Though foreign policy was little discussed in the debate, Vance’s speeches throughout the presidential campaign suggest he shares a similar view to Trump, advocating for a narrow, limited projection of US power and influence in global affairs.
Perhaps most notably, Vance has distinguished himself from some other Republican figures mentioned as potential successors to Trump, such as Ron DeSantis and Vivek Ramaswamy, by more explicitly vocalising the economic populist aspects of the New Right.
Denouncing globalisation for depriving working-class Americans of good jobs, wages and affordable energy, Vance backed government intervention policies such as trade protections, penalties on corporate outsourcing, and government support for child and family care, unlike the traditional pro-free-market platform of the Republican Party.
Criticising economists supportive of free trade as lacking “common sense”, Vance reiterated an increasingly prevalent view among Republicans, that a globalised market economy has benefited corporations but left behind many Americans in relative poverty.
Though critics deride Vance, a former venture capitalist in Silicon Valley who was once critical of Trump, for political opportunism in embracing Trump and economic populism, Vance has defended changes in his political views as result of reconnecting with his blue-collar upbringing and disillusionment with the socioeconomic consequences of neo-liberal policies he witnessed in his corporate career.
THE FUTURE OF THE GOP
As suburban, middle-class voters with college degrees trend away from Trump’s Republican Party, while rural and blue-collar voters move toward it, the balance within the Republican Party may shift toward the dominance of the New Right over other conservative factions.
Paradoxically, the endorsement of Kamala Harris by multiple high-profile former Republican policymakers such as Liz Cheney could indicate the declining influence of traditionally conservative factions within the GOP.
