JD Vance launched a startlingly peculiar offensive against Kamala Harris on a recent Sunday, likening her to none other than Jeffrey Epstein. During a segment on Fox News, Vance assailed the campaign efforts of Harris, raising eyebrows with his audacious claims backed up by internal Donald Trump campaign polls that he said depicted Harris’ standing stagnating among voters. Vance argued that the electorate didn’t perceive Harris as having the ability to manage the country’s inflation crisis, instigating him to draw this fiery comparison.
Vance’s contentious remarks followed the emergence of new polls that contradicted his claim, showing Harris outperforming Trump in both key battleground states and on the national level. The ABC/Washington Post/Ipsos poll of registered voters delivered its verdict on the same Sunday: it adjudged Harris leading Trump nationally by 4 points and outpacing him by 6 points among likely voters. The survey was historic in a way as it was the first this election cycle to have Harris leading Trump outside statistical margins of error.
In a desperate attempt to downplay this solid performance, Vance strategically found refuge in other polls that purportedly showed the political fortunes of Harris waning. He insisted, seemingly without concrete evidence, that Trump’s campaign was in a sightly favorable position.
Both RealClearPolitics and FiveThirtyEight, reputable polling houses, made public their averages on the same Sunday, contradicting Vance’s claims. Their evaluations had Harris ahead of Trump, corroborating the findings of nearly all the polls conducted in the preceding 10 days.
Vance’s statement during the interview seems more like a feeble attempt to undermine Harris’s steadily increasing popularity rather than a serious critique of her policies. The comparison with Jeffrey Epstein appears more like a ploy to disparage her reputation rather than provide a productive analysis of candidate potential and performance.
Many voters, however, do not seem to be swayed by Vance’s Sisyphean attempts to besmirch Harris’s reputation. The consistent polls, which put Harris above Trump, attest to her resilience in the face of baseless critiques and biased narratives. Nay, these steady numbers seem to reveal her ability to retain public trust in an increasingly polarized political landscape.
Harris’s critics, like Vance, have often tried to paint her as incompetent and unable to handle the country’s economic woes. However, the fact that these accusations are thinly veiled attempts to undermine her proves that these critics lack substantial evidence to back up their claims. Such futile attempts only reflect poorly on those who employ them, rather than on Harris herself.
Vance seems to disregard the fact that, if Harris’s standing is indeed diminishing among voters as he claims, this may have more to do with the general disillusionment with politicians and a deeply divided political climate, rather than any fault of Harris herself. Attacking her personal character rather than focusing on policy issues does a disservice to the electorate.
This is particularly clear when Vance reaches for inflammatory comparisons, undermining his own credibility. Implying that Harris’s failure to tackle inflation is akin to Epstein’s criminal behavior is not only misleading but also offensive.
His intent to unduly malign Harris only seems to corroborate the polls showing Harris leading Trump. As repeatedly proven, voters are more discerning than what Vance gives them credit for – they have demonstrated their ability to see through baseless slander and made their choice clear.
Moreover, Vance’s reliance on internal campaign polls from the Trump faction seems questionable. Using internal metrics as the basis for critique instead of more reliable, broader public polls seems like a dubious decision that borders on propaganda rather than election campaign critique.
In essence, the narrative built by Vance and others like him, which consistently undermine Harris, could be seen as potential desperation and a failure to direct the discourse towards more relevant issues. The focus on character attacks rather than policy devalues the democratic process. The continued popularity of Harris, despite these attacks, is indicative of how uninspired and largely ineffective these tactics truly are.
So while Vance resorts to carrying out personal attacks on Harris, it’s worth considering why. His tactics appear to be aimed at stirring controversy and maintaining relevance in the political debate, rather than providing substantive conversation on pressing issues.
In the final account, it’s abundantly clear that Vance’s attack is a mere tactic to undermine and discredit Harris based on narrow viewpoints. However, the electorate seems wise to these manipulative gimmicks, judging by the barefaced polling numbers favoring Harris over Trump. The persistent popularity of Harris is a testament to the public’s discernment and resilience in the face of unfounded slander.
Vance Exposes Hollow Popularity of Kamala Harris appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
