If you’ve learned one thing about liberal Vice President Kamala Harris over the last 18 months, it’s likely that she isn’t all that trustworthy. First of all, nearly every task she’s been given has been a total flop and failure, from our ongoing immigration crisis to even the vaccine out…
But secondly, and possibly more important, she has the same uncanny ability that her boss, Democratic President Joe Biden, does to say things that are either completely made up lies or to insinuate more untruths.
The latest of which is her insistence that 1) Biden will be running for re-election come 2024, and 2) she will be his “ticket mate.”
She said as much during an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash that aired on Monday.
But by the very next day, both of those claims were labeled as likely falsehoods – and by one of her party’s own, no less.
Acclaimed pollster and longtime Democrat strategist Mark Penn sat down with Fox News’ Dana Perino on Tuesday to discuss why Harris’ statement is more hope than a fact.
Now, before we get too much further into this, it’s important to point out that Penn is not new to this game or the possibilities of Democratic politics.
In fact, he was a key adviser for both Bill and Hillary Clinton over the years. Thanks to his wisdom, Bill Clinton successfully won his re-election campaign in 1996. And Hillary won a senate seat in 2000, with Penn at her side. Of course, he also helped to advise Hillary during her not-so-successful bid for the White House in 2016 against Donald Trump.
Needless to say, Penn, unlike Harris, has a national reputation for successful maneuvering in the political field.
And according to him, the chances of Biden running in 2024 are slim to none, let alone winning.
He told Perino, “I think underscoring all this is if you ask Democratic voters, who would they vote for in a Democratic primary for president, only about 30 percent would pick President Biden, which is unprecedented in nature.”
Now, he admitted that both Biden and Harris’ insistence that they would be running in the upcoming presidential election is pretty much a must, especially before a midterm election cycle. As he stated, “any president before a midterm has got to maintain, steadfastly, that he’s running.” After the midterm is when the real calculations about such come into play.
And thanks to those polling facts Penn mentioned, it’s doubtful Biden will end up running.
If that is the case, Penn noted that it’s expected for Harris to throw in her hat for his seat. And at least as far as the Democratic primary goes, he thinks she may get it. According to him, “she would be hard to knock off and would most likely wind up with the nomination.”
Of course, that doesn’t mean she would actually win in a general election.
First of all, if someone like Donald Trump runs, or even the increasingly popular Ron DeSantis of Florida, the likelihood of a not-so-popular Kamala Harris winning is unlikely.
But secondly, history shows us the likelihood may be even slimmer.
Two other Democratic VPs have successfully won the nomination throughout history, Hubert Humphrey in 1968 and Walter Mondale in 1984.
However, neither of them ended up with the presidency. In fact, both were rather epic losses. Hubert lost the Electoral College against Republican Richard Nixon 301 to 191. And Mondale’s loss was even more embarrassing. He amassed a grand total of only 13 Electoral College votes against Ronald Reagan.
Again, the odds don’t exactly look to be in Harris or the Democrats’ favor. And that’s even before we begin to look at just unpopular Harris actually is. While her current job approval rating is higher than Biden’s, it’s only slightly so and still well below what Trump was at this point in his tenure – and Trump was supposedly the most hated president of all time…
It is noted that Biden’s approval rating sits at a mere 36 percent, as of Friday, according to Reuters. And like I said, Kamala’s isn’t much higher.
In any case, her recent claims will likely fall flat like all the rest, proving even more just how untrustworthy both she and her party are.
