McLean County Times

Every time I drive around Bloomington-Normal, I see yard signs promoting the election of Kamala Harris. I can’t help but ask myself, “What do Democrats see in this candidate?” To me, there is nothing to recommend her for the highest office in the land. While many Republicans will say that Harris stands for nothing, I beg to differ. She does, and given her values and what she represents, Kamala Harris would make a dangerous president for many reasons. These concerns stem from her political ideology and her performance as Vice President. Here are some critical arguments against choosing Harris as the next president of the United States:

Radical Progressivism – Progressive values are directly opposed to what conservatives want. Conservatives fear Harris’ radical policies will lead to excessive government control, harm the free market, and limit personal freedoms. A Harris presidency could prioritize big-government solutions, damaging the economy, increasing national debt, and removing conscientious-objector provisions for doctors opposed to abortion, forcing compliance with progressive mandates.

Inconsistent and Opportunistic Positions – Harris has shown a pattern of shifting positions for political convenience, particularly on healthcare, law enforcement, and criminal justice. As a senator and vice president, she adopted a progressive stance to align with the left. Conservatives view her inconsistency as political opportunism, questioning her conviction and ability to lead with integrity and consistency. This flip-flopping raises concerns about her leadership.

Ineffective Leadership as Vice President – The Harris vice presidency has faced widespread criticism, even within the Democrat Party. Tasked with handling the border crisis, she has failed to provide solutions, with illegal immigration surging and enforcement lacking. Conservatives attribute this to her ineffective leadership. Additionally, she has struggled to articulate strategies or fulfill key responsibilities, raising concerns about her competence to govern as president. Many question her ability to lead on critical national issues.

Soft Stance on Crime and Law Enforcement – Harris’s shifting views on crime and law enforcement concern conservatives. Once known as a tough prosecutor, she now supports progressive policies like defunding the police and bail reform. Conservatives fear a Harris presidency would lead to further declines in public safety, especially in cities already experiencing rising crime. They argue that her support for lenient measures could embolden criminals, putting law-abiding citizens at greater risk and worsening crime rates across the country.

Lack of Foreign Policy Experience – Conservatives are concerned about Harris’s limited foreign affairs experience. As vice president, her diplomatic efforts, particularly regarding China, Russia, and the southern border, have been underwhelming. Her awkward and ineffective responses on the world stage raise doubts about her ability to safeguard American interests and strengthen alliances. Harris’s inexperience could weaken America’s international standing in a dangerous global climate and embolden adversaries, putting national security at risk.

Economic Policies that Harm Middle-Class Americans – Harris supports economic policies that conservatives argue would stifle growth and burden middle-class families. Her backing of higher taxes on businesses and the wealthy and massive spending initiatives like Medicare for All could lead to economic stagnation, unemployment, and inflation. Conservatives believe her anti-business stance would harm small businesses, limit innovation, and reduce the U.S. economy’s global competitiveness, ultimately weakening economic prosperity and job creation. Her capital gains tax on unrealized profits alone will send the stock market into a tailspin, massively hurting the retirement nest eggs of millions of middle-class shareholders.

Support for Open Borders and Amnesty – Harris’s immigration stance alarms most Americans, especially her support for sanctuary cities, lenient enforcement, and pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. They fear a Harris presidency would push for amnesty and relaxed border control, leading to surges in illegal immigration. Conservatives argue this undermines the rule of law, strains public resources, and poses significant national security risks, making immigration reform a critical concern under her leadership.

Judicial Appointments – As president, Kamala Harris could appoint judges to federal courts, including the Supreme Court. Conservatives fear her progressive ideology would lead to activist judges legislating from the bench. These appointments could jeopardize constitutional protections, such as Second Amendment rights, religious freedoms, and checks on government overreach. Her judicial choices could shift the courts’ balance for decades, solidifying far-left interpretations of the law and impacting American governance long-term. She might also attempt to “pack the bench” by increasing the number of judges from 9 to 13 and limiting them to 18-year terms.

Cultural Marxism and Identity Politics – Harris has often employed identity politics, dividing Americans by race, gender, and class. Conservatives fear her leadership would prioritize group identity over individual merit and responsibility, fueling cultural Marxism. They argue her rhetoric and policies foster division rather than national unity. A Harris presidency, they believe, would worsen political polarization, heighten tensions, and undermine the principles of equality and meritocracy, threatening the foundation of a cohesive and fair society. A Harris presidency would make for an even worse nation divided.

Dislike of Christian Conservatives – Harris’s actions and statements have raised concerns among religious conservatives. During a 2018 judicial hearing, she questioned nominee Brian Buescher about his membership in the Catholic Knights of Columbus, which critics viewed as an attack on his faith. Her strong advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights and abortion has also conflicted with religious groups, including Catholics. Additionally, her support for policies like the contraceptive mandate has led to perceptions of her as unsympathetic to Christian beliefs, stemming from policy disagreements rather than personal animosity.

Unpopularity and Lack of Public Support – Kamala Harris remains widely and increasingly unpopular with the general public, including many long-time Democrats leaving the Party for the Republican side of the political divide. Her failure to connect with many Americans poses a significant liability. Conservatives argue that a president lacking public support cannot govern effectively or drive meaningful change. Her consistently low approval ratings reflect a lack of confidence in her leadership, undermining her ability to unite the nation.

Not Intellectually Gifted – Critics of Kamala Harris often cite verbal gaffes, her speaking style, and policy handling as evidence of her intelligence or lack thereof. Her repetitive or vague interview responses and circular speaking style make some claim she struggles to articulate her positions. Her role as “border czar” during the immigration crisis and her early exit from the 2020 presidential race further fuel claims of incompetence.

- - - - -

From a conservative Republican perspective, Kamala Harris would make a terrible president due to her far-left policy positions, ineffective leadership, and lack of experience in critical areas like foreign policy and economic management. Her record as Vice President, combined with her inconsistency on the issues, use of identity politics, and distaste for people of faith, raises serious concerns about her ability to protect American values, safeguard national security, and promote a thriving, united nation.

In the end, I wonder if support for her isn’t propelled more by hate for Trump than by love of country. When asked why they support her – Democrats and Republicans alike – supporters’ answers span the gamut but often boil down to one point – they can’t stand former President Trump and everything he stands for. If that’s not demonic motivation, then what is?

Over 40 million Christians do not intend to vote in this election because they feel they don’t want to be complicit in evil. That is wrong. All people of faith have a moral obligation to act against evil rather than remain passive. Even when faced with what is perceived to be two evils, one is morally obligated to act against the greater of the two evils. Failing to act in the face of evil is a form of complicity. As theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer noted in Nazi Germany, “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil.” Inaction can be just as damaging (and corrosive to the soul) as overt support of wrongdoing. People of faith must stand against evil, even at significant personal risk.