According to the transcript with video of Vice President J.D. Vance’s (R) remarks that follow below: “now it’s time for all of our countries, for all of us who have been fortunate enough to be given political power by our respective peoples, to use it wisely to improve their lives.” Vance also said: “the threat that I worry the most about vis-à-vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor. And what I worry about is the threat from within, the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values — values shared with the United States of America.” Vance added: “Everything from our Ukraine policy to digital censorship is billed as a defense of democracy, but when we see European courts canceling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others, we ought to ask whether we’re holding ourselves to an appropriately high standard. And I say “ourselves” because I fundamentally believe that we are on the same team. We must do more than talk about democratic values. We must live them.” Taken in context, or even as pull quotes, one might think that such remarks ought to span the left-right political divide. But no. Leftists and the big media allies and pundits have slammed Vance’s speech in Munich. MAGA, America First, and generally center-leftists have praised it. Some examples will illustrate before we pivot to the full transcript of his remarks as provided to MHProNews. 

Accountability of public officials for the actions and free speech are, or should be, of concern to every American, including those working in the manufactured housing industry or in affordable housing more broadly. As regular MHProNews readers may know, FEA is short for Facts-Evidence-Analysis. More on that in Part II.

 

JD Vance speaks at the Munich Security Conference about yesterday’s Islamist car-ramming terror attack in Munich.

He asks how many more such terror attacks people in the West will have to experience before things change

He says Europeans never voted in favor of mass-immigration pic.twitter.com/a23xvfs8qT

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 14, 2025

 

The chairman of the Munich Security Conference broke down in tears today—not over the Islamist car-ramming attack in Munich, not over the AK-47 shootings in Brussels, but because JD Vance hurt his feelings. pic.twitter.com/k4eFMnyc9x

— JOSH DUNLAP (@JDunlap1974) February 17, 2025

 

JD Vance speaking in Munich about German policies that led to the events in Munich pic.twitter.com/lgQfeHg0Xc

— A Man Of Memes (@RickyDoggin) February 15, 2025

BREAKING: 🚨🚨🚨🇺🇸🇺🇸🇪🇺🇪🇺
JD Vance went to the Munich Security Conference and roasted the entire continent of Europe for being petty tyrants and criminalizing freedom of speech, including a British man arrested for praying at an abortion clinic. pic.twitter.com/AQoBzmQXci

— Barrister IykeObed (J.P) (@IykeObedOnuorah) February 14, 2025

 

JD Vance goes Atomic on a room full of Shocked Antagonists in Munich. The Munich Security Conference did NOT see Freedom being a Topic this year. America, We Are Back 👇🏽🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/yQ29OjuJls

— UnSeat_Al_Green-2026 (@UnSeat_AL_GREEN) February 14, 2025

🇨🇳Wang Yi vs 🇺🇸 JD Vance; Compare the reactions to the remarks given by China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi and US Vice President JD Vance at the Munich Security Conference:

Vance was left standing there alone, uneasy, and bewildered without applause, while Wang Yi was surrounded… https://t.co/WKM6glevRI pic.twitter.com/mbPyR7TOUh

— StarBoySAR 🇭🇰 🇨🇳 🥭 (@StarboySAR) February 15, 2025

Numbers in mainstream media have either cheered or jeered Vance’s remarks. Secretary of State Marco Rubio was challenged by CBS, for example, about Vance’s remarks.

 

🇺🇸💥 Sec. of State Rubio backs VP Vance’s speech slamming Europe’s censorship tendencies. Clash with CBS host Margaret Brennan on “Face the Nation” over free speech’s role in Nazi Germany’s Holocaust. 🗣️🔥Does she really think that free speech caused the Holocaust? If she thinks… https://t.co/zArCFqXwjG pic.twitter.com/N2QgTL5flP

— LynneP (@LynneBP_294) February 18, 2025

 

Sec. Marco Rubio on JD Vance’s remarks in Munich: “Why would our allies or anybody be irritated by free speech and by someone giving their opinion?” pic.twitter.com/aI8eaZ8u9g

— Unlimited L’s (@unlimited_ls) February 16, 2025

With that tee up, here is the full transcript and video of Vance’s speech as provided by the Daily Torch to MHProNews.

