The upcoming presidential election could well be decided in Pennsylvania, where Kamala Harris faces off against Donald Trump in an exceptionally close race.

Harris's strategic choices, including her vice-presidential pick of Tim Walz and her distinctive campaign methods, could be crucial in determining the election's outcome, with many now doubting their efficacy, as Fox News reports.

One of the most pivotal states in the 2024 election is Pennsylvania. Losing this key battleground could enable Trump to secure a second term as the 47th president of the United States. Historically, states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin are critical terrain for Democratic hopefuls.

Josh Shapiro Left Out of VP Pick

Harris did not select Josh Shapiro, the popular governor of Pennsylvania, as her running mate. Instead, she opted for Tim Walz, known for his background as a teacher football coach but considerably less popular among moderates. Shapiro, considered a more moderate liberal, was passed over for the uber-progressive Walz.

Walz has not been granted the autonomy to conduct solo interviews during the campaign, in contrast to Trump’s running mate JD Vance, who frequently engages with media. Some campaign insiders speculate that Walz might be a bit rusty, given his limited exposure.

Tight Polls in Crucial Swing State

Current polling data indicates an extremely tight race. According to the Real Clear Politics average, Trump leads Harris by a minuscule margin of 48.1% to 47.9%. Meanwhile, the 538 average shows Harris narrowly leading Trump, 47.9% to 47.1%, essentially a tie in both cases.

Harris’s decision against picking Shapiro reportedly stemmed from two key issues. Firstly, a tense conversation between Harris and Shapiro resulted in the governor demanding an influential role should he become vice president. Secondly, Harris faced significant pressure from the anti-Israel faction within her party who opposed Shapiro’s strong support for Israel.

Impact of Anti-Israel Sentiments

The pressure from the anti-Israel faction led Harris to hand veto power to this minority group, thus avoiding the controversy that would have ensued. Critics suggest that this pressure could have contributed significantly to the decision, viewing it as a major mistake if Harris lost Pennsylvania.

Harris has been diligently campaigning in the more conservative western regions of Pennsylvania in attempt to mitigate Trump’s expected gains. Her appearances have largely been limited to friendly media platforms, where tough questions are typically avoided. This strategy contrasts sharply with Trump's aggressive media engagement.

Campaigning in Conservative Areas

Harris recently made a strategic visit to the Mexican border. This move was intended to reassert her stance on immigration and to seize the news cycle’s attention. Despite her efforts, her campaign messages have struggled to generate significant media coverage.

Trump, known for his provocative rhetoric, has not held back in his attacks. He recently referred to Harris as "mentally impaired," suggesting she should be impeached and even prosecuted. Such statements draw public attention and spark media debates, inadvertently keeping Trump in the spotlight.

Struggling to Make Headlines

Harris’s campaign has been critiqued for its repetitive messaging. At a recent political event on the West Coast, she reiterated her stance on comprehensive immigration reform, echoing similar comments made in Arizona just days earlier. Analysts argue that such repetition has done little to provide fresh news or invigorate her campaign.

If Harris fails to win Pennsylvania, it could be a critical blow to her campaign, potentially leading to its conclusion. The state’s significance cannot be overstated; every strategic move and decision could tip the balance.

Harris Taking Strategic Risks

While campaigning in Pennsylvania, Harris has tried to address a variety of issues but to limited effect. Her tactics, which include avoiding less-friendly media and rehashing familiar talking points, appear not to be resonating as much with voters.

The choice of Tim Walz as her running mate remains a contentious point. Critics argue that choosing someone more moderate like Shapiro could have been a better strategy. They insist that Shapiro’s familiarity and moderate stance would likely pull in crucial extra votes.

Trump’s Persistent Influence

Despite facing multiple impeachments and a slew of negative press, Trump remains competitive. The incessant media coverage of his statements and actions often benefits him, keeping him central in the public discourse.

As Election Day nears, both campaigns are ramping up their efforts. For Harris, every day in Pennsylvania is an opportunity to swing the voter sentiment in her favor. The complexity of the election underscores the importance of every strategic decision leading up to the final vote.

In this high-stakes contest, the smallest margin could decide the next leader of the United States. Both Harris and Trump understand too well the power in Pennsylvania and are pulling out all the stops to clinch victory in this crucial battleground state.