JD Vance and the Jews: The Political Fallout From the Vegas Sit-Down Heard ‘Round the World

At one point, Vice President JD Vance called it “the elephant in the room.”

Gasp!

An ELEPHANT in the room?! The animal with the biggest nose in the animal kingdom? At a JEWISH meeting?! Enough with the antisemitic dog whistles, JD!

See, that’s the problem: When your image is compromised, you lose the benefit of the doubt. Everything you say and do is put under a microscope. 

Every interpretation is negative. Even really stupid interpretations. (See above.)

And then, when opinions harden against you, you can’t self-flagellate yourself to redemption. Nothing you do will ever be enough. 

No apology is sufficiently sincere; no gesture is adequate. You’re stuck. 

The vice president was walking a political tightrope last night in Las Vegas, where he addressed a closed-door, off-the-record meeting with America’s most influential Jewish Republicans. (Why was it held off-the-record? Don’t know, doesn’t matter: A recording has already been leaked in its entirety.)

Vance’s PR objectives were obvious:

He absolutely succeeded at #1. Partly because of what he said, but mostly because of a new common enemy: the rise of Muslim socialists like Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, who’s made his hatred of Israel and AIPAC the “centerpiece” of his campaign.

(Whoever planned Vance’s campaign stopover in Michigan on the same day he spoke to Jewish Republicans in Vegas was a genius. It was a PR home run.)

Vance’s strength is his wit, intellect, and gift for political framing. He’s a verbal sharpshooter who decimated Tim Walz in their vice-presidential debate, and Jewish Republicans surely applauded his withering takedown of El-Sayed.

From NBC News:

Vice President JD Vance described Abdul El-Sayed, Michigan’s Democratic nominee for the Senate, as “evil” during a campaign rally here Monday.

“I realize that there’s something about Abdul El-Sayed that is very, very evil and on the rise in the United States of America today,” said Vance, addressing several hundred people at an event put on by MAGA Inc., a super PAC closely aligned with President Donald Trump.

“And it’s people who see themselves not as citizens of a common nation fighting for every single person — whether they’re Jewish or Christian, whether they’re white or Black or brown — but see themselves as fighting for one group at the expense of others, and that is how, ladies and gentlemen, you destroy the United States of America,” he added.

That’s the JD Vance who dazzled the base in 2024: A persuasive, plainspoken super-genius who sold MAGA policies, connected with voters, and blasted left-wing talking points into smithereens.

It was good to see him again:

“When I see Abdul El-Sayed campaign around the state with somebody who said that America deserved 9/11, what I see is a man who has sympathy and compassion for people who share his religion but have nothing for people who don’t, a person who will apologize for a murderer so long as he looks the right way but will not understand the plight of an innocent child if that person has their own faith,” Vance said. “And that is the root of this terrible evil, I believe, in the United States of America that is on the rise.”

He added: “Today, you have an opportunity to speak loudly, and in November you have an opportunity to speak much more loudly against the hatred that is on the rise in the United States of America. Reject Abdul El-Sayed.”

He was less successful at #2. JD Vance’s 2028 bandwagon (probably) didn’t gain any new diehards, but at least he stopped Jewish/pro-Israel Republicans from actively jumping off it. 

And that’s not a trivial thing: You’ve gotta stop the bleeding before you can start the healing.

Vance came across as reasonable, sincere, fair-minded, and respectful. He acknowledged Israel’s importance to American foreign policy, praised it as an ally, and connected the rise of antisemitism to unchecked Third World immigration — traditionally, one of the GOP’s most unifying issues.

Best of all, he did it without pandering.

But on the other hand, Vance failed to separate himself from Tucker Carlson, whom many Jewish Republicans feel is just as much of a dangerous antisemite as El-Sayed. The event’s emcee, ex-Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), gave him a golden opportunity to denounce Carlson’s rhetoric.

