After looking at the polls, Kari Lake says she’s truly considering another run for office.

Kari Lake, a Republican candidate for governor, stated that after seeing the poll results, she is” truly” considering running for Senate in Arizona.

When critic Charlie Kirk inquired about a potential Senate function, Lake responded that she was still thinking about her election-related lawsuit. Parts of her lawsuit were heard by the Arizona State Supreme Court next year.

” I’m not sure what I’ll do last socially. I always wanted to get involved in politics, but the people of Arizona hired me to run for governor, and together with them, we have led a remarkable We The People exercise, Lake responded.

Lake, a former local news outlet who was supported by President Donald Trump, added,” I will certainly consider it.” ” I’ve looked at a lot of voting, probably five surveys showing that I may easily lose the main and then the whole Senate race.”

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema’s Senate seat, which he currently holds( I-Ariz ), is up for grabs in 2024. Rep. Ruben Gallego( D – Arizona) will struggle Sinema, a previous Democrat who became an active last year, after he declares his nomination for the Senate the following year.

Gallego and Sinema were harshly criticized by Lake in her meeting with Kirk, who claimed that they had both given in to the far left. According to Lake, she may fare well against either candidate in a three-way culture, though it is unclear if Sinema has yet to run for reelection.

A spokeswoman for Lake claimed earlier this year that she met with members of the Senate Democratic party in Washington. There aren’t many specifics known about the conference, though. In the meantime, Lake has insisted that she pursue her election lawsuit, claiming that the Nov. 8 general election was marred by much mistakes and abnormalities.

The majority of Lake’s case was dismissed by the Arizona Supreme Court last month, but a lower court also ruled that some of the allegations made by her team regarding the Maricopa County signature verification process were unfounded. A Maricopa County judge dismissed Lake’s earlier vote a after a two-day hearing in late December. Before she appealed to the country’s highest jury, the Court of Appeals tossed it out in February.

This fingerprint verification contest, in contrast to the trial court’s decision and the Court of Appeals’ impression, is directed at the application of the laws rather than at those laws themselves, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled. Because Lake was unable to present this problem before the vote, it was incorrect to ignore this claim under the laches doctrine.

Following the 2020 presidential election, Lake told Even the News last week that the court’s decision” is a triumph” for conservatives worried about election fraud and other abnormalities. She remarked,” We’ve been trying for three years to get our foot in the door on one of these election occasions, and I always say we have the greatest ever case already. The door has been pushed available.”

However, Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer stated to The Epoch Times that they anticipate winning after last week’s jury verdict, citing earlier that difficulties that were successful in court.

Maricopa County has won more than 20 complaints challenging the justice, accuracy, legality, and fairness of its election administration since the 2020 general election, according to Richer. ” This situation won’t be any different, and it’ll just add to Lake’s impressively protracted losing run.”

According to vote data, Lake lost the midterm elections to Democrat Hobbs by around 17, 000 votes. Early in January, Katie Hobbs was sworn in as government.

The report” does not reflect that 35, 563 unaccounted ballots were added to the whole tally ,” the Supreme Court ruled, rejecting Lake’s assertion that the votes were mixed. On March 21, the high prosecutor said it would consider and make a decision regarding the review’s acceptance. Six out of the seven factors included in Lake’s argument were denied survey in its March 22 purchase.

According to Chief Justice Robert Brutinel’s mind,” it is ordered denying survey of matters one through five and seven.” The majority of these problems, which were the focus of empirical trials in the trial court, were appropriately resolved by the Court of Appeals. He claimed that Lake’s difficulties are” unsatisfactory.”

This article was contributed to by Tom Ozimek.