Voters rely on executive politicians to craft effective solutions to difficult problems such as crises. Executives are frequently criticized, however, for exaggerating the degree of action required to address a problem. In this paper, I develop a model of elections in which the incumbent must respond to a crisis. In equilibrium, the executive exaggerates policy in order to appear informed to voter. This exaggeration can be due to well-informed executives overreacting to their information, or uninformed executives posturing and acting boldly, despite their lack of information. I show that limits on executive authority can improve policy responses, but may backfire by limiting discretion and encouraging posturing. Finally, I find that ideological disagreement over how to respond to the crisis can increase overreacting and posturing.