JD Vance Attacks Tim Walz’s Military Record. This Former John Kerry Strategist Has Thoughts.

Bob Shrum knows what it means to watch Republicans criticize a Democrat for his military service.

Shrum was a strategist for John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign when a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, made up of Vietnam veterans, questioned his military record, saying he was undeserving of his awards. (Kerry is the recipient of three Purple Hearts, a Silver Star and a Bronze Star.) After television ads criticizing Swift Boat, Kerry temporarily fell behind incumbent President George W. Bush in the polls.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who recently joined Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign as her running mate, is now facing similar attacks on his military record from fellow veteran J.D. Vance, who accused the former National Guardsman of “stealing valor.” Vance claims Walz mischaracterized his service, saying in a 2018 speech that he carried “weapons of war” when he never saw combat. Walz has also been accused of inflating his qualifications, saying he is a “retired staff sergeant.” (Walz served in that rank but retired at the lower rank of master sergeant because he didn’t complete the course. Harris’ campaign has since changed Walz’s biography on its website.)

The architect of the swift boat campaign against Kerry — Chris LaCivita, the “chief strategist” of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth — is now a top Trump campaign aide. Could the Trump campaign use the same strategy against Walz?

POLITICO caught up with Shrum, who has spent decades in Democratic politics, to find out what he learned from his experience fending off Swift Boat attacks on the Kerry campaign — and what advice he would give the Walz campaign now.

“I would like us to (respond to the attacks) immediately,” he said, “and I would like us to do it decisively.”

The text below has been edited for length and clarity.

Gov. Tim Walz’s military record is now under attack by Republicans. Does this remind you of your days as John Kerry’s campaign strategist?

Sure. It also tells me they’ve run out of things to say. They’re just repeating old campaign tactics. I don’t think it’s going to work.

Ultimately, the attack (on John Kerry) didn’t matter, except that it disrupted the campaign in August. But when Election Day came, if people were asked, “Could John Kerry be commander in chief?” their answer was yes. They watched the first debate and they learned their lesson.

I think this time is different. People have heard this before, many of them, not the entire electorate. Walz’s record has been defended by a whole bunch of people across the political spectrum. I don’t think this is going anywhere.

What advice would you give Walz personally and the Harris-Walz campaign on how to respond?

Keep doing what they do, which is responding to attacks, have other people respond to attacks, but then change direction — which also happens. And let’s talk about Mr. Bones (Editor’s Note: Former President Donald Trump received medical leave from military service during the Vietnam War due to heel spurs.) first, who avoided service altogether. Look, that’s such a rich attack. And I say that ironically, since I’m saying this from the campaign of a guy whose father forced some doctor to swear that he had a medical disability that couldn’t be identified.

So you’re recommending they focus on attacking the Trump-Vance campaign?

To the extent that they stick with that — and I don’t think they need to do that for long, I think they can get rid of that — they can talk about the person they’re running against, both in terms of Trump and Vance. They have a lot of surrogates who talk about that. They have a lot of people who talk about what Trump did. So it’s not just about being on the defensive, it’s about changing direction. But that’s not the main issue in this campaign. It’s a side issue.

You could say that about the attacks on John Kerry, right? Because he also risked his life serving in Vietnam. That didn’t stop the attacks.

To me, at the time, it was horrifying. This was someone who volunteered for Vietnam, had a Silver Star and a Bronze Star. This attack was actually carried out on Kerry when I was campaigning for his re-election to the Senate in 1996. Admiral (Elmo) Zumwalt came to Boston and killed him at one press conference. But Admiral Zumwalt was not around in 2004.

In your memoirs you wrote that, looking back, the Kerry campaign should have “hit early and hard during fast boat attacks.” What stopped you then?

Number one, we were told that the polls showed that it had no effect. Number two, there was a financial constraint. The Kerry campaign agreed—and I think it was a mistake, and I think John said it was a mistake—to accept federal funds, which meant that we had the same amount of money for the campaign that Bush had for the eight-week campaign, because his convention was later. So there was a reluctance to respond immediately because it could drain resources that the campaign would need at the end.

But I have to say that Kerry wanted to respond from the very beginning. I mean, he pressured the campaign to respond. I don’t know that it would have made much difference if he had responded immediately, because ultimately I don’t think that this so-called independent expenditure, which Bush has always said he had nothing to do with, affected the final outcome. Maybe it did, in the sense that it created problems for the campaign in August.

I would like us to (respond to the attacks) immediately and I would like us to do it strongly. But none of these restrictions apply to the Harris-Walz campaign. They have no federal funding. They have the resources to do everything they need to do on TV. They have all the surrogates lined up to do it, and they did, and Walz’s popularity is up and Vance’s is down. Republicans and Democrats are pointing that out. I assume they’re probing carefully and they know if it’s having an impact.

Chris LaCivita, who was the architect of the speedboat attacks on Kerry, is now a top Trump campaign aide. Does that surprise you?

Does it surprise me that he processes something he should be ashamed of but is proud of it? No.

Could this attack have any negative impact on the Trump-Vance campaign?

Yes, I think a lot of veterans are going to hate that, especially those who have served a long time and know that if you spend 24 years in the National Guard, you’re really doing something for the government. I think a lot of veterans are going to be repulsed by that attack because they understand, better than anyone, that spending 24 years serving your country in the armed forces really does matter.