When I heard that the Democratic Party’s new political strategy was to call former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Senator J.D. Vance, “wackos,” my first thought was, “Well, that’s weird.”
The attack was first reported on July 24th by an account named “Democratic Governor.” Post to X Gov. Tim Walz is quoted as saying, “These people are weird.”
Vice President Kamala Harris later used the word against her. First fundraiser She picked Walz as her running mate a few weeks later after President Joe Biden dropped out of the race.
Of all the adjectives they could use, all the arguments they could construct, they decided that “weird” was the best option. Very childish.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, uncanny means “suggesting something supernatural, eerie.” This definition evolved from an Old English definition of uncanny as “something to happen in the future,” often referred to as “fate,” writes John McWhorter. Recent The New York Times piece.
However, in colloquial speech, “weird” has now lost most of its futuristic or supernatural connotations. Synonyms for “weird” include strange, abnormal, and unusual.
It seems crazy to me that among adults, and even among voters, the word “weird” isn’t even derogatory. I’m always saying I’m weird. I talk in a weird voice, I dance in the kitchen, I actually like school, and yes, I’m weird.
But among kids, “weird” is an insult. It’s a social judgment. “Weird” is a word used by third-grade bullies, and it’s the first warning sign. And honestly, it’s immature.
Calling the Republican candidate “weird” is a perfect example of an ad hominem attack — one of the mistakes you learn in middle school logic class.Both sides are making ad hominem attacks, but this insult is especially odd because it doesn’t cite any evidence.
This ad hominem attack is aimed at Trump and Vance on virtually no basis, instead of pointing out poor policy or past failures, and frankly, it only weakens the Democratic candidates, because their lack of debate shows they have no case at all.
Vance makes this very argument. Interview with CNN It was broadcast on August 11th.
“I think Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are not happy with themselves because they’re not happy with the policy platform they’re delivering to the American people,” Vance said, “so they’re talking crap instead of actually telling the American people how they’re going to improve their lives.”
Harris and Walz can’t win votes by touting a strong economy, stable foreign policy and secure borders, instead making bizarre and pointless arguments for laughs.
This approach prioritizes humanity over policies: Harris and Walz want to be relatable candidates, the people, so they portray their opponents as cranks.
This is where McWhorter’s argument goes wrong.
“‘“Weird” brands MAGA a detour, an unfortunate temptation that serious politics must render obsolete. Calling it “weird” is clever, revealing, and perhaps prophetic.” McWhorter wrote in the article:
But using colloquial terms without definition or specificity is not clear. It’s confusing and it’s pointless.
The same people who were calling Trump “Hitler” in July have now toned down their comments to just calling him a “crazy guy.” It seems inconsistent. I can think of a few adjectives that would come before “crazy” on any list to describe Hitler.
After Trump’s near death on July 13, calls for unity led Democrats to soften their argument. They chose the word “weird” as a civil ad hominem attack. But they remained silent on why Trump is weird, making this another bullet that missed the mark.
in response Responding to the new strategy, David Karpf, a professor of strategic communications at George Washington University, praised Harris and Waltz’s approach.
“I don’t know who came up with this message, but I salute them,” David Karpf said. “It’s an annoying message that will only infuriate others and cause them to react in an unbalanced way.”
But Trump and Vance’s response was far from “off-balance.”
Trump fired back, calling certain policies odd.
“Nobody has ever said I’m weird. I’m a lot of things, but I’m not weird. I’m outspoken,” Trump told radio host Clay Travis. The interview was published on August 1st“Who wants to open the borders, take prisoners and psychiatric patients out of hospitals and prisons and let them into our country? That’s strange. Who wants that policy? Who wants to quadruple their taxes? That’s strange. The whole thing is strange.”
In an interview with Fox News, Vance says He doesn’t mind being criticized.
“I don’t care what they call me, I don’t care about the middle school-style teasing,” Vance said. “What pisses me off is what Kamala Harris has done to this country for the last three and a half years.”
Vance knows how to discuss policy failures without name-calling, and his response, on the “weird scale,” emphasized personal values that aren’t weird at all: being a good husband and father, for example.
“Maria, frankly, I think this is a projection from people who want to put transgender hormones on 9-year-olds and allow biological males to play in girls’ sports,” Vance told host Maria Bartiromo. “I’m a husband, a father, I’m happily married, I love my life, and I’m doing this because I want to be a good public servant and solve problems for the Democratic Party.”
In his response, Vance pointed out policy issues he disagrees with. This is good politics: name-calling only increases the volume of public debate and stagnates it.
What’s even stranger is that Democratic candidates continue to use the term. When I heard that, I thought the “weird” usage would die down in a week. Now, six weeks later, it’s still an attack. It’s weak to use basic phrases, but that’s probably because no other strategy exists.
Micaela Esturus is a fourth-year history major.