Walz is showing his true colors and it’s pathetic.
During a recent campaign event in Michigan, Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz took aim at Donald Trump, questioning the former president’s awareness of where his branded Bibles were produced. Walz claimed that the Bibles, marketed under Trump’s name, were actually printed in China, suggesting that Trump had “outsourced God” himself.
Walz’s comments came in the context of a broader critique of Trump’s record on American manufacturing and the auto industry. He scoffed at Trump’s assertions of being a champion for these sectors, pointing out that under Trump’s presidency, Michigan reportedly lost significant numbers of jobs, including thousands in manufacturing and the auto industry.
“Trump’s claims about saving the auto industry don’t hold up,” Walz stated. “During his time in office, our state lost over 280,000 jobs, including nearly 9,000 in the auto sector alone. He promised that under his leadership, no plants would close, yet we saw the opposite happen.” He highlighted that while Trump boasted about his achievements, the reality for working-class Americans was far grimmer.
Walz didn’t shy away from using humor to underscore his points, suggesting that Trump may not have noticed the “Made in China” label in the Bibles because, in his view, he never opened one. This jab was meant to illustrate Walz’s perception of Trump as disconnected from everyday American life.
As Trump promotes his “God Bless the USA Bible,” which includes a collection of the nation’s founding documents, Walz pointed to the irony of a self-proclaimed patriot selling products manufactured overseas. He painted a picture of Trump as a “scab” for American workers, arguing that his presidency was marked by an “endless string of broken promises” that left many workers in Michigan and beyond disillusioned.
In an era where many Americans are rightly concerned about the impact of outsourcing and the need for job creation, Walz’s remarks resonate with voters seeking genuine commitment to revitalizing the nation’s manufacturing base. As the election draws closer, these debates will likely become more pronounced, highlighting stark contrasts between the two parties’ approaches to American industry and economic resilience.