Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake said she is “seriously” considering running for Senate in Arizona after seeing the polling results.
When commentator Charlie Kirk asked about a possible Senate run, Lake said she is still focusing on her election-related lawsuit. Last week, the Arizona state Supreme Court took up portions of her suit.
“I don’t know politically what I will do next. I never had any desire to get into politics, and the people of Arizona recruited me to run for governor, and we have led an amazing movement of We The People,” Lake said in response.
“It is something I will seriously consider,” added Lake, a former local news anchor President Donald Trump endorsed. “I’ve looked at a lot of polling, probably five polls showing that I can not only win handily in a primary, but I can go on to win the entire race for Senate.”
The Senate seat currently held by Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) is up for grabs in 2024. Sinema, a former Democrat who became an independent last year, will also face a challenge from Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) after he declares his candidacy for the Senate next year.
In her interview with Kirk, Lake sharply criticized Gallego and Sinema, accusing both of capitulating to the far left. Lake suggested that polling shows she would perform well against either in a three-way race, although it needs to be clarified if Sinema is running for reelection yet.
Earlier this year, a spokesperson for Lake told news outlets that she met with members of the Senate Republican team in Washington. However, few details about the meeting have been provided. Meanwhile, Lake has insisted that she continue pursuing her election lawsuit, alleging enough errors and irregularities during the Nov. 8 gubernatorial race to cost her the election.
The Arizona Supreme Court last week threw out most of Lake’s case but also ruled that a lower court was wrong to dismiss some of her team’s claims about the signature verification process in Maricopa County. After a two-day trial in late December, a Maricopa County judge rejected Lake’s initial election lawsuit. The Court of Appeals tossed it in February before she appealed to the state’s highest court.
“Contrary to the ruling of the trial court and the Court of Appeals opinion, this signature verification challenge is to the application of the policies, not to the policies themselves,” the Arizona Supreme Court wrote. “Therefore, it was erroneous to dismiss this claim under the doctrine of laches because Lake could not have brought this challenge before the election,” it added.
Last week, Lake told Just the News that the court ruling “is a victory” for conservatives concerned about election fraud and other irregularities—namely after the 2020 presidential race. “We’ve been trying for three years to get our foot in the door on one of these election cases, and I’ve always said we have the greatest election case ever, and the door’s been pushed open,” she remarked.
But Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer told The Epoch Times after last week’s court decision that they are expecting to win, citing previous election challenges that were successful in court.
“Since the 2020 general election, Maricopa County has won over 20 lawsuits challenging the fairness, accuracy, legality, and impartiality of its election administration,” Richer said. “This case will be no different and will simply add another mark to Lake’s impressively long losing streak.”
Election data shows that Lake lost to Hobbs, a Democrat, by about 17,000 votes during the midterms. Katie Hobbs was sworn in as governor in early January.
The Supreme Court rejected Lake’s claim of intermingled ballots, saying that “the record does not reflect that 35,563 unaccounted ballots were added to the total count.” The high court indicated it would deliberate on March 21 and decide whether to accept the review. In its March 22 order, it denied review of six out of seven points included in Lake’s appeal.
“It is ordered denying review of issues one through five and seven,” reads the opinion written by Chief Justice Robert Brutinel. “The Court of Appeals aptly resolved these issues, most of which were the subject of evidentiary proceedings in the trial court.” He said that Lake’s challenges are “insufficient.”
Tom Ozimek contributed to this report.