On a recent political trek in Pennsylvania, Kamala Harris took a thinly veiled stab at Donald Trump, though avoiding direct mention of his name. She embarked on this journey in the company of running mate Tim Walz, alongside their spouses, giving an impassioned yet questionable speech in Rochester. Harris, with an air of unfounded righteousness, made a contentious claim, stating ‘… the strength of a leader is seen in who they can lift up’.
In her attempt to decry Trump’s leadership, Harris posits that those who ‘beat down’ others show a lack of strength. This claim, however, reveals a certain amount of irony considering the tactics prevalent during their campaign trail. Still, Harris, Walz and their spouses continued pressing on through the important battleground state of Pennsylvania.
Their campaign trail seems to be nothing more than desperate scramble, an attempt to solidify support in the leadup to the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Pennsylvania, greatly coveted by both Harris’s camp and Trump, holds substantial weight in the race for 270 electoral votes, highlighting the importance of the state in the broader political landscape.
Trump had been in Pennsylvania a day before Harris for a rally in Wilkes-Barre and plans to return for another event on Monday following Harris’s visit. Seen by some as a strategic move to follow Trump’s campaign trails, it’s a game of catch-up that Harris and her team seem to be losing.
During her speech, Harris gave kudos to Pennsylvania’s Democratic Senator Bob Casey and Democratic Representative Chris Deluzio, highlighting her strategy of rallying members of her party for support and cooperation. The state’s keen importance was clearly accentuated during Harris’s speech, making an arguably desperate appeal towards Pennsylvanians.
Directly addressing her supporters, she attempted to rally listeners by placing great responsibility on Pennsylvanian shoulders. Yet, she used this emphasis to further advocate her ‘fight’ message, a key aspect of her campaign alluding to a dubious promise of safeguarding individual freedoms.
Harris hollowly affirmed that her campaign was ‘born out of love for country’. Contrary to this romanticized sentiment, a more accurate perception would be the campaign’s clear motive to gain political power. She concluded her speech by challenging her supporters to fight for the country, leaving one to question if the fight is truly for the people, or for the consolidation of power.