Political identity always has mixed principles and personality. We believe certain claims are right and that particular policies are either suited or misguided toward fulfilling those claims.
At the same time, we sense an attraction or revulsion toward ways of conduct in the public sphere. Some find high-flying eloquence inspiring. Others prefer a homespun vernacular of common sense. Some love a brawler, a fighter. Some desire the conciliatory tones of a uniter, a peacemaker. The latter focus on personality has come to be known as “vibes.” What kind of feelings does hearing and seeing a particular office-seeker engender in you?
Political decision-making should include principle and personality. However, neither should push out the other in our considerations for public office. Yet, personality seems to reign in 2024. Consider, for example, the approach taken so far in the Harris–Walz ticket for president. We see much less talk of issues and policies and much more a feel for the personality, the “vibes,” of the two office-seekers.
Those in the leftist media have repeatedly described Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign as defined by “joy.” Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) has been described as a man with folksy, Midwestern charm. Some online bizarrely have compared him to their own parents, implying he is the father they wish they’d had.
To be sure, our politics could use a dose of the positive. Folksy charm is an endearing and useful form of communication. But categorizing Harris and Walz by these traits seems more like media hype than reality. The “joy” in the Harris campaign looks more like relief that President Joe Biden no longer heads the Democratic ticket. It is a joy from, not a joy for. Walz, too, has limits to his supposed fatherlike charm, which voters will see firsthand as the fall campaign continues.
The relentless focus on these “vibes” also obscures the other element in politics. We don’t need only to know whether we like the personality of the candidates. We need to know whether they will govern well if elected. And knowing whether they will govern well must include an appraisal of their political views.
The vibes focus has directed us away from the progressive rhetoric and policymaking of both Harris and Walz. Breathless odes to joy should not keep voters from asking about abortion, immigration, taxes, education, and the other practical issues the next presidential administration must address. Harris has been one of the most pro-abortion officeholders in history, as witnessed by her visiting an abortion clinic earlier this year. Walz might sound centrist in his speech, but he has governed to the political left, not the center.
It would be unfair not to note that the Republican Party has a similar problem. Policy has taken a backseat to personality in its embrace of former President Donald Trump and the combative tactics he embodies. Too many have switched positions and modified principles seemingly on a dime to conform to this new political reality on the Right.
Still, the media did not obscure the policy positions Trump did and does take. We still hear regularly about his general position on the southern border and his views on Social Security and national defense. The treatment of Harris and Walz, on the other hand, so far seems intent on going even further in hiding the substantive in favor of the performative.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
But, in the end, actions speak louder than words. And policies affect our lives more than vibes. We should resist a vibes election. We must demand answers about what a President Harris would do on the pressing matters confronting us as a nation.
For those willing to look, the answers might give us more pause than joy.
Adam Carrington is an associate professor of politics at Hillsdale College.