CHARLIE KIRK (HOST): Is this an upgrade? You traded one problem for another. You traded senility — or someone who is senile — for someone who is radical. You traded somebody who is — who you feel bad for, to someone who is deeply unlikely — unlikable.
Kamala Harris is two of the worst things that you could be in politics — she is unlikable and she is radical. And also she's really stupid. She's not a smart person. She's very, very low IQ. Joe Biden chose her not because she was some wonderful politician. Joe Biden did not choose her based on merit. He chose her based on the same criteria of DEI that got Trump shot, that has been destroying this country. The very same DEI ideology that has been sweeping the nation is now the standard bearer of the Democrat Party, and I think that is perfect. I think it is perfect now that the very same ideology that we have been fighting against is now embodied in the standard bearer of the Democrat Party. You could not have a better example of the worst aspects of the country or the Democrat party. But now — that's where she is. She is a DEI candidate. Joe Biden even acknowledged it. Joe Biden said that I chose Kamala Harris, not because she was brilliant, not because she was smart, not because she was qualified — I chose her because I wanted a Black female as my vice president.
Now, some Democrats think this is gonna be a big upgrade, but remember this is an electoral college issue. And I will say this, Joe Biden is actually a better candidate even with him being senile in Pennsylvania than Kamala Harris is in Pennsylvania. That's not to say that we're going to win, but for Democrats who think that Kamala Harris is this major upgrade, Joe is a likable old guy. And something that has been very difficult, it's hard to get people to really hate Joe Biden. Not impossible. It's been happening. But, instead, people are disappointed. People take it easy on Joe Biden. It's because no decent person wants to engage in elder abuse. You feel sorry for him. Kamala Harris is very easy to despise. Not only does she believe in the most radical ideas — she has played around with abolishing the electoral college, she wanted to get rid of the filibuster for the green new scam, a 100 trillion dollar deal. She said we're going to ban all fracking. By the way, her 2019 presidential race is a gold mine of opposition research. Say what you about Joe Biden, when Joe Biden ran for the presidency back in 2019, 2020, he was far more disciplined. Remember, Kamala Harris started her presidential campaign in Oakland with 20,000 people and tons of money, and she went down and finished six out of six before primary voting even began. She was not even able to win over the trust of her own Democrat primary voters.
In some ways, Kamala Harris is the accidental Democrat nominee. Very similar to Gerald Ford in 1976. Very similar. Gerald Ford was the unelected President. Started as Speaker of the House. They got rid of Spiro Agnew, he became VP. They got rid of Nixon, he became President. Then they ran Ford-Rockefeller. He never actually was elected president. Kamala Harris technically was elected vice president via being VP with Joe Biden, but she was not elected the nominee. She cannot even win over the primary voters in the Democrat party. And so they traded senility for unlikeability. They traded incompetence for radicalism. So what would you rather have? Would you rather run a candidate who's incompetent and can't put two sentences together, or someone who is deeply scary and radical?