Before Donald Trump picked Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) as his 2024 running mate, some GOP strategists were hoping he would go with Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) or North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum instead — as they believed that having a more traditional conservative on the ticket would increase Trump's appeal to independents and swing voters who aren't ultra-MAGA in their views.
But Trump went full MAGA by choosing Vance. And according to Axios reporters Zachary Basu and Andrew Solender, some House Republicans believe Trump hurt his campaign by picking a "hardline MAGA" candidate like Vance.
"Vice President Kamala Harris' sudden elevation as Donald Trump's opponent has some Republicans second-guessing the former president's selection of Sen. J.D. Vance as his running mate," Basu and Solender wrote.
"Why it matters: While President Biden was refusing to budge last week in the face of mounting Democratic pressure, Trump chose the outspoken senator as a tribute — and potential heir — to the hardline MAGA movement."
READ MORE:'Hell hath no fury': Taylor Swift fans unleash wrath on JD Vance over 'childless cat lady' quip
The Axios reporters continue, "Vance's nomination at the GOP convention came at the peak of the party's confidence about the 2024 election, which polls suggested was shaping up to be a potential landslide. But less than a week later, Biden was out and Harris was in — scrambling the polls and detonating the Trump campaign's assumptions about the electoral playing field."
Harris' allies have been attacking Vance with a vengeance, slamming him for his anti-abortion views and saying, in the past, that women should stay in abusive marriages.
A House Republican, interviewed on condition of anonymity, told Axios, "The road got a lot harder. He was the only pick that wasn't the safe pick. And I think everyone has now realized that."
Another House Republican, also quoted anonymously, told Axios, "On the whole, the feeling is: doesn't add much. And now, with Kamala at the top, the capacity to have expanded the map a little bit …. would have been much more beneficial."
Read Axios' full report at this link.