For many American families, the cost and availability of child care pose real challenges. With this in mind, it’s hardly a surprising that many voters would look to elected officials for possible solutions.
It was against this backdrop that JD Vance sat down with conservative pundit Charlie Kirk at an event in Arizona on Wednesday, and the host asked the Republican vice presidential nominee what can be done to address the cost of child care.
“One of the ways that you might be able to relieve a little bit of pressure on people who are paying so much for daycare is, maybe grandma and grandpa wants to help out a little bit more. Or maybe there’s an aunt or uncle that wants to help out a little bit more,” Vance replied. “If that happens, you relieve some of the pressure on all of the resources that we’re spending on daycare.”
Has it not occurred to the Ohio senator that if parents had access to free familial labor, they’d already be taking advantage of that? Watching the exchange, I found myself wondering how many Americans saw this and thought, “My relatives can help watch the kids? Why didn’t I think of that? Thank goodness for these valuable insights from JD Vance!”
But it was a day later when Vance’s running mate faced the same question and responded with an even less coherent answer. As a HuffPost report summarized:
Donald Trump on Thursday got a question about what he would do as president to make child care more affordable and accessible. The answer he gave might charitably be described as a rambling non sequitur, or less charitably as policy gibberish.
This was one of those things that people really have to see to fully appreciate.
The question, for those who can’t watch clips online, was about making child care more affordable.
“Well, I would do that, and we’re sitting down — you know, I was, somebody, we had Sen. Marco Rubio, and my daughter Ivanka was so impactful on that issue,” Trump’s 368-word answer began. “It’s a very important issue. But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, that — because, look, child care is child care. It’s, couldn’t, you know, there’s something, you have to have it — in this country, you have to have it.
“But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to — but they’ll get used to it very quickly — and it’s not gonna stop them from doing business with us. But they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country.
“Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care, that it’s going to take care. We’re gonna have — I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country, because I have to stay with child care.
“I want to stay with child care, but those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just, that I just told you about. We’re gonna be taking in trillions of dollars, and as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s, relatively speaking, not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers we’ll be taking in. We’re going to make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people, and then we’ll worry about the rest of the world.
“Let’s help other people, but we’re going to take care of our country first. This is about America first. It’s about Make America Great Again. We have to do it because right now we’re a failing nation, so we’ll take care of it. Thank you. Very good question. Thank you.”
So, why does this word salad matter? Several reasons, actually.
Right off the bat, it’s worth emphasizing that Trump — who presumably has been engaged in debate preparations and should be at the top of his game — appeared wholly incapable of speaking coherently about a common issue. For those who believe the Republican nominee is in a state of cognitive decline, his answer on child care costs offered fresh evidence.
Similarly, Trump’s nonsensical rambling served as a timely reminder of a familiar problem: The former president doesn’t know or care about public policy, and he routinely has trouble faking it. Those expecting him to have meaningful governing plans — on any issue — are going to be disappointed.
After the remarks, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu said he prefers Trump’s economic policies because the former president “can actually speak to details.” Reality suggests otherwise: We’re routinely confronted with proof that Trump is effectively economically illiterate.
But appearing on MSNBC the morning after the GOP candidate’s comments, White House Senior Deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates raised an underappreciated point: “If you have any idea what the hell that answer means, you’re a better detective than I am, because these tariffs that he wants to apply across the board would amount to a $4,000 tax increase on working families. And that is something that authorities across the private sector are warning would be devastating for our economy and would depress economic growth.”
To the extent that Trump said any understandable words in his response, the Republican seemed to suggest that he’ll impose tariffs on trading partners, which he believes will generate money that he can then apply to child care costs. But that’s bonkers: Not only will the tariffs fail to create some giant pool of money for Trump to draw from, but those same tariffs would raise costs for the families looking for relief.
The GOP candidate, in other words, has the entire policy dynamic backwards.
