• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Walz's "attack" on Vance for graduating from Yale?

Oh, I did. The fact that you can't follow along is your issue to resolve and not mine.
If you can take off the Trump "binders", your horizons might get a bit broader.

What did attending Yale have to do with “his roots”, other than his claim of having different “roots” than many (if not most) of his fellow students and faculty there?
 
Where did Walz say Vance's education was "bad"? I didn't see it in the article.
Walz didn't criticize the education.
He said (essentially) that it was part of what makes JD further distanced from "middle America" than he, himself, is. Is that "bad"? I would say not necessarily so.
Exactly. His reference was simply to point out how phony Vance's "As a result of my life experiences and upbringing, I'm for the working man" campaign bullshit.
 
What did attending Yale have to do with “his roots”, other than his claim of having different “roots” than many (if not most) of his fellow students and faculty there?
Geez. Walz never criticized Yale nor minimized the education. Now, since I don't speak your Trumpian dialect, that is the best that I can do for you. Maybe you can re-focus your outrage to Trump's disgusting MEDAL OF HONOR remarks. Something that actually warrants outrage.
 
Geez. Walz never criticized Yale nor minimized the education.

Really?

“Like all regular people I grew up with in the heartland, J.D. studied at Yale,” Walz said sarcastically at the rally.

Walz and you seem to imply that by later attending Yale, JD Vance somehow lost his status of having been a regular person from the heartland.

Now, since I don't speak your Trumpian dialect, that is the best that I can do for you. Maybe you can re-focus your outrage to Trump's disgusting MEDAL OF HONOR remarks. Something that actually warrants outrage.

Nope, I’m going to stick to the thread topic.
 
he governor, in a recent interview on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, expanded on that point, saying, “None of my hillbilly cousins went to Yale, and none of them went on to be venture capitalists, or whatever.”...
how horrible.. what makes "elites" is their policies. not their background
 
Interesting tidbit:

I'm not at all surprised by this and it's a bit of a dilemma for conservative parents and their children who have been raised in a conservative family.

Really smart people come from both sides of the political spectrum. I happen to have grandchildren all around the beginning, middle, and very soon stages of college. A few of them are of the academic caliber to be choosing and attending schools at the very top level. And it's a problem right now because their brains and capabilities compete with what these schools now represent politically. It's not like there is a set of very top universities that lean right. But luckily, there are majors in these top universities which largely prevent the student from the worst of the political brainwashing (like engineering, physics, applied math, chemistry, etc.)

The left has effectively taken over the entire U.S. educational system from start to finish, and the brainwashing is rampant at all levels. Shame on the right for allowing this to occur and not noticing it over all the years this has been well underway. At the lower levels, school choice is now really gaining momentum and spread and that's a wonderful direction and change IMO. But the top universities are still from really far to quite far left - nearly all of them.

So, the kids from conservative families have to set that aside when their academic goals are of the highest nature. Acceptances to these schools is an enormous honor and only the very smartest and best have any chance. For now, it's actually a big help if the applicant is a minority and poor. These schools are really after upping the number of such students in their application process. And once upon a time, it was useful to be a female but that's switched now. The best of the best "smarts" are now more often coming from girls than boys so the enrollment numbers have gotten skewed toward girls - so now it's actually an acceptance advantage to be male rather than female. And these schools are simply loaded with money/endowments, so they don't care how many students pay full tuition, part tuition, or go to school on full financial aid. Money isn't helpful and poverty isn't harmful.

As I've closely watched this application/acceptance process very firsthand in several recent years, I well understand the hard work, dedication, desire, stress, and anxiety these very top students go through and the enormous pride in their accomplishments. Left or right, these kids have so much potential and, those at that level, just set politics aside and plunge themselves into their academic endeavors.

Attacking Vance (Obama, DeSantis, Hillary, Bill and more) for their impressive academic successes is asinine and will only make those who engage in it look petty, defensive, stupid and jealous. Chances are, no one who succeeded like this rare group has, will be doing the bashing. That group doing the bashing is likely the type like Walz, who has embellished their own past and pretended they were more successful than they really were. The type who has blamed others for their DUIs and has a history of calling themselves by a rank or label they never achieved, accomplished or finished. That's pathetic. Few of us can academically do what Vance did but bashing those that did - is pathetic. There is everything right about being just who you are and taking pride in that but there everything wrong with pretending to be something you aren't and bashing others who accomplished things you didn't.
 
I'm not at all surprised by this and it's a bit of a dilemma for conservative parents and their children who have been raised in a conservative family.

Really smart people come from both sides of the political spectrum. I happen to have grandchildren all around the beginning, middle, and very soon stages of college. A few of them are of the academic caliber to be choosing and attending schools at the very top level. And it's a problem right now because their brains and capabilities compete with what these schools now represent politically. It's not like there is a set of very top universities that lean right. But luckily, there are majors in these top universities which largely prevent the student from the worst of the political brainwashing (like engineering, physics, applied math, chemistry, etc.)

