One Candidate, 100 Messages

Election Day is just around the corner, and even CNN is calling out Kamala’s strategy of having her cake and eating it too.

In this case, she’s running ads in Michigan, where there’s a high proportion of Arab and Muslim voters, touting her alleged support for Gazans - despite kicking Arab community leaders out of her campaign events. On the other hand, she’s running ads in Pennsylvania, which has a higher proportion of Jewish voters, touting her alleged support for Israel - despite passing over Pennsylvania’s own Jewish governor for the VP nod due to a pressure campaign from antisemitic, anti-Israel elements in her party.

So, which is it? The reality is, Kamala is too weak to make a decision. And we can say this about Kamala with practically every other issue;  she has consistently refused to take an unequivocal position on anything remotely controversial. She’s a candidate with 100 messages, all tailored to have the least amount of substance possible to minimize the risk of offending anyone.

The one thing she has been consistent and vocal on is calling President Trump and his supporters some variation of “fascist,” a term that’s been so thoughtlessly flung around it increasingly lacks any substance or meaning.

At this point Kamala’s entire campaign, in fact, is centered around blowing a billion dollars on office openings, celebrity endorsements, Liz Cheney’s desire to be relevant again, and an incessant deluge of (often contradictory) ads.

Who’s the more appealing candidate? The former president with a proven record of delivering peace, prosperity, and stability and who’s repeatedly outlined his commonsense plans to do it again - or the empty vessel chameleon whose message is whatever has zero chance of offending the people in front of her, regardless of how vapid it has to be?

Bottom Line: When you’re everywhere supporting everything, you’re nowhere supporting nothing. It’s a basic lesson that Michiganders are going to teach Kamala Camp on November 5th.