Why the Media Seems Easy on Kamala Harris

Republicans have been complaining for the past month about the beneficial media treatment received by Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. They have asserted that no Republican could get by while avoiding interviews like Harris and Walz have. Many Republicans have also negatively compared this approach to the coverage J.D. Vance has received over the same time period. They see some form of unfair bias in the coverage, which they have pointed out on social media nearly every day since Biden dropped out of the presidential race. As Christopher Rufo noted, in a summary of the credulous Republican position, “Twenty years ago, the stolen valor narrative would have sunk Walz. But we live in a different country now. One that might be ‘beyond scandal.'”

Republican concerns are not serious. Instead, they reflect a frustration over political gamesmanship. Republicans are almost always able to define the narrative and negatively paint their Democratic opponents. When such a strategy fails, they are quick to blame the media that usually falls for their rhetorical approach.

Republican narrative successes

For decades, Republicans could easily define their political opponents in the media the way they intended. The party succeeded in the 1980s in portraying Democrats as weak and out-of-touch on issues such as crime and government spending. After the interregnum of Bill Clinton, they worked their magic time and again with the aid of conservative talk radio, blogs, and Fox News. Their messages seemed to stick more often than not. Even the candidates they could not defeat with messaging were badly wounded. Barack Obama suffered two decisive midterm defeats due to Republican attacks over the deficit and spending, while the (more substantive) criticisms of Bill Clinton helped tank Al Gore’s 2000 candidacy.

Republican messaging worked again this summer with Joe Biden. The party spent the past four years hammering home Biden’s frailty and senility in the media and with voters. Then, when Biden did decisively falter at the June debate, conservatives could dominate the narrative with vindication of their arguments. No matter what Democrats did to change the subject, the media was singularly focused on Biden’s age and the urging from the rest of his party to drop out.

Republicans need a new line of attack

Now that Biden is gone from the picture, Republicans are wondering why the same playbook has not worked with Harris and Walz. They fail to realize that messages and memes sometimes fail to catch on. Not every video MrBeast produces gains millions of views. Their attacks on both candidates so far have been weak and disorganized. For months, Republicans parroted the same talking points about Biden being old or John Kerry being for the Iraq War before he was against it. But now, they just throw whatever they can at Harris and Walz and hope that something sticks. Their muddled message on Harris eventually coalesced around criticism that she refused to do interviews, an attack that diminished once she conducted a strong interview with CNN. They have done the same with Walz, who was sloppy with discussions about his military service but far from the perpetrator of “stolen valor” that his critics have portrayed him as.

Republicans need to pick an attack on Harris and Walz that actually works. They need to stick with this attack over the weeks and months, honing it and dropping off other ancillary comments. Such a decision may be critical to their success in November given Harris’s stellar polling numbers. No amount of complaining about CNN will accomplish this task for them.