Schumer: Trump Probably Regrets Picking 'Weird' J.D. Vance

www.rollingstone.com

cross-posted to:
[email protected]

262

Schumer: Trump Probably Regrets Picking 'Weird' J.D. Vance

www.rollingstone.com

@MicroWave to

politics English • 2 months ago

cross-posted to:
[email protected]

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer suggested that Donald Trump may be rethinking his choice of J.D. Vance as his vice presidential running-mate.

But Trump’s VP nominee is “one of the best things he ever did for Democrats,” the senator said

Donald Trump may be regretting his choice of running-mate and wondering “Why did I pick this guy?” according to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. Over the past few weeks since Trump announced his decision, the narrative that Sen. J.D. Vance is “weird” has gained traction, and Schumer speculated that may have the former president considering replacing him.

“Every day, it comes out Vance has done something more extreme, more weird, more erratic,” Schumer said. “Vance seems to be more weird and erratic than President Trump, and I’ll bet President Trump is sitting there, scratching his head, and wondering, ‘Why did I pick this guy?’”

Chat

Boozilla
link
English
20•2 months ago
While all the other politicians are doing their weird sex dungeon stuff in the middle of the night, they’re laughing at this dipshit for not knowing how to cover his tracks.

politics

[email protected]

Create a post

You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News