When Donald Trump tapped US Senator and never-Trumper Maga superstar JD Vance as his vice presidential pick, the Rust Belt populist was in for a rude awakening.

In a viral video, Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz called Vance and the Maga movement “just weird,” an insult that quickly became a meme. The reintroduction of his past comments about the inappropriateness of “childless cat ladies” involved in government spread almost as quickly as an online joke about the Ohioan having intimate relations with a bank.

Other viral videos of Vance struggling to make small talk and awkwardly laughing at himself at campaign events seemed to give the impression of an unserious candidate. The Hillbilly Elegy author and former Silicon Valley investor seemed to lack the charisma of his running mate, and for much of the summer pundits wondered whether Trump regretted his choice.

But Vance has persevered, holding swing state rallies, attacking fundraisers and regularly appearing in combative interviews on popular — and not always friendly — TV news programs.

On the campaign front, Vance thrives on elevating Trump’s most combative campaign tactics, particularly demonizing immigrants, discrediting the press and effectively inciting the crowd on both issues.

“Journalism in this country is increasingly a disgrace,” Vance said, complaining during a September 23 campaign stop in North Carolina about reporters investigating his claims that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, had stolen residents’ pets and eaten. In Traverse City, Michigan, two days later, he called for the deportation of “millions of illegal aliens,” blaming Kamala Harris for allowing them into the country.

For many Trump supporters, the Ohio senator’s hardcore nativist message and populist record make him an effective messenger on the campaign’s biggest issues: immigration and the economy. How effective he is with a broader audience will be tested Tuesday during the vice-presidential debate.

Vance, no stranger to hyperbolic anti-immigrant speeches who during his 2022 Senate campaign advanced the “great replacement” conspiracy theory that Democrats are facilitating immigration to increase their electoral margins, escalated Republican Party rhetoric in mid-September.

It started when baseless claims that members of the Haitian immigrant community in Springfield, Ohio, had killed and eaten local residents’ pets, circulated on right-wing social media accounts and gained traction among the neo-Nazi group Blood Tribe, according to NPR. Local Republican Party officials picked up on the claims and J.D. Vance brought them into the mainstream by posting on X on September 10: “Reports now indicate that people have had their pets kidnapped and eaten by people who should not be in this country . Where is our border czar?”

During the presidential debate that evening, Trump himself repeated the claims in a now infamous tirade. The condemnation came quickly, but Vance doubled down — seemingly even justifying the practice of lying to make a point.

“If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do,” Vance said, when Dana Bash pressed him about his claims during a CNN interview on 15 September. September.

That week, Springfield officials responded to repeated bomb threats against public buildings in the area, including buildings calling for anti-immigrant speeches. On September 16, local schools were forced to evacuate due to the violent threats, and Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, a Republican who has himself disputed the claims about the residents of Haitian Springfield, announced that he would send highway patrol officers to reinforce the security in prison. schools.

It didn’t seem to matter how many times local officials in Springfield disputed the claims, or how many journalists traveled to Springfield to investigate — and debunk — the racist rumors. During a series of campaign events, Vance defended himself and proved his willingness to rise to power through controversy and apparent disregard for the consequences of his rhetoric.

On September 17 in Wisconsin, Vance dismissed a question about his apparent tendency to “create stories,” saying he meant he wanted to “create stories” in the sense of making news, not creating stories as in making up things. . It was the media’s fault, not his, for misunderstanding him.

During an audience Q&A session with the press, a reporter asked Vance, “You say you have a responsibility to share what your constituents tell you, but do you also have a responsibility to fact-check them first?” Vance collapsed.

“Well, I think the media has a responsibility to fact check the residents!” Vance said, drawing a cheer of approval from the hundreds who came to hear him speak. He also appeared to dismiss journalists’ attempts to fact-check him, saying that reporters who traveled to Ohio to investigate alleged reports about Haitian immigrants were “not looking for the truth” but rather “bullying ”.

Mac Stipanovich, a retired Republican party worker from Florida, was angered by Vance’s comments about Haitian Ohioans — and questioned the strategic value of openly bashing immigrants.

“I originally thought his goal was to win the general election, and that he was going to be a next-generation person who didn’t have all the baggage of Trump, who could appeal to a broader audience and help the campaign in the general election can help. . It turns out he’s just campaigning to win a national Republican primary. In many ways he is more Trump than Trump.” Stipanovic said.

Media coverage of Vance has largely focused on his stunning pivot: He wholeheartedly opposed Trump’s rise in 2016 — even comparing the former president to Hitler — and his shift to the “new right,” with his emphasis on limiting immigration, promoting economic populism and valorizing the heterosexual nuclear family.

Vance’s ideological path and political circles are crucial to understanding the candidate and how he might govern in office.

But what the reporting on Vance’s role in the campaign may be missing so far is how effectively Vance is playing to the Trump base.

Vance has proven his ability to maintain a combative back-and-forth in televised interviews, and has adopted a rally format that allows him to showcase this.

After making his remarks, Vance opens the floor for questions from reporters, giving journalists from local and national media outlets the opportunity to ask a question for him to respond to. The format is a crowd-pleaser: Before Vance has a chance to respond to the question, his audience will often answer for him, drowning out the reporter and prompting Vance to talk about the topic.

At the rally in Wisconsin, the crowd booed a reporter who asked Vance to respond to Harris’ denunciation of “hateful rhetoric” about migrants.

“That’s basically my answer,” Vance said. “Loud boos and two thumbs down.”

Later, during a September 23 campaign stop in Charlotte, North Carolina, Vance again married his defense of claims about Haitian immigrants with attacks on the press.

“It is my responsibility to listen to the people I serve, and not to biased media,” he told the crowd. He claimed that residents of East Palestine, Ohio – where a train derailed and exploded in 2023 – were being treated “like enemies” by the US media. It was not immediately clear what press coverage Vance was describing, but his outraged comments drew applause.

“I’ll always listen to you,” Vance said. “Even if the media attacks me, I will listen to you about what is happening in your community because that is what a leader should do.”

Vance’s impact on the race so far is not entirely clear. He has consistently polled somewhat poorly, although polls have not shown a dramatic dip in favor over the past month. Many Republicans who support the ticket enough to attend in-person campaign events told the Guardian they liked what they saw in Vance. Jacob Spaeth, who owns a small business in Minnesota and traveled to Wisconsin this month to see the senator speak, said he was impressed by Vance.

“To be honest, I didn’t really know him beforehand,” Spaeth said. “But after seeing everything he said, I think he’s a good choice.”

In a column in early September, Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the conservative think tank Ethics and Public Policy Center, advised Vance to “keep plowing through the maze,” rather than bombing interviews and then hiding from the press, like Sarah Palin during her disastrous national debut as John McCain’s vice presidential running mate in 2008.

So far, Olsen told the Guardian, he thinks Vance has stayed the course.

“Unlike many candidates who are trained to present their talking points over and over again, he actually responds to a question and is able to maintain an ongoing dialogue or battle” depending on the tenor of the interview, said Olsen. “I think it is distinctive in the modern campaign.”