Kamala and Walz: Let’s Talk Policy, Not Photoshop

At our core, Conservatism is about integrity, personal responsibility, and a commitment to truth. We believe in the power of ideas and policy to drive change, not in the manipulation of perceptions or the staging of artificial events. If we criticize Harris and Walz on these grounds, we must be careful not to mirror the tactics we accuse them of using. Instead, our focus should remain steadfast on the substantive policy failures that have characterized their time in office. It’s imperative that we, as Conservatives, maintain a disciplined focus on the policy failures of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. Their records offer a wealth of material that can be leveraged to highlight the shortcomings of progressive governance, contrasting it sharply with the Conservative vision of limited government, individual liberty, and free markets.

Kamala Harris’s record as California’s Attorney General and her tenure as Vice President provide ample material for critique. Her prosecutorial record, marked by inconsistencies and later progressive pivots, raises legitimate questions about her judgment and commitment to justice. As Vice President, her handling of critical issues like immigration and her often vague and uninspiring public appearances offer much to criticize without needing to delve into dubious claims about AI or hired actors.

For Kamala Harris, her time as California’s Attorney General is a particularly rich vein to mine. Harris’s approach to criminal justice was inconsistent, oscillating between harsh measures and later attempts to reposition herself as a reformer. This inconsistency has left her vulnerable to criticism from both the left and right. Conservatives can argue that her record reflects a lack of clear principles, something that contrasts sharply with the Conservative commitment to rule of law and consistency in governance.

As Vice President, Harris has also struggled to effectively manage her portfolio. Her handling of the border crisis, in particular, has been a disaster. Despite being tasked with addressing the root causes of migration, Harris has been largely absent on the issue, leading to continued chaos and an overwhelmed immigration system. This is a clear example of the kind of big government inefficiency that we, as Conservatives, argue against. Rather than relying on flashy, AI-generated imagery, we should be hammering home the point that Harris’s inability to manage the border crisis is a direct result of failed policies and a lack of leadership.

Similarly, Governor Tim Walz’s tenure in Minnesota has been marred by controversial decisions that have left many Minnesotans disillusioned. His approach to the COVID-19 pandemic, which involved strict lockdowns and economic restrictions, hurt small businesses and strained individual liberties. His response to the civil unrest following George Floyd’s death was seen as weak and indecisive, leading to prolonged violence and destruction in Minneapolis. These are significant issues that deserve to be at the forefront of our criticism.

His handling of the COVID-19 pandemic was characterized by heavy-handed lockdowns and restrictions that did more harm than good. Small businesses were shuttered, jobs were lost, and the state’s economy suffered as a result. Conservatives should be emphasizing how these outcomes demonstrate the dangers of overreliance on government intervention. We can contrast Walz’s approach with states like Florida and Texas, where more freedom-oriented policies allowed economies to remain open and robust even during the pandemic’s worst months.

In addition to his pandemic response, Walz’s handling of the civil unrest following George Floyd’s death has been widely criticized. His inability to provide strong leadership during this critical time resulted in extended violence and property damage, causing many to question his competence. Conservatives can and should highlight this as a failure of progressive governance and the kind of leadership that prioritizes optics over substance.

When we shift the focus to allegations of AI usage and paid actors, we risk diluting these strong, policy-based arguments. Moreover, such tactics can appear petty or unfounded, ultimately undermining our credibility. It’s important to ask whether engaging in this line of attack helps or hinders our cause. The answer seems clear: we gain little and stand to lose much.

The broader Conservative movement has long stood for a vision of limited government, free-market solutions, and individual freedom. These principles are compelling and resonate with a wide swath of the American electorate. By focusing on the policy missteps of Harris and Walz, we can offer voters a clear choice between the failures of big government and the successes of conservative governance.

Furthermore, sticking to substantive critiques allows us to maintain the moral high ground. It enables us to draw a clear distinction between our commitment to honest, principle-driven politics and the kind of identity-focused, superficial tactics we have long criticized in others. If we become bogged down in the same kind of trivial attacks, we risk becoming what we oppose.

