Watch: JD Vance Gives Fiery Opinion on Kamala Harris' Lead, Claims Harris 'Doesn't Like Her Numbers' in Recent Interview

According to the polls, Vice President Kamala Harris holds a modest but noteworthy advantage in national surveys, and she’s slightly ahead in several key battleground states.

However, Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio, who is running alongside Donald Trump, believes there’s a caveat to consider: if you trust public polls, Harris has the lead.

But in her internal polling, Vance suggests, the vice president “doesn’t like her numbers.”

In an expansive interview with Tucker Carlson, released on Wednesday, Vance explained that the internal polling data and the way journalists present it is something most people outside of politics or media don’t fully grasp.

“You understand how this operates, but I’ll provide some insight for your viewers and listeners,” Vance said.

“I’ve mentioned before, ‘Kamala’s internal numbers aren’t looking great right now.’ And of course, the left responds by saying, ‘Well, J.D. Vance is Trump’s running mate, and no one from Kamala Harris’ team is speaking to him,’” he continued.

“And that’s true: Kamala Harris’ campaign isn’t speaking to me. But they are talking to journalists. Those journalists, in turn, want insights into our campaign’s internal data. They want to know our internal numbers.

“And, to be clear, journalists are telling me Kamala Harris doesn’t like her numbers. On the flip side, those same journalists are telling me our campaign is comfortable with its numbers. The narrative here is consistent.”

Carlson added that “journalists essentially act as couriers of information between campaigns.”

After sharing a laugh about how some journalists seem to operate like intelligence agents, Vance remarked, “Journalists in electoral politics are like the CIA in international relations.”

Carlson quipped, “People think polls are just a way to measure public opinion. Similarly, they think, ‘Journalists are supposed to report on what’s happening!’ No, journalists are participants in the political game.”

“And they don’t disclose this to their readers,” he continued, with Vance agreeing that journalists often act as behind-the-scenes mediators between campaigns.

Vance also noted that this behavior aligns with what journalists have reported in recent election cycles.

For instance, in 2016, die-hard supporters of Hillary Clinton were confident in their numbers, while more seasoned figures like Bill Clinton were less certain. In 2020, there was confusion on both sides about what the numbers actually indicated.

This time, Vance said, the internal polling paints a similarly clear picture.

“Look, I think we’re in a good position,” he said. “But we can’t take any of this for granted.”

The full interview, for the curious, is here:

As of Thursday morning, the RealClearPolitics polling average shows a two-point gap in Harris’ favor, 49.3 percent to Trump’s 47.3 percent.

However, the race in battleground states remains tight, and Trump has historically performed better in internal polls than in general surveys. Both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, for example, held larger leads in national aggregate polls compared to their final winning margins, with Biden’s discrepancy being particularly notable. And ultimately, the national vote doesn’t determine the outcome.

There are also warning signs in the data when scrutinized further. Consider younger voters, a group Biden won by 28 points in 2020. By the time Biden stepped aside, his lead among 18-29-year-olds had shrunk to just seven points, according to the Cook Political Report, and it was expected Harris would perform better.

That assumption has proven correct, though not to the degree many anticipated: CNN recently reported that Harris holds only a 15-point lead in this demographic, a far cry from the surge her campaign was hoping for.

These are the nuances that internal polls tend to capture better than general surveys, which are more focused on providing a broad overview of the race rather than drilling down into specific demographics or levels of enthusiasm. Frankly, there’s little financial or public interest in covering these finer details.

But within the political world and media circles, this kind of information is invaluable. And don’t think it doesn’t get passed around behind closed doors. Yes, Vance is just one voice, but his observations seem to hold weight.