 

Part I

Vice President J.D. Vance’s Remarks At Munich Security Conference

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you, and thanks to all the — the gathered delegates and luminaries and media professionals.

And thank- — thanks especially to the hosts of the Munich Security Conference for being able to — to put on such an incredible event. We’re, of course, thrilled to be here. We’re happy to be here.

And, you know, one of the things that I wanted to — to talk about today is, of course, our shared values.

And, you know, it’s — it’s great to be back in Germany. As — as you heard earlier, I was here last year as a United States senator. I saw Foreign Minister — excuse me, Foreign Secretary David Lammy and joked that both of us last year had different jobs than we have now.

But now it’s time for all of our countries, for all of us who have been fortunate enough to be given political power by our respective peoples, to use it wisely to improve their lives.

 

 

And I want to say that, you know, I — I was fortunate in my time here to spend some time outside the walls of this conference over the last 24 hours, and I’ve been so impressed by the hospitality of the people, even, of course, as they’re reeling from yesterday’s horrendous attack.

And the first time I was ever in Munich was with — was with my wife, actually, who’s here with me today, on a personal trip. And I’ve always loved the city of Munich, and I’ve always loved its people.

And I just want to say that we’re very moved, and our thoughts and prayers are with Munich and everybody affected by the evil in- — inflicted on this beautiful community. We’re thinking about you, we’re praying for you, and we will certainly be rooting for you in the days and weeks to come.

Now — (applause) — thank you. I hope that’s not the last bit of applause that I get, but — (laughter).

We — we gather at — at this conference, of course, to discuss security. And normally, we mean threats to our external security. I see mili- — many great military leaders gathered here today.

But while the Trump administration is very concerned with European security and believes that we can come to a reasonable settlement between Russia and Ukraine, and we also believe that it’s important in the coming years for Europe to step up in a big way to provide for its own defense, the threat that I worry the most about vis-à-vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor. And what I worry about is the threat from within, the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values — values shared with the United States of America.

Now, I was struck that a former European commissioner went on television recently and sounded delighted that the Romanian government had just annulled an entire election. He warned that if things don’t go to plan, the very same thing could happen in Germany too.

Now, these cavalier statements are shocking to American ears. For years, we’ve been told that everything we fund and support is in the name of our shared democratic values.

Everything from our Ukraine policy to digital censorship is billed as a defense of democracy, but when we see European courts canceling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others, we ought to ask whether we’re holding ourselves to an appropriately high standard. And I say “ourselves” because I fundamentally believe that we are on the same team. We must do more than talk about democratic values. We must live them.

Now, within living memory of many of you in this room, the Cold War positioned defenders of democracy against much more tyrannical forces on this continent. And consider the side in that fight that censored dissidents, that closed churches, that canceled elections. Were they the good guys? Certainly not, and thank God they lost the Cold War.

They lost because they neither valued nor respected all of the extraordinary blessings of liberty, the freedom to surprise, to make mistakes, to invent, to build.

As it turns out, you can’t mandate innovation or creativity, just as you can’t force people what to think, what to feel, or what to believe. And we believe those things are certainly connected.

And unfortunately, when I look at Europe today, it’s sometimes not so clear what happened to some of the Cold War’s winners.

I look to Brussels, where EU commiss- — commissars warn citizens that they intend to shut down social media during times of civil unrest the moment they spot what they’ve judged to be, quote, “hateful content.”

Or to this very country, where police have carried out raids against citizens suspected of posting anti-feminist comments online as part of, quote, “combating misogyny on the Internet, a day of action.”

I look to Sweden, where, two weeks ago, the government convicted a Christian activist for participating in Quran burnings that resulted in his friend’s murder. And as the judge in his case chillingly noted, Sweden’s laws to supposedly protect free expression do not, in fact, grant — and I’m quoting — “a free pass to do or say anything without risking offending the group that holds that belief.”

And perhaps most concerningly, I look to our very dear friends, the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britons, in particular, in the crosshairs.