There’s a deeper danger in this shift toward less principled attacks: the erosion of public trust. Voters are increasingly skeptical of all politicians, weary of the endless cycle of accusations and counter-accusations. By steering clear of unsubstantiated claims and instead focusing on verifiable policy critiques, we can help rebuild trust in the political process. We can show that we are the party of ideas, of solutions, and of integrity.

It’s also worth considering the long-term implications of our strategy. The 2024 election is not just about winning a political battle; it’s about defining the future of the Conservative movement. Do we want to be remembered as the party that engaged in the same kind of tactics we’ve decried, or as the movement that stood firm on principles and led the nation with a clear, positive vision?

To be sure, the temptation to engage in these attacks is strong, especially when they generate media buzz and rally certain segments of the base. But we must resist the urge to take the easy road. Instead, let’s double down on what we know works: a relentless focus on the issues, on the failures of our opponents’ policies, and on the strengths of our conservative solutions.

We are better than this. We don’t need to resort to semantics or dubious claims to make our case. We have the right ideas, the right values, and the right solutions to lead this country. By staying true to our principles and keeping the focus on the issues that matter, we can not only win the next election but also ensure that Conservatism remains a powerful, principled force for good in America.

But beyond simply pointing out these failures, it’s essential that we articulate a clear, positive Conservative alternative. Our movement has long been associated with the principles of limited government, personal responsibility, and free-market solutions. These principles have proven time and again to be the most effective means of achieving prosperity and maintaining liberty. We should be outlining how a Conservative administration would address issues like border security and public safety more effectively than the current leadership.

In terms of border security, a Conservative approach would prioritize the rule of law and the protection of American sovereignty. This would involve strengthening border enforcement, reforming the immigration system to ensure that it is fair and efficient, and addressing the root causes of migration through targeted foreign policy measures rather than vague diplomatic initiatives. We would also focus on reducing the bureaucratic red tape that often hampers effective action, ensuring that government serves the people rather than the other way around.

On the economic front, our response to the pandemic and future crises would emphasize the importance of keeping markets open and minimizing government interference. This approach has been proven to generate better outcomes for individuals and businesses alike. By empowering individuals and businesses to make their own decisions rather than imposing top-down mandates, we can ensure that the economy remains resilient and adaptable in the face of challenges.

It’s also important that we continue to emphasize our commitment to individual liberty. This means protecting the rights of Americans to make their own choices, whether in healthcare, education, or how they run their businesses. A Conservative administration would push back against the increasing encroachment of government into these areas, ensuring that personal freedom is upheld as a fundamental value.

Moreover, we must not shy away from addressing the cultural issues that are currently at the forefront of political discourse. The left’s embrace of identity politics has led to a divisive and fragmented society. As Conservatives, we should be championing a vision of America that is inclusive and united around shared values of freedom, opportunity, and responsibility. This means rejecting the divisive rhetoric of identity politics and instead promoting a message that appeals to all Americans, regardless of race, gender, or background.

By focusing on these substantive issues and providing clear, principled solutions, we can demonstrate that the Conservative movement is not only the party of ideas but also the party of action. We can show that we are capable of governing effectively and delivering real results for the American people.

In doing so, we will also reinforce the moral high ground that has been a hallmark of Conservative politics. By avoiding the pitfalls of superficial attacks and instead focusing on what truly matters, we can maintain the integrity and credibility that is so crucial in today’s political landscape.

Ultimately, the upcoming election is an opportunity for us to reaffirm our commitment to the principles that have made Conservatism a powerful force in American politics. It’s a chance to show the electorate that we are not just about opposing the left, but about offering a better, more effective alternative. By staying focused on the issues, holding fast to our principles, and rejecting the temptation to engage in unprincipled attacks, we can ensure that Conservatism remains a guiding light for the nation’s future.

In conclusion, let’s commit to a campaign that is grounded in the values of integrity, truth, and policy-driven discourse. Let’s make sure that our arguments are based on substance rather than spectacle, and that our focus remains on the real challenges facing our country. By doing so, we will not only strengthen our movement but also provide the American people with the leadership they deserve. This is how we can win the hearts and minds of voters, and this is how we can secure a brighter future for America.