Republicans talk about Walz's record as a police officer. Why do voters in low-crime communities care?

With Governor Tim Walz now the vice presidential candidate, police policy has become a central focus of the election campaign.

In particular, Walz's response to the social unrest in the days following the murder of George Floyd became campaign material for former President Donald Trump, who is running on the Republican ballot alongside Senator JD Vance.

Walz, a Democrat, was criticized from the left and the right for his actions at the time, but there seemed to be enough blame for the unrest in Minneapolis. For example, a 2022 report showed that Minneapolis public safety officials neglected their own emergency plans when the protests spiraled out of control.

Recordings unearthed by ABC News show Trump praising Walz's response to the unrest in 2020. But in 2022, the Minnesota Peace and Police Officers Association endorsed Walz's opponent, Republican candidate Scott Jensen, saying Walz was “lacking” when it came to supporting law enforcement.

“Law and order” messages work well in election campaigns. But why is this the case even in communities that have little crime?

As part of our Talking Sense series, correspondent Catharine Richert spoke to David Squire Jones, a criminologist at the Center for Homicide Research, to find out. His answers have been edited for clarity and brevity.

Politicians talk a lot about crime in communities that are hardly affected by it. Why does this message resonate so strongly in these communities?

Americans tend to have an inflated sense of crime in their communities that doesn't match crime statistics. We saw a huge drop in crime throughout the 1990s and a plunge in recent years before and during the pandemic.

But if you do a survey in urban communities, but also in rural communities – and especially in rural communities – there is a concern among the population about being affected by crime.

They fear that there will be more crime in their community, that the demographics in their community will change due to immigration and other factors, that they will no longer be safe in their own homes, that someone will break into their home, and they are more afraid of being alone.

So it's an interesting shift that isn't supported by the evidence, and rural communities in particular tend to be seen as relatively safe.

Republican vice presidential candidate JD Vance said last week that Walz was “a guy who claims to stand for public safety but actively encouraged the rioters who burned Minneapolis.” Is Vance's characterization accurate, and what factors played into the response at the time?

As for Senator Vance's claim that Governor Walz incited unrest, I have found no evidence to support that statement.

I know he understood the frustration that many of the protesters felt after the death of George Floyd, not only with what they saw and what happened, but also… the way the police treated communities of color and poor communities.

He understood this, but I have not seen, read or heard anything that suggests he was calling for active unrest.

Vance specifically points to Walz's response to the unrest in the days following George Floyd's murder. But more generally: [his statement] implies a certain kind of performance on policing. What does Walz's performance really tell us about how he has handled the issue of policing in his nearly eight years as governor?

His record on promoting police reform is mixed, but he has also helped police increase funding for police departments across the state.

It's a delicate balancing act, and I think he tried to do that. He recognized the reality and the necessity of policing. He opposed the ballot bill to defund the Minneapolis Police Department.

From my perspective, that means he sees the need for policing, but he also sees the need for better policing, which is why he has revamped our Police Officer Standards and Training Commission.

He has welcomed various reforms, such as the ban on chokeholds, the way children are treated in schools and the obligation for officials to intervene and report misconduct.

I think he's concerned with better policing, not with defunding or abolishing the police, and he's certainly not anti-police.