I’m not convinced by Phil’s argument regarding Vance’s RJC remarks, since, again, he embraced Israel, rejected antisemitism in unmistakable terms, claimed Charlie Kirk for the pro-Zionist side, and said both Jews and Christians believe people are made in the image of God.
That said, I agree with Phil about Vance’s comments about Tucker Carlson yesterday. They were very weak. I assumed Vance had a canned answer ready to go but thought it would be better than that.
He’d have stopped short of renouncing Tucker as a friend and avoided getting into any of it in detail, while still making his differences clearer, if he had said something like this:
“I’m friends with Tucker, but it’s pained me to hear some of the things he’s said about the president and Jewish influence on our public life. I don’t want to litigate any of this with you, because he talks two hours a day, and I have a full-time job. But suffice it to say he doesn’t speak for me on such matters. Next question.”
I assume he’s being so tepid because a full personal break with Tucker would be sincerely unwelcome for him, and he doesn’t want Tucker denouncing him as a sellout and a fraud. But so long as Vance is mealymouthed — and especially won’t push back on any of Carlson’s anti-Jewish insanity — he’s going to continue to get hammered by people who assume the worst of him.
Also, without having any insight into it, I doubt a Tucker–Vance relationship will survive a Vance presidential candidacy in 2028, given how much Carlson hates Republicans now.
So, Vance is probably delaying the inevitable.
This is a very insidery issue at the moment, but if Vance is still trying to walk this tightrope when a campaign is fully under way, he risks seeming scared of an influencer and therefore weak.
Not to mention that drawing a bright line here is the right thing to do.