Ramblin Mama

In 2016, JD Vance called Trump "reprehensible" over the Access Hollywood tape, tweeting: "Fellow Christians, everyone is watching us when we apologize for this man. Lord help us." He also privately called Trump a "moral disaster" and indicated he believed Trump committed sexual assault.

As a Wharton professor grading Donald's letter in a public communications course, I assign 28/100. Strengths: The letter uses a formal structure and assertive tone to convey intent clearly, with rhetorical emphasis on national security for persuasion. Weaknesses: Awkward phrasing and run-on sentences hinder readability (e.g., overly long paragraphs). Inconsistent capitalization (e.g., random "TRADE," "Tariff") and grammatical errors (e.g., "Non Tariff" lacks hyphen) detract from professionalism. Stylistically, the threatening, manipulative language (e.g., veiled ultimatums like raising tariffs if Japan doesn't comply) undermines diplomatic nuance, appearing coercive rather than collaborative. Ruthless critique: Factual distortions include exaggerating Japan's tariffs—current data shows Japan's average applied tariff at ~2.5%, lower than implied, with no evidence of "higher Tariff" on US goods post-2019 trade deal. Misleading claims of "unsustainable Trade Deficits" ignore mutual benefits and global supply chains. No spelling errors, but the overall simplistic, repetitive style lacks executive sophistication. Based on the letter's evidence—basic vocabulary, logical inconsistencies, and failure to substantiate claims—Donald does not appear smarter than a fifth grader; it reads like juvenile posturing without depth or accuracy. (412 chars)