I’m confused about what Tim Walz is trying to achieve.

The governor of Minnesota and Democratic candidate for vice president is under significant media scrutiny – which is warranted – following Vice President Kamala Harris’s selection of him as her running mate.

Unfortunately, the coverage isn’t painting him in a favorable light.

Numerous instances indicate that Walz may be embellishing or misrepresenting details about his history.

While we aren’t delving into the extreme fabrications associated with George Santos (the former Republican congressman known for concocting elaborate lies about his background and finances), concerns are still valid.

These are avoidable mistakes, leading voters to question what they can genuinely believe when Walz speaks.

Is Walz Misunderstanding IVF? Probably Not

One significant untruth that Walz has repeated this year – and which seems particularly blatant – is his assertion that he and his wife could only conceive their two children through in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Walz has referenced this point multiple times, even weaving it into his campaign narratives.

“Thank God for IVF, my wife and I have two beautiful children,” he stated in July during an appearance on MSNBC.

He also remarked about Ohio Senator JD Vance, his Republican counterpart: “If it were up to him, I wouldn’t have a family because of IVF.”

This statement from Walz is odd for various reasons, primarily because it’s incorrect. (Moreover, in regard to Vance, it’s misleading; Vance, like former President Donald Trump, has supported the procedure.)

Recently, it was revealed by Walz’s wife, Gwen Walz, during an interview with Glamour, that the IVF claim is inaccurate. Instead, the couple underwent a much simpler and less expensive treatment known as intrauterine insemination (IUI). Unlike IVF, IUI does not involve ethical dilemmas linked to the creation of embryos outside the womb.

Walz’s discussion of his family’s fertility journey seems to have gained traction earlier this year when IVF became a contentious political issue after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that embryos should be recognized as children.

It seems likely that it was politically strategic for Walz to assert he and his wife relied on IVF, especially after his selection as Harris’s running mate. The Democratic platform has prioritized abortion and reproductive rights in this election, making Walz’s “experience” in these matters potentially appealing to Harris.

Walz’s campaign spokesperson Mia Ehrenberg attempted to justify Walz’s remarks as a simple misunderstanding.

“Governor Walz communicates in ways that resonate with everyday people. He was using a familiar shorthand regarding fertility treatments,” she explained.

However, for the families who have navigated the emotional challenges of IVF, this rationale may fall flat.

In my view, this isn’t a mere miscommunication. It appears to be a deliberative tactic intended to enhance his political appeal, as he’s used this narrative to connect with audiences during rallies.

A Broader Trend of Deceptive Assertions

Following Harris’s announcement of Walz as her running mate, a discussion regarding his military service arose. Walz dedicated 24 years to the National Guard, which is commendable.

However, it becomes more puzzling why Walz felt compelled to amplify his rank upon retirement.

He has frequently referred to himself as a “retired command sergeant major,” a claim that even appeared on the Harris-Walz campaign website until it was modified following the backlash.

The confusion lies in the fact that while Walz did attain the rank of command sergeant major, he did not retire at that rank due to not fulfilling the necessary requirements.

Recently, The Washington Free Beacon uncovered several more examples where Walz has exaggerated or altered his background. For instance, in 2006, when running for Congress, he distinguished an award he had received from the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce.

Despite claiming an award from the state chamber, Walz never actually received it, and he was subsequently asked to retract that statement.

This raises serious concerns and has turned what ought to be relatable narratives—such as struggles with fertility and Walz’s military background—into contentious issues.

Walz needs to offer a clearer explanation regarding these inaccuracies.