Vance declined, opting to pivot to Nick Fuentes and Joe Rogan (transcript by the Daily Wire):

Norm Coleman: So Jew hatred has been a big topic of conversation. I just want to have one more kind of touch on that issue, and then we’re going to talk about some other things. Great. Great. But, you know, you mentioned Fuentes, podcasters. A few names: Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Joe Rogan, Nick Fuentes. They have platformed antisemites. How do you how do you draw a line in terms of… because they’re powerful. Those podcasters, they touch a lot of voices. How do you draw the line in terms of whether you fight with the platforms that you appear on and you podcast? How do you do that today?

JD Vance: Yeah. I mean, look, and I recognize that not everyone in this room is going to agree with me on this, but I take two basic approaches to it. One area where I really do draw the line is on people who engage in what I call this blood libel attitude. And like I recognize a lot of people in this room might disagree with things that Tucker Carlson or Megyn Kelly or Joe Rogan has said, but I think, just to hone in on Fuentes and Rogan, I think these are two very, very different categories of people, both with their within their reach, but also within the ideas that are in their in their actual head.

(We’ll get to Vance’s “blood libel” comment in a sec, because it’s stirring controversy.)

JD Vance: I’m biased, I like Joe Rogan, but I think it’s a mistake to sort of say we’re going to write Joe Rogan off because he said something that we don’t like. I think the best approach is to actually go in there, and talk to him, and make the arguments as best as you can. We did an interesting thing, Norm. We actually tried to understand the podcast universe and how it affected mid-term elections. We care a lot, of course, about Mike [Rogers]’s race, but also a lot of other races across the country. And we actually looked at, you know, what Mike Rogers… excuse me, what Joe Rogan… And what we found is that if you look at all the other podcasters, their reach was 5 to 10% of what we would call persuadable voters, those voters in the middle who really are gettable. With Rogan, it’s something like 35 to 40%.

And so I think that there, one, I do not think that Joe Rogan and Nick Fuentes are the same, just substantively, but as a political matter, I think that we have got to be willing to go everywhere and bring our message anywhere and to any person. And that means sometimes going into a podcast where you’re going to talk… last time I was on Joe Rogan, we talked about UFOs for like an hour, right? But you got to meet people where they are and make the arguments as best as you can, and that is, I think, ultimately how you win the political debate. It’s not by shunning people, and that’s the approach that I try to take. Talk to as many people as possible, but obviously I’m not going to go talk to a guy who’s attacked my wife or who’s said that Hitler was a good guy. But outside of some pretty bright lines, I try to talk to as many people as I can. Thanks.

So, Vance’s “bright lines” are calling Hitler a good guy and/or attacking his wife. Okey Dokey.

What about someone who calls President Donald Trump the antichrist? Or an Israeli slave? Or evil? Or demanding his impeachment? 

Or someone who platforms a Holocaust revisionist? Or tries to launch a third party? Or insists that America has “lost its sovereignty” to Israel? Or accuses Israel of “destroying my country”?

Or dedicating his show to demonizing Israel, attacking Jewish Republicans, and dividing the Republican Party?

In some ways, Carlson’s anti-Jew obsession is comical:

Tucker Carlson: "I never mention @benshapiro because I don't think about him very often."

CUT TO ALL THE TIMES Tucker Carlson has mentioned Ben Shapiro on his show: pic.twitter.com/Yxv3YyUKeX

— Nathan Livingstone (MilkBarTV) (@TheMilkBarTV) August 21, 2026

But in other ways, it’s a chilling, existential threat. The Democratic Party is a lost cause; the pro-Palestinian forces have completely taken over. AOC, Bernie Sanders, Zohran Mamdani, and El-Sayed aren’t outliers; they’re mainstream. They represent the heart and soul of the left-wing base.

If Carlson pushes the GOP into becoming the Democratic Party Lite, pro-Israel voters have nowhere else to go.

Vance can’t keep pivoting to Rogan and Fuentes. Being a “conscientious objector” isn’t a long-term solution, and if that’s his strategy, it’s destined to fail.

Why?

