From fracking to abortion, Harris and Trump’s campaign was specifically crafted for Pennsylvania. The significance of the key swing condition…
But the significance of the location was not lost on either candidate as the debate was held in the largest and most politically-influential city in Pennsylvania, the state that’s poised to determine the winner of the presidential contest.
For Harris, winning Pennsylvania would offer her a significant boost in holding the White House as she also looks for victories in “blue wall” swing states like Michigan and Wisconsin. And that’s before any potential wins in states like Arizona and Georgia.
And for Trump, flipping Pennsylvania — a state he narrowly won in 2016 but lost in 2020 — would give him a broader path to winning back the White House. And it would reaffirm the power of the working-class electorate that fueled his win in the state eight years ago.
Here’s how both candidates sought to make a special appeal to Pennsylvanians during the debate.
In 2019, when Harris was running for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, she voiced support for a ban on hydraulic fracturing — or fracking.
But Harris’ newly-minted presidential campaign in July said that she would not support a fracking ban.
And recognizing the political potency of the issue, Harris on Tuesday sought to distance herself from her past comments by pointing to her record as vice president.
“I have not banned fracking as Vice President of the United States,” she said during the presidential debate. “And, in fact, I was the tie-breaking vote on the Inflation Reduction Act, which opened new leases for fracking.”
But her onetime opposition to the oil and gas drilling technique, which has contributed to an energy boom across Pennsylvania, has become a central point of attack for the Trump campaign.
“If she won the election, fracking in Pennsylvania will end on day one,” the former president warned during the debate.
It’s an issue that has particular resonance in Central and Western Pennsylvania, as it represents a major flashpoint in the ideological tug of war between climate initiatives and the push for increased fossil fuel production in the US.