A little over two years ago, the British government charged Adam Smith-Connor, a 51-year-old physiotherapist and an army veteran, with the heinous crime of standing 50 meters from an abortion clinic and silently praying for three minutes — not obstructing anyone, not interacting with anyone, just silently praying on his own.

And after British law enforcement spotted him and demanded to know what he was praying for, Adam replied, simply, it was on behalf of the unborn son he and his former girlfriend had aborted years before.

Now, the officers were not moved. Adam was found guilty of breaking the government’s new “buffer zones” law, which criminalizes silent prayer and other actions that could “influence” a person’s decision within 200 meters of an abortion facility. He was sentenced to pay thousands of pounds in legal costs to the prosecution.

Now, I wish I could say that this was a fluke — a one-off, crazy example of a badly written law being enacted against a single person. But, no, this last October, just a few months ago, the Scottish government began distributing letters to citizens whose houses lay within so-called “safe access zones,” warning them that even private prayer within their own homes may amount to breaking the law.

Naturally, the government urged readers to report any fellow citizens suspected guilty of thoughtcrime.

In Britain, and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat.

And in the interest of comity, my friends, but also in the interest of truth, I will admit that sometimes the loudest voices for censorship have come not from within Europe but from within my own country, where the prior administration threatened and bullied social media companies to censor so-called misinformation — misinformation like, for example, the idea that coronavirus had likely leaped fr- — leaked from a laboratory in China. Our own government encouraged private companies to silence people who dared to utter what turned out to be an obvious truth.

So, I come here today not just with an observation but with an offer. And just as the Biden administration seemed desperate to silence people for speaking their minds, so the Trump administration will do precisely the opposite, and I hope that we can work together on that.

In Washington, there is a new sheriff in town. And under Donald Trump’s leadership, we may disagree with your views, but we will fight to defend your right to offer it in the public square, agree or disagree. (Applause.)

Now we’re at the point, of course, that the situation has gotten so bad that, this December, Roma- — Romania straight up canceled the results of a presidential election based on the flimsy suspicions of an intelligence agency and enormous pressure from its continental neighbors.

Now, as I understand it, the argument was that Russian disinformation had infected the Romanian elections, but I’d ask my European friends to have some perspective. You can believe it’s wrong for Russia to buy social media advertisements to influence your elections. We certainly do. You can condemn it on the world stage even. But if your democracy can be destroyed with a few hundred thousand dollars of digital advertising from a foreign country, then it wasn’t very strong to begin with. (Applause.)

Now, the good news is that I happen to think your democracies are substantially less brittle than many people apparently fear, and I really do believe that allowing our citizens to speak their mind will make them stronger still.

Which, of course, brings us back to Munich, where the organizers of this very conference have banned lawmakers representing populist parties on both the left and the right from participating in these conversations.

Now, again, we don’t have to agree with everything or anything that people say, but when people represent — when political leaders represent an important constituency, it is incumbent upon us to at least participate in dialog with them.

Now, to many of us on the other side of the Atlantic, it looks more and more like old, entrenched interests hiding behind ugly, Soviet-era words like “misinformation” and “disinformation,” who simply don’t like the idea that somebody with an alternative viewpoint might express a different opinion, or, God forbid, vote a different way, or, even worse, win an election.

Now, this is a security conference, and I’m sure you all came here prepared to talk about how exactly how you intend to increase defense spending over the next few years in line with some new target And that’s great, because as President Trump has made abundantly clear, he believes that our European friends must play a bigger role in the future of this continent. We don’t think — you hear this term, “burden sharing,” but we think it’s an important part of being in a shared alliance together that the Europeans step up while America focuses on areas of the world that are in great danger.

But let me also ask you, how will you even begin to think through the kinds of budgeting questions if we don’t know what it is that we’re defending in the first place?

I’ve heard a lot already in my conversations — and I’ve had many, many great conversations with many people gathered here in this room — I’ve heard a lot about what you need to defend yourselves from, and, of course, that’s important. But what has seemed a little bit less clear to me and certainly, I think, to many of the citizens of Europe, is what exactly it is that you’re defending yourselves for. What is the positive vision that animates this shared security compact that we all believe is so important?