Consider Axios’ headline from Monday, Aug. 31: El-Sayed Courts Jewish Democrats but Won’t Dump Piker

Or any of these:

Forbes: El-Sayed Defends His Decision Not to Condemn Piker

Fox News: El-Sayed Tries to Make Peace With Jewish Democrats but Draws Line at Dumping Hasan Piker

Washington Post: El-Sayed’s Ties to Firebrand Influencer Threaten Democrats’ Path to Control Senate

Politico: Michigan Senate Candidate El-Sayed Declines to Disavow Hasan Piker’s Past Comments

The Hill: Abdul El-Sayed Fails to Denounce Hasan Piker Again!

New York Post: Abdul El-Sayed Refuses to Distance Himself From Anti-Israel Extremist Hasan Piker — Even as Jewish Michiganders Are Scared

National News Desk: El-Sayed’s Piker Problem Worries Democratic Allies

CNN: Panel Spars Over El-Sayed’s Ties to Hasan Piker

New York Times: How El-Sayed Could Dispatch His Hasan Piker Problem

Detroit News: It’s Right to Judge Abdul El-Sayed by the Company He Keeps

By failing to cleanly separate himself from Hasan Piker, El-Sayed has shot himself in the foot. He’s now dogged by Piker everywhere he goes — and every time Piker says something offensive, El-Sayed is back on his heels.

Second verse, same as the first.

It’s become a scandal with very long legs, because Piker’s business model requires him to constantly push the envelope, say shocking things, and generate attention — which means, he’s not gonna stop. He can’t.

It would wreck his business model.

But what’s true about Piker is also true about Carlson: He monetizes outrage and controversy to stay in the headlines, too. That’s his business model as well.

Which means, JD Vance and Abdul El-Sayed share the same political vulnerability.

It’s puzzling why Vance refuses to bandage his wound. It wouldn’t take much. Just two or three sentences.

All he’d have to say is that Carlson has changed — and as a Christian, Vance prays for Carlson’s redemption — but OF COURSE he vehemently disagrees with Carlson about Trump being the antichrist, a slave, and/or Israel “destroying” the United States. 

That’s irresponsible, idiotic, untrue, and un-American.

Memo to Team Vance ’28: Pivoting to strawmen isn’t a long-term solution. All it does is postpone the inevitable.

It also jeopardizes Vance’s #3 objective: Healing the ongoing GOP divide on foreign policy.

Here, he failed completely. No fences were mended; no progress was made.

Instead of advancing the football, Vance stayed on the sidelines.

Will still don’t know his foreign policy vision. We still have no idea how a President Vance would address the bad actors who want to use Israel as a wedge issue to split the MAGA movement.

We know how his boss dealt with ‘em:

You don’t win a debate by refusing to debate. Participation is mandatory.

That’s what’s so frustrating: If Vance sicced his (impressive) debating skills on Jew-hatred, he’d make mincemeat of the bigots. He’s smart enough — and verbally adept enough — to defend the U.S.-Israeli relationship from obvious antisemites while still making it crystal clear that “America First” means exactly that.

But he doesn’t seem interested. Doesn’t seem to care. Only talks nicely about Israel when forced.

That’s a strategic mistake, because if Jewish/pro-Israel Republicans believed he would fight the good fight, enthusiasm and support for Vance 2028 would skyrocket. He’d solidify the MAGA movement and cruise to the nomination.

Because he’s tailormade for a political debate that pro-Israel Republicans view as an existential threat. He’s the right man at the right time.

Unless he doesn’t understand the issue:

JD Vance: My solution to this, and, you know, I’m hardly an expert on the Jewish faith, but I believe that Jews and Christians, one of the critical things that we agree on is this concept of Imago Dei, that we are all made in the image of God. It says it right there in the Hebrew Bible in the book of Genesis. And what I what I say to the people, like the root of antisemitism, the core of antisemitism to me, is the idea of blood libel. The idea that because of your genetics, because of your blood, because of your ancestry, you are guilty of a crime that you never committed. And I think that blood libel, which is at the root of antisemitism, is the exact opposite of the Christian gospel. And because of that, I believe the gospel is actually the solution to this.

