880
submitted 1 month ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

JD Vance was roundly mocked online over a trip to the supermarket where he bemoaned the steep price of eggs — and botched the photo opp.

The Republican vice presidential nominee stopped by a supermarket in Reading, Pennsylvania, with his sons over the weekend to illustrate how grocery prices have been impacted by “Kamala Harris’s policies” when he claimed a dozen eggs cost $4.

The problem? When footage of the visit emerged, Vance was quickly called out by viewers who spotted the price tag of a dozen eggs behind him was actually $2.99.


🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 month ago

I remember reading somewhere that it was likely something he picked up from his wife, as it is apparently not uncommon in India?

That could have been a lie, but honestly who cares how the guy chooses to dress or present? His views and words are toxic enough that we don’t need to resort to personal attacks on his appearance; calling him and his ilk ‘weird’ is more cutting to them than anything else.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 7 points 1 month ago

I mean, he probably shouldn't be talking about drag queens.

[-] PixeIOrange@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

My problem with it, and this might be wrong so sorry if i am, is that he doesnt have a clue how the people he represents live. Politics have separated from the people and he doesnt recognize this. Instead of understanding his job or his land, he seem to care more for his looks. Its another little step in diverting from the people. I personally have no problem at all if someone just does what he/she likes as long as no boundaries are hurt. Im happy that this gets more common these days.

[-] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 month ago

The best way to look at it is to ask “if he cared less about his appearance, and dressed more slovenly - would it excuse his abhorrent views and stances?”.

If the answer is no, then it should be a non-factor.

A cynical part of me thinks that some of the more outlandish politicians dress that way (Trump’s hair dye and fake tan, JD Vance’s guyliner, Boris Johnson’s unkempt hair, etc.) are done in part as an attempt to de-rail reporting by having us fall into the easy trap of ridiculing their appearance rather than criticising their views and actions.

[-] UmeU@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

While I do think this is an intended strategy for Boris Johnson (he’s admitted as much), I think the clown show which is Vance / Trump, and don’t forget Giuliani’s dripping hair dye, is not premeditated. That would be giving them too much credit.

I think they are just simply bumbling from one grift to the next, completely unaware of how ridiculous they look.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

To me, it's more about the fact that if any of his followers saw someone in makeup and decided they were a man in any other instance, they would treat that person like shit.

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

It's to make them stand out, so you don't confound them with other people.

Trump just looks like any old man without his ridiculous makeup.

this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
880 points (97.7% liked)

News

23296 readers
2501 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS