The effort has begun. As someone that pays a lot of attention and used to study this stuff it makes perfect sense. Conservatives are test-marketing different insults and slogans to see what sticks. So, their opener is that Tim Walz is a San Francisco liberal. That’s an interesting insult given the circumstances. I have been to San Francisco on two separate occasions. I have apparently been to San Francisco more frequently than Walz.

The two policy planks that are getting the most attention is his desire to make sure every child is fed in school in his home state. Additionally, he wants every citizen in Minnesota to get paid family leave. Those planks are very popular amongst voters. According to Pew researchers, more than 80 percent of voters think that workers should get paid leave for their own medical problems. Well over 60 percent think that fathers and other family members should receive paid leave WHEN OTHERS IN THEIR FAMILY are dealing with a medical crisis or just gave birth.

Free school lunches are not quite as popular. Those programs test out in the high fifties and low sixties depending on how the question is asked and who is doing the asking. However, let’s ignore the numbers for a bit and consider the pros and cons of such proposals.

The cons are obvious and short. It costs money. Government is about priorities and some people think we shouldn’t be prioritizing those things. There are three groups of people that this would describe. There are libertarian types that don’t think the government should be spending on anything like this. Pure libertarians think the government should fund for national defense and that is pretty much it. So, they also eschew tax breaks and other subsidies for corporations and wealthy Americans as well.

As much as I admire their consistency, that kind of opinion is not common and not horribly realistic. That horse done left the barn. That brings us to the second group. It is an unholy combination of people that either feel cheated because they didn’t get it or they object to helping poorer people because they are becoming dependent on assistance and need some tough love. Of course, then you just have the assholes that are happy when the people they don’t like get hurt. I’d like to think they are in the minority.

I can’t do anything for the last group of folks. The first folks we will call the “anti-progress” crowd. That logic can extend out to almost everything. Why should younger people have cell phones? I didn’t have one until I was 26. Why should my car have automatic steering or seat belts? The first cars didn’t have that. If we want our children to have things better than what we had then that comes with improvements in technology and programs that makes life easier.

The bootstrapping folks are the hardest nut to crack. There are some instances where this ideology makes sense. It doesn’t in this instance. An eight year old cannot pick themselves by their bootstraps and as much as you might think their parent is a lazy piece of shit, the kid has no control over that. Feeding them only helps them. There are other tangible benefits. A fed child is a happier child and a child that can focus more in class.

If you are a conservative operative you know all of this. You at least know that feeding children and giving people paid leave is incredibly popular. Yet, this is what happens when you have no other policies to campaign on.