The left has effectively taken over the entire U.S. educational system from start to finish, and the brainwashing is rampant at all levels. Shame on the right for allowing this to occur and not noticing it over all the years this has been well underway. At the lower levels, school choice is now really gaining momentum and spread and that's a wonderful direction and change IMO. But the top universities are still from really far to quite far left - nearly all of them.

So, the kids from conservative families have to set that aside when their academic goals are of the highest nature. Acceptances to these schools is an enormous honor and only the very smartest and best have any chance. For now, it's actually a big help if the applicant is a minority and poor. These schools are really after upping the number of such students in their application process. And once upon a time, it was useful to be a female but that's switched now. The best of the best "smarts" are now more often coming from girls than boys so the enrollment numbers have gotten skewed toward girls - so now it's actually an acceptance advantage to be male rather than female. And these schools are simply loaded with money/endowments, so they don't care how many students pay full tuition, part tuition, or go to school on full financial aid. Money isn't helpful and poverty isn't harmful.

As I've closely watched this application/acceptance process very firsthand in several recent years, I well understand the hard work, dedication, desire, stress, and anxiety these very top students go through and the enormous pride in their accomplishments. Left or right, these kids have so much potential and, those at that level, just set politics aside and plunge themselves into their academic endeavors.

Attacking Vance (Obama, DeSantis, Hillary, Bill and more) for their impressive academic successes is asinine and will only make those who engage in it look petty, defensive, stupid and jealous. Chances are, no one who succeeded like this rare group has, will be doing the bashing. That group doing the bashing is likely the type like Walz, who has embellished their own past and pretended they were more successful than they really were. The type who has blamed others for their DUIs and has a history of calling themselves by a rank or label they never achieved, accomplished or finished. That's pathetic. Few of us can academically do what Vance did but bashing those that did - is pathetic. There is everything right about being just who you are and taking pride in that but there everything wrong with pretending to be something you aren't and bashing others who accomplished things you didn't.
Partisan much?
 
And, as I said, it's not a "criticism" of his graduating from Yale. It's pointing out that JD is far removed from "average middle America".





I'm certain lots of people thought/think so, yes.
He is now and largely/maybe even solely because of his impressive education, the opportunities that has provided him, and where that has taken him.

Almost any graduate from Yale has doors open wide to their future success (and they deserve it). They earned it and it took tremendous effort, brains, and fortitude to get to that open door stage. Most of them were lucky to be born with a very capable brain and then they applied it from the day they entered grade school, all the way through their Yale graduation.
 
Why would *Walz* label an ally as "elitist"??

Especially when Walz is running an "everyman campaign".

Is Walz's alleged failure to label Obama as an elitist "hypocritical" or "smart retail politics"???

Vance's "problem" is that he wants to RUN as an "everyman" (hilbilly, aw shucks, bootstraps, family-man, type guy).....but he's not anything like an "everyman."
It's not a problem that he grew up very poor and then went very far. It's a great success story.
 
I don't care for this one from Walz. Call him weird for making comments about "childless cat ladies" or other weird things that MAGA believes, but this line of attack is not a good one imo.

Firstly, Vance was able to attend Yale because the school provided financial aid for him to go. It was not like he paid for school using funds from his rich family.

Secondly, if a guy from a middle or lower class family is able to make a more successful life for himself, shouldn't we applaud it?

Now, going after him for being a venture capitalist might be a better sticking point, but Walz should leave off on the attacks about going to Yale, imho.


Thoughts?
It's a weird angle I would avoid, and mainly because what the Democrats should be aiming to do is work on getting back working class voters without alienating other voters. I don't see the point in knocking someone who was able to attend an Ivy League university. Many in the middle and lower classes aspire to have their kids attend the best schools, so knocking that doesn't work very well. Being rich shouldn't be demonized either, but poor behavior because someone is rich is fair game. There's plenty about Vance to attack than where he got his educations, and Vance seems happy to provide plenty of material so Walz should avoid any own goals.
 
Why would *Walz* label an ally as "elitist"??

Especially when Walz is running an "everyman campaign".

Is Walz's alleged failure to label Obama as an elitist "hypocritical" or "smart retail politics"???

Vance's "problem" is that he wants to RUN as an "everyman" (hilbilly, aw shucks, bootstraps, family-man, type guy).....but he's not anything like an "everyman."

OK, but neither is Walz who is a sitting state governor, running for the same higher office as Vance.
 
So if a poor kid goes to an Ivy League school, does the poor kid then become "distanced from middle America" at that point, just by virtue of an Ivy League education.

I mean, why listen to anyone who goes to such elitist private institutions?

95708
US-Secretary-of-Transportation-Pete-Buttigieg-official-photo.jpg


I'm going to say it one more time: Yale was only one piece of the puzzle.

