Anonymous wrote:I loved his book and learned a lot from his first hand accounts.

I just totally disagreed with his conclusions about how to prevent cycles of poverty endemic to the rust belt and Appalachia where he grew up. Obviously, many of them need systematic help. It sounds so trite and simplistic to contend yet they could all beat inter generational poverty with a bit of elbow grease. Millions of LMC youth not getting into an Ivy law school.

On the other hand, personal work ethic is obviously important as well.

There needs to be a balance between structural supports to encourage social mobility and individual work ethic.

I was surprised to hear he is Republican after reading his book. You’d think he’d have more empathy.

Another republican drinks the kool-aid and gets hoisted by their own petard.

I read the book. I was struck by three things:

- The first half of the book was sensitively written; the second was a conservative screed.
- When he first got to Yale, his friends seemed to be others who felt at least somewhat like outsiders. Once Vance seemed to have broken the code and been accepted by elite power brokers, there were few, if any, mentions of the people who had befriended him when he felt out of place.
- He seems to have limited empathy and imagination. He either doesn’t get or doesn’t care that it’s easier to work the system when you’re white and male than when you’re not — despite working hard, being intelligent, and even attending an Ivy League law school. I’m sure he has qualities that might not be adequately captured in the book, but that really made me wonder about how that attitude will impact his biracial kids.

tldr: He got to make the leap from self-proclaimed “hillbilly” to something approximating a hillbilly’s vision of what a rich, powerful, white male looks like. . It’s a caricature he embraces.

I loved his book and learned a lot from his first hand accounts.

I just totally disagreed with his conclusions about how to prevent cycles of poverty endemic to the rust belt and Appalachia where he grew up. Obviously, many of them need systematic help. It sounds so trite and simplistic to contend yet they could all beat inter generational poverty with a bit of elbow grease. Millions of LMC youth not getting into an Ivy law school.

On the other hand, personal work ethic is obviously important as well.

There needs to be a balance between structural supports to encourage social mobility and individual work ethic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He found a grift by pandering to the rubes.

+1
Grifters grift.

I don't think this is just a grift. After the popularity of his book, he was given a number of platforms including tv appearances, speaking engagements and venture capital etc. After his initial surge in popularity, he tried to be a thoughtful, reasonable, nuanced voice speaking to what he saw as some of the structural problems in this country. He just realized that this was not viable for him in a post-Trump era and pivoted era.

Heard much from Ramesh Ponnuru lately? Yuval Levin? Reihan Salam? Erick Erickson? These guys were, at one point, supposed to be conversation-shapers at the vanguard of new conservatism and J.D. was dabbling in that conversation and ideological hand wringing. Trump has sucked all of the energy out of the room and now political branding is defined by reference to Trump, until he is off the scene for good.

Unlike someone like Trump, JD has been thinking about running for public office for quite a while and curating his steps with that in mind. He fashions himself a serious person and a serious thinker. But you have to survive in this game. He made his choice, but I don't think it was all a grift, so much as it was an attempt to keep his fledgling political career from running into immediate headwinds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He found a grift by pandering to the rubes.

+1
Grifters grift.

+2 he’ll twist with the wind the next time a new flavor of “Conservative” comes around and “Trumpism” isn’t in favor anymore.

Anonymous wrote:He found a grift by pandering to the rubes.

+1
Grifters grift.

He found a grift by pandering to the rubes.

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent dude, and his wife is great. But he's quite ambitious and made the political calculus a while ago that the National Review brand of conservatism was not a viable path for his political fortunes. He can be thoughtful and nuanced (and some of his writings reflect this, even if you do not agree with him), but nobody is buying that these days, especially with the specter of Trumpism looming. He's had to walk back a number of his anti-Trump opinions in order to try to carve out a niche. This is the calculus that has been made, but it does not appear to be working.

Look at Asha Rangappa, who was at YLS at the same time as JD and is now a twitter warrior. These things happen when visibility, attention, ambition, scrutiny and brand-building enter the mix.

As evidenced by Ted Cruz at the SCOTUS confirmation hearings recently, you would be surprised (or perhaps not) by the number of esteemed, venerable people who are completely obsessed with their twitter mentions and the concomitant attention high. Sign of the times.

+1 to all of this.

I have to say that I do really wonder about his wife and how she's dealing with this. It would be hard for impossible for me to deal with this. They seemingly moved to Ohio to be close to his roots and to work to "make things better" with your spouse who was moderate right at best. Now the dude is more or less on the Trump. I don't think I could deal.

Guess he wants to appeal to the republican base.

Anonymous wrote:Power reveals who someone really is. Trash.

He has no real power right now independent of his backers, just visibility. Peter Thiel, Steve Case and a number of other rich backers were taken with Hillbilly Elegy and provided a platform. Working on the power part now.

He turned out to be just another spineless opportunist, like every other Republican who wants us to forget they once opposed Trump?

He's a decent dude, and his wife is great. But he's quite ambitious and made the political calculus a while ago that the National Review brand of conservatism was not a viable path for his political fortunes. He can be thoughtful and nuanced (and some of his writings reflect this, even if you do not agree with him), but nobody is buying that these days, especially with the specter of Trumpism looming. He's had to walk back a number of his anti-Trump opinions in order to try to carve out a niche. This is the calculus that has been made, but it does not appear to be working.

Look at Asha Rangappa, who was at YLS at the same time as JD and is now a twitter warrior. These things happen when visibility, attention, ambition, scrutiny and brand-building enter the mix.

As evidenced by Ted Cruz at the SCOTUS confirmation hearings recently, you would be surprised (or perhaps not) by the number of esteemed, venerable people who are completely obsessed with their twitter mentions and the concomitant attention high. Sign of the times.

Power reveals who someone really is. Trash.

It’s just shocking to me. Clearly a smart & educated dude; grew up lower-middle class, entered the marines then graduated from Ohio State in only two years, then Yale Law. His wife was a Gates Cambridge Scholar, then attended Yale Law and is a successful lawyer. In his book, he criticized Fox.

Now he’s on Twitter rambling about illegal immigrants and yada yada.