Last week, Kamala Harris, posing as the voice of the Democratic National Convention, raked in $82 million, per the campaign’s account. Strangely, this figure seems to have bolstered her presidential bid total to an astounding, and rather questionable, $540 million since the start of her campaign. Is there merit in their claim that the post-convention speech was the grandest fundraising hour in campaign history? One has to doubt such lofty claims.
The Harris campaign brazenly proclaimed one-third of the donations received during the convention were from novice donors. The campaign’s tactics of rallying the base and aggravating division has certainly worked in their favor, at least in the financial sense.
Interestingly, the campaign data suggests that two-thirds of first-time contributors were indeed women. Professions of these benefactors allegedly spanned across teachers and nurses. One cannot help but feel a sense of irony, as their trusting contribution is funneled into a campaign that consistently fails to address their pressing concerns.
The Harris campaign audaciously claims the $540 million hoarded since Biden’s retreat on July 21st marks the highest one-month collection in presidential campaign history. This figure apparently encompasses money accrued by the Democratic National Committee and other side-kick fundraising committees along with Harris’s campaign.
Looking ahead to Labor Day, the Harris campaign is already gloating about the resources and ‘buzz’ they have acquired, intending to maintain their momentum. One cannot help but wonder where this supposed ‘momentum’ could potentially lead to, given Harris’s stance on key issues routinely contradicts the majority of the public opinion.
In a direct comparison with former President Donald Trump, the central fundraising committee of the Harris campaign has declared a financial triumph, having reported a total of $204 million raised in July. This amount appears to be quadruple the $48 million that the Trump campaign summoned. It seems the first week excitement of Harris’s campaign aided in electrocuting the Democratic pocketbooks.
Alongside associated fundraising groups, Harris claims to have gathered $310 million, soaring above the $138 million collected by Trump and his partners. Yet, one does wonder about the integrity and motives of those backing such exorbitant amounts for a campaign riddled with inconsistency.
Harris, still fresh off her campaign launch, is brazenly suggesting she has overtaken Trump in polling in key battleground states. However, regardless of their expensive PR efforts, the margins continue to teeter on the edge of insignificance and the race remains fiercely competitive.
Nearing the proposed first debate between Trump and Harris, the campaign appears to be resting on false confidence. The debate scheduled for September 10th in Philadelphia, will surely expose cracks in the Harris campaign.
Stories of grandiose fundraising and voter wooing tactics are difficult to swallow, considering Harris’s history of performance. Remember, it’s not about the amount you raise, but the efficacy of your policies and the trust of the people that genuinely matter.
Though allegedly triumphing in fundraising, it becomes painfully evident that Harris’s campaign has yet to successfully create a functional, let alone ideal, roadmap for their term. Amid rampant posturing and political bluster, key objectives and thought-out strategies seem non-existent.
The Harris campaign has grown adept at producing eye-popping fundraising numbers. Yet hidden within these astronomical figures is a narrative of misplaced trust backed by hefty donors. Actions speak louder than numbers, and so far, the Harris campaign hasn’t played the right tune.
Yet, the Beatlemania-type frenzy exhibited in these first-time donors raises questions as to their understanding of what they are investing in. Supporters of Harris should be wary of buying into hype, instead of substance, as money will never guarantee a leader’s competence.
Indeed, the inflated figures being flaunted by the Harris campaign appear to be more about bragging rights and less about substantive policies that could bring about real change. Fundraising is arguably a measure of popularity, not an effective leadership quality.
The campaign’s extravagant financial figures unveiled, appear like a desperate bid to garnish support. Yet, this blatant comparison to past presidential campaigns does nothing to alleviate doubts about Harris’s competency for the most powerful position in our nation.
Hence, as Harris continues her dash toward what she presumes to be the finish line, one must remember that true leadership is not in the figures quoted but in action, integrity, and the will to serve faithfully. American citizens deserve nothing less.