If you want to try to argue that Maddow and Buttiegieg are just "regular folks", I won't stop you - but I probably won't agree with you.

I'll agree with the others, you seem oddly invested in this.
 
If a poor kid is able to overcome his roots and go to an Ivy League school, that should be celebrated, not criticized. That is what this thread is about.
Yes, it absolutely should!
 
He is now and largely/maybe even solely because of his impressive education, the opportunities that has provided him, and where that has taken him.

Almost any graduate from Yale has doors open wide to their future success (and they deserve it). They earned it and it took tremendous effort, brains, and fortitude to get to that open door stage. Most of them were lucky to be born with a very capable brain and then they applied it from the day they entered grade school, all the way through their Yale graduation.


None of that is "bad". Walz didn't say any of that was "bad".

This whole thread is a tempest in a teapot.
 
I'm going to say it one more time: Yale was only one piece of the puzzle.

If you want to try to argue that Maddow and Buttiegieg are just "regular folks", I won't stop you - but I probably won't agree with you.

I'll agree with the others, you seem oddly invested in this.
Because the Yale component is totally unnecessary and will actually turn some liberals who went to "elite" schools off. It does absolutely nothing good for Walz but can do some damage.
 
Here is another point: Did Vance take his elite "freebie" education and give anything back to his community? Nope. His focus was simply to enrich himself by any means ethical or not. In other words, he is a less entertaining "mini trump."
For anyone who chooses to "enrich themselves" by being accepted at and graduating from Yale, best of luck. Your chances of getting accepted and getting the chance are extremely low. And if you do pull it off - huge congrats and enjoy all the success that will likely bring you.
 
No. But here's the thing: we want to give MAGA a hard time about stating that higher education is not the best, and that is the right thing to do. If people have an opportunity to get a college degree from anywhere, much less an Ivy League school, and that education is of benefit to their career, kudos.

Therefore, if we want to mock MAGA for such statements, how is it not hypocritical to criticize Vance for going to Yale? Is Walz not doing the same thing MAGA does? Yes.
Did he "criticize" Vance for going to Yale? I didn't see that. I mean, I guess pointing something out that is true, part of Vance's resume, could be viewed as 'criticism' if you really, really want to see it that way, and the person in question is running as a common man of the people, fake populist, from Appalachia (spoiler - he didn't grow up in Appalachia), but why do YOU see it that way?
MAGAns are often denigrating higher education, and we rightfully criticize them for that. How then is it OK for Walz criticize Vance for his Yale education?
Yes, correctly pointing out a part of Vance's history is an ATTACK!!!!! UNFAIR!!!! Yes, sure, attending Yale then using your connections at the ELITE institution to get a job to make gobs of money at a VC firm, then being backed by other billionaire ELITES kind of doesn't fit with the fake populist image Vance is trying to peddle, which is also unfair!! I mean, how DARE Walz (former factory worker, small college graduate, HS teacher, football coach, member of the NG for 24 years) point out true things about Vance that undermines his opponent's fake populist message!!
 
None of that is "bad". Walz didn't say any of that was "bad".

This whole thread is a tempest in a teapot.
it's not. Its getting quite a bit of negative feedback on social media and not just from MAGAns.
 
OK, but neither is Walz who is a sitting state governor, running for the same higher office as Vance.
Difference is this....

Per his own book, once at Yale, Vance says he experienced an identity crisis .... he didn't fit in with the upper-crust Yalies and he didn't feel like he fit in with the middle-class in Middletown, OH.

With the help of his girlfriend (and later wife Usha) he learned to socially navigate with the upper-crust Yalies (which fork to use, shopping at high-end stores, etc.) and to "network" with the "right" people (get on Yale Law journal; avoid a judicial clerkship that would have taken him away from Usha).

Vance now is part of that upper-crust and identifies as such.

Walz has never had that "identity crisis." He is as "at home" with either the winner of the state fair hog contest or a VIP at a State Dinner.

The idea of "worrying" about what fork to use is meaningless to a true Midwesterner....because the answer is common-sense: whatever one fits in your mouth.
 
It seems the commie profs had no effect on Vance.
They didn't on DeSantis either. ;)

These two got the education but successfully avoided the indoctrination.
 
Because the Yale component is totally unnecessary and will actually turn some liberals who went to "elite" schools off. It does absolutely nothing good for Walz but can do some damage.
Yes, and you know this how exactly? I can't imagine a dumber reason not to vote for the Harris/Walz ticket than Walz correctly pointing out part of Vance's history, but could be those liberals who went to elite institutions are really that vain and stupid.... Could be true. I'd like to see some data on that.

And it also might be true that pointing out Vance is a fake populist does "nothing good" for the campaign, but you saying it doesn't mean it's true. It's an empirical claim - does the broader attack on Vance's fake populism message work? The way to demonstrate whether it's good or bad for the voters who matter - the undecideds - is through data and you have none.
 
Back
Top Bottom