Blood libel isn’t a belief in the genetic guilt of Jews. It’s an antisemitic trope that accuses Jews of murdering non-Jews to fulfill religious rituals. (Which is why I’ve written that falsely accusing Israel of “genocide” in Gaza is the new blood libel.) Vance conflated “blood libel” with Jewish deicide, a.k.a. collective guilt.

Recommended: The Greatest Con in Political PR History: The Blood Libel Lie of Israel’s ‘Genocide’

Does it matter what he called it? Yeah, it kinda sorta does.

Because you can’t solve a problem if you don’t know what it is.

JD Vance: And let me just make a final political point. I mean, to, you know, address some of the obvious elephants in the room, Norm, that that there is a growing suspicion among, I would call it under-40s, of the US-Israel relationship. And I think my view is, what we have to do is articulate why this is in the best interest of the United States of America, and actually get out there and talk about the ways in which it is in the best interest of the United States of America. So, like to take a very obvious example, we’re working with the Israelis on some extremely top-secret technology that is very, very important for the North American Missile Defense Shield. Because I love my kids, because all of you in in in this room, we love our kids, we love our grandkids, we want to make sure that if, God forbid, a bad country shoots a missile at the United States of America, we are safe.

[…]

I think it’s very, very important to talk about the concrete alignment of interest, and to hook the relationship on that, rather than something that may have made a lot of sense rhetorically 30 or 40 years ago, but just doesn’t have the same purchase as it did 30 or 40 years ago, because the country is different, and because young people are looking at this in a different way.

Explaining the benefits of the U.S.-Israeli relationship is smart. So is protecting our borders from Jew-hating immigrants. That’s all well and good.

But it’s only part of the equation.

Thirty years ago, all the big-hearted, “enlightened” liberals were passionate about Tibet. They loved the Dalai Lama and yelled “Free Tibet!” at all the award shows.

It was their #1 cause célèbre.

Then Hollywood stopped mentioning Tibet, because filmmakers wanted access to the lucrative Chinese marketplace. Then it vanished from social media — censored and shadowbanned by the Chinese-created TikTok. (And good luck asking about Tibet on Chinese AI platforms like DeepSeek.)

Nowadays, liberals don’t even mention Tibet anymore. It’s a total dead issue.

Because that’s how propaganda works!

Which means, if stopping antisemitism and anti-Zionism matters, then you can’t just focus on Third World immigration, collective guilt, and El-Sayed. That’s not enough.

You must also address bigots like Tucker Carlson who disseminate, promote, and cheerlead antisemitism and anti-Zionism 24/7 online.

Look, it’s not coincidental that so many in the “under-40” crowd have turned against Israel: They’re the ones who consume this garbage!

Which is why the vice president is leaving Las Vegas with a mixed scorecard. On one hand, he reminded Jewish Republicans of their common enemy. (And with El-Sayed acting so villainous, it was an easy sell.) That ought to be enough to keep our party unified through the midterms.

So in that sense, it was a success.

But on the other hand, the debate over Israel, antisemitism, and Tucker Carlson-styled bigotry is going to happen one way or another. It’s long overdue. To quote Joe Louis, “You can run, but you can’t hide.”

Someone must enter the arena of ideas, look the American people in the eye, and actually win this argument.

Unfortunately, it won’t be JD Vance. He’s not interested.

One Last Thing: 2026 will reach a crescendo with the midterm elections. Nothing less than the future of our country teeters in the balance.

Never before have the political battle lines been so clearly defined. Blue wave or red wall, one way or another, the 2026 midterms will transform our country.

We need your help to win the media war!

As a PJ Media VIP member, you’ll receive exclusive access to our behind-the-paywall content, commenting privileges, and an ad-free experience. VIP Gold gets you the same level of “insider access” across our entire family of sites (PJ Media, Townhall, RedState, twitchy, Hot Air, and Bearing Arms). That means: More stories, more videos, more content, more fun, more conservatism, more EVERYTHING!

And if you CLICK HERE and use the promo code FIGHT, you’ll receive a Trumpian 60% discount!

Thank you for your consideration.