And I believe deeply that there is no security if you are afraid of the voices, the opinions, and the conscience that guide your very own people.

Europe faces many challenges, but the crisis this continent faces right now, the crisis I believe we all face together, is one of our own making.

If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you. Nor, for that matter, is there anything that you can do for the American people who elected me and elected President Trump.

You need democratic mandates to accomplish anything of value in the coming years. Have we learned nothing, that thin mandates produce unstable results? But there is so much of value that can be accomplished with the kind of democratic mandate that I think will come from being more responsive to the voices of your citizens.

If you’re going to enjoy competitive economies, if you’re going to enjoy affordable energy and secure supply chains, then you need mandates to govern, because you have to make difficult choices to enjoy all of these things. And, of course, we know that very well in America.

You cannot win a democratic mandate by censoring your opponents or putting them in jail — whether that’s the leader of the opposition, a humble Christian praying in her own home, or a journalist trying to report the news. Nor can you win one by disregarding your basic electorate on questions like who gets to be a part of our shared society.

And of all the pressings — challenges that the nations represented here face, I believe there is nothing more urgent than mass migration.

Today, almost one in five people living in this country moved here from abroad. That is, of course, an all-time high. It’s a similar number, by the way, in the United States — also an all-time high.

The number of immigrants who entered the EU from non-EU countries doubled between 2021 and 2022 alone. And, of course, it’s gotten much higher since.

And we know the situation, it didn’t materialize in a vacuum. It’s the result of a series of conscious decisions made by politicians all over the continent, and others across the world, over the span of a decade.

We saw the horrors wrought by these decisions yesterday in this very city. And, of course, I can’t bring it up again without thinking about the terrible victims who had a — a beautiful winter day in Munich ruined. Our thoughts and prayers are with them and will remain with them. But why did this happen in the first place?

It’s a terrible story, but it’s one we’ve heard way too many times in Europe and, unfortunately, too many times in the United States as well: an asylum seeker, often a young man in his mid-20s, already known to police, rams a car into a crowd and shatters a community.

How many times must we suffer these appalling setbacks before we change course and take our shared civilization in a new direction?

No voter on this continent went to the ballot box to open the floodgates to millions of unvetted immigrants. But you know what they did vote for? In England, they voted for Brexit. And agree or disagree, they voted for it. And more and more, all over Europe, they’re voting for political leaders who promise to put an end to out-of-control migration.

Now, I happen to agree with a lot of these concerns, but you don’t have to agree with me. I just think that people care about their homes. They care about their dreams. They care about their safety and their capacity to provide for themselves and their children.

And they’re smart. I think this is one of the most important things I’ve learned in my brief time in politics. Contrary to what you might hear a couple mountains over in Davos, the citizens of all of our nations don’t generally think of themselves as educated animals or as interchangeable cogs of a global economy, and it’s hardly surprising that they don’t want to be shuffled about or relentlessly ignored by their leaders.

And it is the business of democracy to adjudicate these big questions at the ballot box.

I believe that dismissing people, dismissing their concerns, or, worse yet, shutting down media, shutting down elections, or shutting pe- — people out of the political process protects nothing. In fact, it is the most surefire way to destroy democracy.

And speaking up and expressing opinions isn’t election interference, even when people express views outside your own country, and even when those people are very influential.

And trust me, I say this with all humor, if American democracy can survive 10 years of Greta Thun- — Thunberg’s scolding, you guys can survive a few months of Elon Musk.

But what German democracy — what no democracy — American, German, or European — will survive is telling millions of voters that their thoughts and concerns, their aspirations, their pleas for relief are invalid or unworthy of even being considered.

Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There is no room for firewalls. You either uphold the principle or you don’t.

Europeans, the people have a voice. European leaders have a choice. And my strong belief is that we do not need to be afraid of the future.

You can embrace what your people tell you, even when it’s surprising, even when you don’t agree. And if you do so, you can face the future with certainty and with confidence, knowing that the nation stands behind each of you.

