Published on July 30, 2024, 12:27 am

In a recent, unexpected move, Democrats have begun to use an unusual new messaging strategy against Sen. JD Vance (R-OH) following his announcement as former President Donald Trump’s anticipated running mate. Rather than critiquing the senator’s policy positions or Senate career, Democrats seem to be promoting a peculiar notion: that JD Vance is “weird.” This strikingly different talking point seems to mark an effort from the left to shift away from their standard rhetoric.

This strange yet effective talking point first made its rounds when Democratic Minnesota Governor Tim Walz used it in a recent interview. Since then, Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign and several other Democrats have adapted this new classification of Vance and incorporated it in their media releases.

By utilizing this unconventional descriptor for Trump and Vance, they are making an overt rhetorical shift — from high-minded messaging to using words that more straightforwardly express public sentiment towards hard-line conservative rhetoric that Vance often employs.

According to Tim Hogan, a well-known Democratic strategist who also worked on the 2020 presidential campaign for fellow Minnesotan Sen. Amy Klobuchar, this term captures the underlying discomfort among people who don’t immerse themselves in politics daily but respond negatively when hearing the Republican VP candidate criticize those without children. In Hogan’s eyes, it mirrors how many might discuss the current political climate with a neighbor informally.

However, right-leaning social media users wasted no time coming forward with reasons why this new messaging strategy can potentially backfire. Using examples like Ella Emhoff’s surprising attire choice or Nancy Pelosi wearing a traditional African cloth while kneeling in the Capitol amongst others, they robustly questioned the peculiarities within the Democrat party itself.

Vance himself responded indifferently towards being labeled as “weird,” stating in an interview that he is not bothered by this simplification and views it merely as part of serving his countrymen proudly under inevitable Democrat attacks.

The adoption of this new label as part of a widely recognized messaging strategy underscores an astounding miscalculation. If sections of your party seem outlandish and the counterpart is being called “weird,” it might be time for some self-analysis.

However, the act of categorizing all societal eccentricities or oddities within political figures as ‘weird’ might oversimplify the unique characteristics that differentiate us. Running for office does require a degree of uniqueness; however, cherry-picking these quirks to paint someone in a particular light can serve as a double-edged sword in the dynamically evolving world of real news and trusted news from a Christian worldview.

Ultimately, what may seem “weird” to one person could appear perfectly reasonable to another—it just depends on who’s looking at it through which lens. The challenge lies in delivering breaking news with objective veracity rather than subjective perceptions.