Trump’s running mate, Sen. JD Vance, called out Vice President Kamala Harris on Saturday for her closing arguments and other statements made during the campaign that suggest she’d rule unconstitutionally if elected, despite her claims that the former president would do so. Vance made his remarks as he closed out a rally in Las Vegas, Nev., a state where he and Donald Trump currently lead, according to most polling.
“In Kamala Harris’s America, she tries to censor her fellow citizens or call them garbage for having the audacity to notice that she did a terrible job. In Donald J. Trump’s America, we are going to fight for every American citizen, whatever your background or whoever you voted for. In Kamala Harris’s America, she’ll wag her finger at you and complain for you laughing at a joke. And in Donald J. Trump’s America, we have a pretty good time — because we love this country and you can have a good time,” he said.
“So the question before us is not whether you agree with me on every issue. It’s not whether you agree with Donald J. Trump on every issue. The question is whether you want peace and prosperity for your fellow citizens, or whether we want to double down on the failed leadership of Kamala?” Vance continued. “The question is whether we believe that we actually had peace and prosperity when Donald J. Trump was president and we did or do you believe that somehow Kamala Harris is going to do something radically different over the next four years than she did over the first four years? And the answer is no. We know the answer to that question.”
WATCH:
Meanwhile, Harris is continuing to lose ground in the most important battleground states she needs to defeat former President Trump. And now, according to veteran reporter Mark Halperin, Harris is struggling in Wisconsin, per conversations he’s had with political strategists on both sides of the aisle.
“It remains the base case that Vice President Harris is unlikely to win, according to my sources in both parties, not sure thing, but unlikely to win Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona. If she doesn’t win those three states, she must sweep Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin,” Halperin stated during a segment for 2Way TV. “As forecast here a long time ago, it appears that she’s basically back to where Joe Biden was on the eve of the debate, on a electoral college path to exactly 270 electoral votes. So our intense focus for the rest of the way will be to continue to monitor to see whether she can actually win North Carolina, Georgia, or Arizona. Does not appear to my sources now that she will.”
Halperin also pointed out that Pennsylvania is considered the most significant of the three Rust Belt states, not only because it has the highest number of electoral votes but also due to favorable polling results for the former president in recent weeks. After recently hosting a two-hour analysis of the race in the Keystone State, Halperin reported that Harris is facing concerning developments in Wisconsin. “And what I’m here to tell you tonight, based on my reporting with Democrats and Republicans nationally and in both those states, that it could be that Kamala Harris wins Pennsylvania but loses the White House because she loses Wisconsin,” he said, noting that Trump and Harris were holding dueling rallies in the state on Friday night.
“Because as I said, my reporting is that she’s in trouble in Wisconsin. This is based on three sources, two Republicans, one Democrat, all of whom know the state quite well, and all of whom told me today the same version of they would be somewhere between surprised and shocked if Kamala Harris won Wisconsin,” Halperin continued. “All I’m telling you is to reorient yourself away from news framing that says it’s all about Pennsylvania. ‘The winner of Pennsylvania will win this election.’ That’s become kind of a mantra. The winner of Pennsylvania will win. I’m here to tell you, she may well win Pennsylvania and win the election, but she could win Pennsylvania and lose the election because she doesn’t win Wisconsin. Watch Wisconsin.
Disclaimer: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.