And that, to me, is the great magic of democracy. It’s not in these stone buildings or beautiful hotels. It’s not even in the great institutions that we have built together as a shared society.

To believe in democracy is to understand that each of our citizens has wisdom and has a voice. And if we refuse to listen to that voice, even our most successful fights will secure very little.

As Pope John Paul II — in my view, one of the most extraordinary champions of democracy on this continent or any other — once said, “Do not be afraid.”

We shouldn’t be afraid of our people, even when they express views that disagree with their leadership.

Thank you all. Good luck to all of you.

God bless you. (Applause.)

Feb. 14, 2025
Vice President J.D. Vance

—

Part II Additional Information with More MHProNews Analysis and Commentary 

1) It has been observed that God answers every prayer in one of three ways. Yes. No. Later. It has also been observed that God is not Aladdin’s Lamp with an unlimited number of wishes. God is free to answer our prayers in the way that the Creator of All deems to be in the best interest of the individual uttering the prayer and the interests of all of humanity.

2) In 2020 millions prayed that 45th President of the United States (POTUS) Donald J. Trump would win re-election. Despite a heated controversy with evidence-supported claims of election fraud, Trump was denied a consecutive 2nd term. But some who are witnessing the fast start of Trump 2.0 vs. how Trump 1.0 began are speculating that perhaps the 4 years off with Trump winning in 2024 was for the best.

3) Trump has curiously said that while J.D. Vance is very capable he is not necessarily the automatic successor for him as the potentially next GOP leader of the MAGA/America First Movement.

When asked if he viewed JD Vance as his successor, Trump answered “no“

🟨 In Q drop 2609 it was asked:

“Is there a plan in place for AFTER TRUMP?”

Q replied “yes”

Let’s see what happens. pic.twitter.com/eFEbIOAmr8

— NewsTreason Channel 17 (@NewsTreason) February 11, 2025

🚨NEW: Trump when asked if he currently sees JD Vance as his successor says “No, but he’s doing a fantastic job. A lot of people are doing a fantastic job. It’s too early.”

Trump wants JD to continue proving himself. It’s a managerial tactic. pic.twitter.com/FrmuPQS1Du

— Autism Capital 🧩 (@AutismCapital) February 15, 2025

 

4) Vice President J.D. Vance (R) has been described as someone who is like Trump, but in some ways is ‘smoother.’ Even some critics of both Trump and Vance have described Vance as “smoother.” Be that as it may, Vance is seen as a rising star in MAGA world. Some who were skeptical of Trump’s pick for VP have since admitted that they are delighted.

 

JD Vance on Trump: “He was President, and take-home pay was going up faster than it had in 40 years. Inflation was low. The border was secure. And remember, they all said Donald Trump was going to start World War III, and yet we had more peace around the globe than we had had in… pic.twitter.com/BMz4Iykj4R

— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) October 16, 2024

As I watch the debate, it’s helpful to remember that Vance is a smoother liar than Trump. So to assist those watching now or reviewing highlights later, here is a helpful JD Vance translator. I welcome additions from other observers. (Thread)#ResistanceUnited #DemVoice1 pic.twitter.com/3f6nEQGiyd

— Jeff Roush (@JeffRoushPoetry) October 2, 2024

JD Vance isn’t the best at retail politics. He couldn’t do McDonald’s. (Remember “whatever makes sense?”) But he’s great at handling hostile interviews, won the VP debate soundly, and is capable on the stump. Trump handles retail, Vance handles details, king and prime minister.

— James Kirkpatrick (@VDAREJamesK) October 20, 2024

JD Vance is growing on me. I was skeptical of him when Trump picked him. I have to say he’s been kicking ass and taking names. I’m very impressed with him and how he carries himself and speaks. JD Vance my apologies to you patriot.

— American Islandman (@N76247476Man) February 15, 2025

 

5) J.D. Vance notably connected the dots between illegal immigration and its impact on affordable housing. Vance is an effective counterpuncher with left-leaning media.

