Letters to the Editor: JD Vance won the debate, if you don’t mind his lying and election denialism

To the editor: Scott Jennings is right — the guy who played Sen. JD Vance in Tuesday’s vice presidential debate did a great job of not seeming “weird.” Unfortunately, he did it by lying through his teeth about himself and his running mate, former President Trump. (“JD Vance won the debate with Tim Walz, hands down,” Opinion, Oct. 1)
Did Trump save the Affordable Care Act, as Vance said during the debate? No. That was Sen. John McCain’s downward-cast thumb when Trump tried to dismantle it.
Did Trump leave office peacefully? No. In fact, he called the violent thugs who attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, “very special” and said he loved them. Now he calls the ones in prison “hostages” and wants to pardon them.
And Vance in 2022 did say abortion should be “illegal nationally.” So yes, Vance won the debate — against himself and Trump.
Kathryn Jensen, Castaic
..
To the editor: Jennings wrote that Trump was “convicted in New York City, basically, for hooking up with a porn star 18 years ago.”
False. Trump was convicted for crimes of falsifying business records related to an illegal and untaxed payment his company made to keep that porn star quiet before the 2016 election.
Trump’s cheating with Stormy Daniels was immoral, but not illegal. His illegal contribution to his political campaign, with the intent to hide his bad behavior and influence the election, was the thing that convinced a jury of 12 that he was a crook.
I agree with Jennings that Vance won the debate based on style and self-confidence. What Jennings failed to note was that Vance very self-confidently lied.
James Wilterdink, Chula Vista
..
To the editor: Now that you’ve allowed Jennings to step briefly out of his alternative world and proclaim the stunning merits of Vance (whose cavalcade of lies in the vice presidential debate he sees as “smooth, well-delivered arguments”), I’m wondering what’s next.
To call Vance’s openly expressed contempt for democracy and free-and-open elections as evidence of deserving his place in American politics, I’m waiting for Jennings to extol the merits of drinking gasoline, stabbing oneself in the eyes and using the U.S. Constitution as toilet paper.
Nick Duretta, Pasadena
..
To the editor: In touting Vance’s debate performance, Jennings makes only a passing reference to how Vance now sidesteps his past criticisms of Trump by freely conceding that he once was wrong about the former president.
As if Vance has come to see the proverbial light.
That facile defense begs for an upgrade. Look for Vance to piously note that 2019 was a revelatory year for him: He converted to the Catholic faith, and voiced his new-found praise for Trump’s presidency.
Ah, yes, as the gospel song goes, “I once was blind, but now I see.” Only question is whether Vance’s conversion was more to Catholicism, or to Trumpism.
Roberta Helms, Santa Barbara
..
To the editor: Conservative columnist Jonah Goldberg’s awareness of the dangers of reelecting Trump does not mean that The Times needs to show “balance” by printing Jennings’ screed about the vice presidential debate.
Jennings is smart enough to know that Vance lied his way through the debate. But for him, like most current GOP figures, that doesn’t matter.
It’s not necessary for The Times to print an opinion supporting fascism to rebut an anti-fascist opinion for the sake of “balance.”
Paul Beck, Hermosa Beach