Dana, it comes from first-hand accounts from my constituents. I say that we’re “creating a story” meaning we’re creating the American media focusing on it. I didn’t create twenty thousand illegal migrants coming into Springfield, thanks to Kamala Harris’ policies. Her policies did that but yeah, we created the actual focus that allowed the American media to talk about this story and the suffering caused by Kamala Harris’ policies.
Here’s a longer clip of the interview, in case you’re interested:
I think this is a good illustration of how so many people come to hate Trump and Vance. The use of these truncated quotes, over and over, by the media as well as Democrat candidates and spokespeople, has created a very strong perception amounting almost to a certainly in many people’s minds that Trump and Vance and anyone who supports them are simply awful people – that the candidates are diabolical racists who lie and lie and lie and aren’t even ashamed of it.
This edifice of perception has been built, brick by brick by brick, over the course of many years. There are thousands of such bricks, and if you knock one down, there are plenty of others to shore up the building of belief. To argue in a manner that could make a dent in such beliefs, a person would have to knock down hundreds of such bricks, which would take an incredible amount of time and effort. And it would take remarkable and unusual patience in listening on the part of the Trump/Vance hater, as well. How many people are willing to go through that? Very very few.
This is also where Trump’s “lies” come from. He exaggerates at times, typical salesman talk, and he has been a very successful salesman for decades. I do wonder if Vance is surprised by the sudden hostility after being interviewed about his book. He seems to handle it well.
It’s raining cats and dogs in Springfield.
Intentional misinterpretation is the true “creating” here, a theft of meaning by Bash to replace Vance’s intention with her own. Time was such a person would be drummed from polite society (or simply slapped across their smug mug), but in our times intentional misinterpretation rules the roost.
People are just primed to want to believe the very worst possible interpretation of something that a figure that they already hate said or did. There’s a certain grim glee that can come from having your worst beliefs about a person confirmed, about having your hatred of them validated. It’s why the media plays these games, taking quotes out of context and purposefully misinterpreting them. They know damn well that people want to have their (what they believe to be) righteous hatred justified. People want to have their perceptions of themselves and their role as a good guy who is part of the good team validated as well as that there are true villians who they can feel good about hating.
Only the media is allowed to “create stories,” but some of them are too thick to realize that that is exactly what they do every day.
Dana’s resting face is positively chilling. I wonder what her ex-husbands had to do or say to get that icy look.
I can see two sides to this, however… That is some incredibly sloppy and dangerous verbiage for Vance to use in that context. He already knew the Dems were pushing the “it’s a lie” idea by Sept. 15th. Then he only attempts to justify the validity of the story at the very end of the dialog.
I see Republicans doing this all the time. It’s as though they operate in a bubble of conservatism (or something) where they don’t even have to make a statement of where the truth is in these topics. Now if they are appearing on Fox, it’s one thing, but this is Dana Bash.
No i dont see it that way it was the only example that got their attention
They’ve been doing this to Trump since 2015.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali points out what the real story is here:
Paul Simon nailed it:
“A man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest.”
– the Boxer
WOW! Watching the full interview, isn’t Vance formidable. Bash is a bashometer. She needs her wings clipped. We created “the light” of the needs of the people, says Vance.
Unlike the sometimes flippant and witty Trump, Vance makes the argument in long-form.
sdferr is straight on, right — “Intentional misinterpretation is the true ‘creating’ here, a theft of meaning by Bash to replace Vance’s intention with her own.”
By 14m, Bash rides on official claims. Vance counters with direct from constituents claims. She responds with denials. It’s the foghorn of the Propaganda State that she echoes.
But back to the second assassination attempt on Trump, yesterday, Just The News shared Scott Rasmussen’s 1,000 likely voter poll (16-17 Sep), finding that 28% of Democrats would rather these actual assailant to have been successful.
Bash ignores that the violence is coming from the Left, not Rs.
“In a shocking display of how vitriolic U.S. politics has become, more than a quarter [28%] of Democrats believe America would be better off if GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump had been killed during one of the two assassination attempts on his life, a new survey revealed Wednesday.”
Will the propaganda media ever report this hugely important fact finding? Of course not. They are not shocked — to put words into Bash’s face, because you side with the 28%.