25 MILLION ILLEGAL ALIENS COMPETING WITH AMERICANS FOR SCARCE HOMES IS ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT DRIVERS OF HOME PRICES IN THE COUNTRY. – VP Nominee, Sen. @JDVance #VPDEBATE pic.twitter.com/Dz6MQVHzms

— Real America’s Voice (RAV) (@RealAmVoice) October 2, 2024

JD Vance made me proud with this 🔥

Raddatz:
Only a Handful of Apartment Complexes were taken over by Illegal Alien Gang Members 🤦🏻‍♂️

JD:
“Do you hear yourself? Only a handful of apartment complexes were taken over by Venezuelan gangs and Donald Trump is the problem and not… pic.twitter.com/elQGJwkb3h

— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) October 13, 2024

Note that MHProNews previously reported that same point well in advance of Vance’s remarks. It was and remains a logically correct observation by Vance. MHProNews uniquely connects the dots between various issues and the lack of affordable housing.

 

 

6) Vance’s push-back to Euro-elites on issues like free speech and what it means to be a true democracy (here in the U.S., more appropriately a Republic) is echoed by Elon Musk’s recent remarks about government run by the people’s representatives vs. government run by bureaucrats.

Elon Musk: If the people cannot vote and have their will be decided by their elected representatives in the form of the president and the senate and the house, then we don’t live in a democracy. We live in a bureaucracy. pic.twitter.com/SqpPE5l4Pb

— Acyn (@Acyn) February 11, 2025

ELON MUSK: “If the bureaucracy is in charge, what meaning does democracy actually have? If the people cannot vote, have their will it be decided by their elected representatives, the President, the Senate, the House, then we do not live in a democracy, we live in a bureaucracy” pic.twitter.com/ZtVbi18EPu

— America (@america) February 11, 2025

 

7) It has been observed that Trump 2.0 has brought together numbers of younger leaders positioned in various agencies and roles that allows them to prove their America First or MAGA ‘chops.’ As a successful businessman, President Trump clearly understands the importance of succession planning.

“It’s no longer a faux pas to support President Trump, it’s no longer a faux pas to be MAGA, it’s actually cool to do so,” says CJ Pearson, a Republican Youth Advisory Council co-chair, on why he believes young voters supported President Trump in 2024.

“When it comes to our… pic.twitter.com/0s8yxXpzJm

— CBS News (@CBSNews) February 10, 2025

Donald Trump Jr. has a message for the RINOs – “This isn’t the old Republican party anymore – this is the America first party!” pic.twitter.com/fnSUvOd4fa

— Millie Weaver 🇺🇸 (@Millie__Weaver) January 6, 2021

Now this is what America has been waiting for….

Leaders like @SecRubio and @VP who stand up for OUR country, not bow to the EU. No more selling us out.

It’s America First, period!pic.twitter.com/ARVNTan8p1

— Veterans for America First – Veterans for Trump (@VFAFWarroom) February 16, 2025

YOUTH FOR TRUMP
The RNC Youth Advisory is working to keep the momentum going for Gen Z support of President Trump. @BrilynHollyhand @JakeJakeNY pic.twitter.com/gx4Q38FRur

— Real America’s Voice (RAV) (@RealAmVoice) February 11, 2025

“Incoming Reps. Brandon Gill, Brian Jack, and Riley Moore aren’t sworn in yet, but they’ve already been dubbed by GOP strategists as the “three amigos” —  a trio of young conservatives, committed to President Donald Trump’s agenda. The trio is already ubiquitous on the Hill, and… pic.twitter.com/NSUp9cPlkM

— Brandon Gill (@realBrandonGill) November 18, 2024

 

8) Here is J.D. Vance answering the question with a left-leaning New York Times reporter previously covered by MHProNews in the report linked below the X-post.

J.D. Vance destroys NY Times reporter who thinks by deporting illegals that we won’t have people who can build houses.

He does it with class and with facts, even though she interrupts him. pic.twitter.com/oiPiDC63st

— 👉M-Û-R-Č-H👈 (@TheEXECUTlONER_) October 14, 2024

 

 

9) In a fact-check by MHProNews using left-leaning Google and left-leaning Bing’s AI powered Copilot, there is no known remarks that are manufactured housing or factory-built housing specific. The following is per Copilot.

