American Politics Realigning? Walz and Vance Might Be More Similar Than You Think

Something important and promising might well be happening in American politics. At the popular level, working class folks are expressing their deep discontent with a system run by octogenarians who serve their donors rather than the American taxpayer. The latter has come to realize that Democrats and Republicans have formed a kind of Uni-party beholden to the rich and powerful rather than to their plebian electors.

Strange to say however, both parties have shown faint signs of perhaps recognizing that truth and its devastating consequences for them at the voting booth. The Republican Party has selected a presidential candidate (Donald Trump) who talks a good game in terms of rebellion against the status quo. At the same time, the Democrats have set aside their senile superannuated “leader” (Joe Biden) in favor of a much younger black woman (Kamala Harris).

The truth is however that the policies of neither Trump nor Harris promise much difference in terms of changing the given order as far as international relations are concerned. No matter who’s elected, genocidal support for Zionism will remain a cornerstone of our country’s foreign policy. The war in Ukraine will continue it seems “to the last Ukrainian.” And America’s “diplomacy” will still prioritize war, sanctions, and regime change over peace-seeking diplomacy and dialog. All of that will continue unabated.

Nevertheless, Kamala Harris’ selection of Tim Walz as her running mate and Donald Trump’s choice of J.D. Vance as his offer strong indications that something new might be afoot for 2028. Both Walz and Vance are far more thoughtful than Harris or Trump. In fact, both vice-presidential candidates might be more war averse and friendly to the working class than their mentors.

Tim Walz

That’s clear to most in the case of Tim Walz. As Minnesota governor, he has distinguished himself as a progressive. Among other legislative achievements, he signed bills that:

• Made access to abortion easier
• Provide free breakfast and lunch to all school children
• Offer free college tuition for families with incomes of $80,000 or less
• Curb greenhouse gas emissions
• Moved towards establishing a public healthcare option within the MinnesotaCare system
• Restored voting rights to decarcerated felons
• Vastly increased Minnesota’s spending on housing to prevent homelessness, expand homeownership opportunities and provide rental assistance to thousands of households.

J.D. Vance

As for J.D. Vance, his populist credentials might be less evident.

Still, according to American lawyer and political commentator, Robert Barnes, J.D. Vance might well be “the most war-skeptical, pro-worker Republican office holder of the last 100 years.”

Barnes supports this contention by citing (among other considerations) Vance’s 2024 vote against a $95 billion Ukraine aid package. Vance was one of only 18 senators voting against it in a 79-18 tally. (Vance thinks Ukraine is Europe’s problem and not that of the United States.) Barnes also points out that the Teamsters regard Vance as an important working-class ally.

As for intellectual influences on Senator Vance, here is a list provided by Politico’s Ian Ward in his article “The Seven Thinkers and Groups That Have Shaped JD Vance’s Unusual Worldview.”

1. Catholic Social Teaching: Catholic social justice teachings (the “best kept secret of the Catholic Church”) emphasize community, workers’ rights, and environmental protection. The most famous examples of such teachings are found in the encyclicals of Leo XIII (Rerum Novarum 1891), Pius XI (Quadragesimo Anno 1931), John XXIII (Mater et Magistra 1961), John XXIII (Pacem in Terris 1963), Vatican II (Gaudium et Spes, 1965), and Pope Francis (Laudato Si 2015).
2. Sohrab Ahmari (co-editor of Compact Magazine): Also emphasizes Catholic teachings regarding social justice.
3. Peter Deneen (University of Notre Dame): Deneen holds that unfettered free markets with their emphasis on competition have undercut not only the American family, but communitarian values and the collective basis of our national life. Neoliberal economics need not only restraint but replacement.
4. Brad Wilcox (BYU): Wilcox argues that women’s entry into the workforce has been better for companies than for most women. The companies benefit from more and cheaper labor. Meanwhile many women end up hating their jobs. Too many also feel overworked because they typically retain responsibility for cooking, cleaning, and childcare when they return from the workplace.
5. Peter Thiel (Hedge Fund Investor): Thiel warns against a technology that has too often shackled us as opposed to liberating us and building a better society. We need to get off our phones.
6. Curtis Yarvin (American blogger): For Yarvin, American democracy has deteriorated into control by a corrupt oligarchy. Resolving such tendencies, he says, might entail installing a kind of dictator— a nationalist CEO who would run the country like a startup business.
7. Rene Girard (French historian and theologian): Girard holds that Christianity must be reinterpreted to recognize that the Judeo-Christian tradition is on the side of the poor and oppressed rather than the rich and powerful.

Conclusion

It’s discouraging that American political discourse is overwhelmingly ad hominem rather than focused on the issues suggested by the policies of Tim Walz and the intellectual influences on J.D. Vance.

“Vance is weird.” “Walz is a communist.” “Trump’s a fascist.” “Harris is the product of DEI.” “My audience crowds are bigger than yours.”

Such immature schoolyard put-downs do nothing at all to address the real concerns of voters.  

Better to explore candidates’ stances on climate change and the threat of nuclear war. Why is America so beholden to Israel and cooperative with its clearly genocidal policies? And what is Ukraine to us?

What about street people and public housing? What about subsidized childcare, free post-secondary education, and debt relief for those with unrepayable student loans? Have the candidates thought about the issues of police violence and reparations to the black community? And do any of those seeking our vote recognize connections between immigration and U.S. wars, regime changes, and sanctions?

And at an even deeper level, are we primarily individuals in competition with one another or must we rediscover community and common good? Has technology become our master rather than our servant? And what are best practices for addressing issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion? What are the benefits and liabilities of universal healthcare and state-subsidized education?

Those are the issues that need addressing and serious debate. Those are the issues that require real discussion rather than the sound bites, slogans, and zingers.  

And while Harris and Trump offer little hope of going there, I’m suggesting here that their selection of running mates more serious and thoughtful than either main candidate perhaps offer some hope for the future.

Walz’s policy decisions as governor of Minnesota and the influences on Vance’s thinking seem to suggest that it does.

What do you think?