I recall that CNN and CBS News investigative reporter Cheryl Attkisson (sp?) was surprised by the morose atmosphere at her New York office after the Gingrich Revolution finally outed Democrats from the House after the 1994 election.
Her editor explained their grief, “We lost (control of Congress)” after over 40 years of uninterrupted rule in the House. She says she had no idea that newspeople took any sides in politics. They were there to report facts, not to take “sides”.
Everything we took for granted is going away now: “We now live in a nation where doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the press destroys information, religion destroys morals, and our banks destroy our economy.”
~ Chris Hedges
T J:
Chris Hedges should know about “the press destroying information.” He’s one of the champion liars of the leftist press.
Please see this post of mine from 2014.
Bash is really disgusting. You can just see the hate oozing from every pore when she’s dealing with anyone right of center.
How can one deal with such vitriol? I don’t like these people, but I can’t see degrading my mental and physical health with the hate these people exude.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali [Kate (3:59 pm)] notwithstanding, I appreciate as well the perspective offered by TommyJay (3:51 pm).
Vance is putting lipstick on a pig. Yes, he and Trump were “creating a story”, bringing attention to something that mainstreamers are happy to ignore. Vance (and Hirsi Ali) are right to bring attention to the situation.
But Trump has, as so often happens, offered at no extra charge, something else to pin on him, and that is spewing allegations that at best await verification. Purloining and dining on geese does seem to be the case over there. Dogs, well okay, in some cultures (but Haitians?). Now *cats*?? I think it’s better to button up over that one until there’s decent evidence. I wish Trump had buttoned up, but buttoning up just isn’t in his DNA.
(Chris Rufo says there’s a video of people barbecueing cats in Dayton OH, but he says that even he hasn’t seen the video himself.)
But I digress. We want the story to be about Haitians (or any foreigners) overwhelming small towns uninvited, but the mainstreamers get to ignore the overwhelming and get to make it about eating cats.
And then [see TommyJay (3:51 pm)] they get to make it about Vance admitting to lying. Lipstick doesn’t look very attractive on a pig.
I know, I know, the other side gets to lie and fabricate all over the place with impunity. That’s the playing field on which we good guys find ourselves, and until that changes, we have to play by their side’s more exacting rules (that apply only to us).
I’m one of those dinosaurs that believes in straightforward truth from any side. Sigh, the supply outstrips the demand. Okay, there I go, digressing again.
@M J R:That’s the playing field on which we good guys find ourselves, and until that changes, we have to play by their side’s more exacting rules (that apply only to us).
Never going to change as long as we continue to play. You don’t win three card monte by continuing to play. You walk away, or you flip the table over and administer a beatdown.
Trump’s skill is using the media’s weaknesses against them. In this case, the media is now having to say well akshually the Haitians are only taking geese in Springfield and and akshually the cats were barbequed by Africans not Haitians in Dayton not Springfield, instead of either reporting nothing, or reporting how wonderful it is that dying Springfield was revitalized by plucky immigrants.
Recently one of the big media outlets was pretending that the Capitol Hill occupation in Seattle never happened. This is not casino blackjack with a house edge, this is three card monte. It’s not biased, so much as it is a scam.
I still have co-workers who truly believe that Palin actually said “I can see Russia from my house.”
Even after I point out that was from a Saturday Night Live skit; they still refuse to believe that she did NOT say that.
Too many people hear only what they want to hear, see only what they want to see, and believe only what they want to believe.
LINK for above about Rasmussen, and replies
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/hldwed8a-poll-shocker-28-democrats-think-america-better-if-trump
Indeed he ought to, neo.
The story I cite at Just The News had this tantalising yet under-explicated teasing sub-headline of interest here. “ New Scott Rasmussen poll also shows Americans think anti-Trump rhetoric main reason for assassination attempts.”
So, I go to the Link given for details.
The questions on poll percentages tell us that more than anything or anyone else, people perceive Trump as having “used overheated language that might encourage some people to act violently?” at 54%.
But at least that answer is balanced by the next question on who is actually “encouraging the assassination attempts on Donald Trump?” Collectively, the news media and “Anti-Trump” rhetoric dominate responses.
https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2024-09/GCM24-0917%20Toplines%20-%20Assassination%20Attempt.pdf
EXCERPTS of interest:
6* Please let me know if the following have played a role in encouraging the assassination attempts on Donald Trump?