J.D. Vance has not made specific remarks about manufactured housing or factory-built housing. His comments on the housing crisis have generally focused on broader issues such as restrictive zoning laws, exclusionary policies, and the impact of institutional investors on housing affordability1. Vance has also blamed illegal immigration and inflation for the rising cost of housing, but he hasn’t addressed manufactured housing specifically.

10) But several of Vance’s remarks and background suggest that he would be open to a free-market solution and ‘enforce existing laws’ responses to the affordable housing crisis.  Considert his Q&A with Copilot.

Is it fair to say that J.D. Vance is generally in favor of enforcing existing laws on immigration or other topics, is generally in favor of free market solutions to problems like the affordable housing crisis, that might include manufactured homes?

Yes, it’s fair to say that J.D. Vance generally supports enforcing existing immigration laws. He has advocated for strong border security measures, including the completion of the border wall and stricter controls on illegal immigration1. Vance has also supported mass deportations of undocumented immigrants.

Regarding housing, Vance has emphasized free market solutions to address the affordable housing crisis. He has criticized restrictive zoning laws and exclusionary policies that limit housing availability and drive up costs3. While he hasn’t specifically mentioned manufactured homes, his support for free market principles suggests he would likely favor a variety of housing solutions, including manufactured homes, to increase affordability.

Does this align with what you were thinking, or is there a specific aspect you’d like to delve into further? …”

 

11) What is better known is that recently confirmed HUD Secretary E. Scott Turner has specifically mentioned HUD Code manufactured homes as an important part of solving the affordable housing crisis. What is not as clear is where Turner stands on the critical topic of “enhanced preemption” under the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 (MHIA, MHIA 2000, 2000 Reform Law, 2000 Reform Act). Thus, the significance of the outreach by the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) on that topic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

12) What is also known is that President Trump during his first term in office made specific references to factory homebuilding, at one point was interested in an international factory-housing venture, visited a manufactured home community post-storm in Florida, plus visited The Villages multiple times – which the later community is a mix of manufactured homes and conventional construction.

 

 

So, it seems unlikely that Vance would be opposed to manufactured homes.

13) More Munich address topics focused, Vance’s defense of the rights of “We the People,” of free speech, of having the U.S. government benefit its own citizens rather than seemingly favoring those of other nations are all among the topics that potentially bode well for manufactured housing during Trump 2.0 and potentially beyond. MHProNews plans to monitor and report as deemed warranted.

 

Are You Among 5 Groups-Millions Harmed by Market Manipulation and Misinformation on Manufactured Homes? Mobile Homes-Manufactured Housing-Trailer+Prefab Houses Definitions plus Revealing FEA

Are You Among 5 Groups Millions Harmed by Market Manipulation and Misinformation on Manufactured Homes? Mobile Homes-Manufactured Housing-Trailer Houses-Prefabs-Modulars Part II FEA

 

 

 

 

 

Again, our thanks to free email subscribers and all readers like you, as well as our tipsters/sources, sponsors and God for making and keeping us the runaway number one source for authentic “News through the lens of manufactured homes and factory-built housing” © where “We Provide, You Decide.” © ## (Affordable housing, manufactured homes, reports, fact-checks, analysis, and commentary. Third-party images or content are provided under fair use guidelines for media.) See Related Reports, further below. Text/image boxes often are hot-linked to other reports that can be access by clicking on them.)

By L.A. “Tony” Kovach – for MHProNews.com.

Tony earned a journalism scholarship and earned numerous awards in history and in manufactured housing.

For example, he earned the prestigious Lottinville Award in history from the University of Oklahoma, where he studied history and business management. He’s a managing member and co-founder of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC, the parent company to MHProNews, and MHLivingNews.com.

This article reflects the LLC’s and/or the writer’s position and may or may not reflect the views of sponsors or supporters.

http://latonykovach.com

Connect on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/latonykovach

 

 

Related References:

The text/image boxes below are linked to other reports, which can be accessed by clicking on them.’