45% Anti-Trump rhetoric
41% The news media
30% The Trump campaign 25% The Harris campaign
18% None of these
7* While it is always difficult to wish ill of another human being, would America be better off if Donald Trump had been killed last weekend?
17% Yes [28% of Democrats]
69% No
14% Not sure
8* If Donald Trump is re-elected in November, would that constitute a major threat to democracy in the United States?
48% Yes 43% No
9% Not sure
9* What if Kamala Harris is elected. Would that constitute a major threat to democracy in the United States?
37% Yes
52% No
10% Not sure
T J (4:55 pm) quotes,
“In a shocking display of how vitriolic U.S. politics has become, . . . .”
I don’t think it’s “shocking”. Look at it this way . . .
I do NOT favor assassinating ANYONE, okay? I don’t even favor wishing someone ill, ill unto death. BUT — were certain someones to die, I do think that *objectively*, the world would be better off, in certain cases much better off, without those certain someones.
And certain of those certain someones are even prominent American public figures.
I guess the vitriol enters in when people are consciously wishing others ill, whether via assassination or via heart attack or via what have you.
We’re losing our common humanity. It’s awful.
physicsguy finds out that Jacobin far Lefties are beyond the pale: “ How can one deal with such vitriol (as Bash exudes)? I don’t like these people, but I can’t see degrading my mental and physical health with the hate these people exude.”
These people wants us DEAD — for just dissenting! Trump FIRST! But we’re all next in line.
Maybe physicsguy knows the long-term cost such fevered hate requires. But when it comes to the physical threat coming, the price one must be prepared to pay comes into focus — when “Give use your Liberty or your life!” is demanded — then because I’m an American who loves the “Radicalism of the American Revolution” (a Gordon Wood thesis), I know that I’m prepared to pay it.
The Declaration of Independence? “It’s the only thing we’ve got”, as Americans, says Wood, interviewed here last year: https://www.dadsavesamerica.com/p/how-the-declaration-of-independence-fda
It remains “The most powerful statement of Democratic Revolution” the world has ever seen.
M J R: agreed.
https://hotair.com/jeff-goldstein/2009/03/09/how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-f-bomb-n160646
Read it. Don’t read it. Your choice.
TJ, it’s the long term cost mentally and physically such hate takes on a person I was referring.
I’m not so ignorant that I just discovered that such people are beyond the pale. Give me some credit….sheesh
Not so oddly, I found a Babylon Bee offering in my inbox, in which they took about ten quotes and totally distorted the meaning by leaving out a word here or there.
Sometimes the ‘fake news you can trust’ is too close to real news for comfort.
I don’t know what to do about these people. I do all that I am able to do–I never tune them in.
Actually, they are so obvious that it would be comical, except for people like those cited in this thread who swallow it. I really don’t know what to do about them.
Personal–I was teasing one daughter, who is an ordinarily intelligent “Bernie Bro”–or pretends to be–about the fact that it was a kindred Bernie spirit who tried to assassinate Trump.
The other daughter immediately jumped in to indicate that the real problem was the open carry laws in Florida. She was serious. This woman has a Doctorate, is an Executive in the health care field, and a University Lecturer, yet she bought that line from some ‘trusted source’. To say that I was dismayed, and showed it, would be an understatement.
Re: Cat-eating viral meme
Well, Trump and Vance did break through. It’s now a viral meme on X/Twitter and TikTok:
________________________
They’re eating the dogs
They’re eating the cats
Eat the cat
Eat the dog
https://x.com/ArtCandee/status/1834294453369991367
________________________
The video is trolling Trump and Vance.
However, I’ve also encountered some conservative commentary which sees it as a win to cut through the media blackout on immigrant dumping on US cities.
I couldn’t say who’s winning this skirmish.
“I couldn’t say who’s winning this skirmish.”
As no explanation why Haitians are being imported by the Biden tyranny into small town communities has been forthcoming, you are standing on solid ground there, huxley. Consequences? Hell, we aren’t even fit to have answers.
We, we are creating … [closes eyes and shakes head “no” in some annoyance] Dana, it comes from first-hand accounts from my constituents. I say that we’re “creating a story” meaning we’re creating the American media focusing on it.
–J.D. Vance
So, according to Vance, the pet-eating meme was intentional. I was afraid it was just Trump babbling extemporaneously in the debate.
I’m still not sure it was a good idea.