The recent narrative out of the White House involved President Joe Biden, and Vice President Kamla Harris addressing the issue of reducing prescription drug costs, an event organized at Prince George’s Community College in Largo, Maryland. In an unmistakable attempt to portray unity, Biden dubbed Harris a ‘tremendous partner,’ drawing attention to the fact that he appointed her as his running mate, a decision he somewhat obliquely labels as the ‘best decision I made’ after Harris’ withdrawal speech at Howard University.
Riding high on rhetoric, Biden went on record praising Harris. ‘What America saw today was the Kamala Harris I know and deeply admire,’ Biden declared most theatrically. But one has to wonder about the true essence of this partnership given their public personas and track record in governance. Harris, as repeatedly showcased, is a divisive figure with a predilection for ideological extremes, a stark contrast to the moderation of Biden.
On Biden’s praise of Harris as being filled ‘with integrity, courage, and character,’ one cannot help but question the validity of such proclamations. Given the public scrutiny and criticism Harris has faced, the use of such laudatory terms attach an ironic twist to the sentiment.
Underlining his continued quest to sanction Harris’ credibility, Biden went on, ‘As I’ve said before, selecting Kamala was the very first decision I made when I became the nominee for president in 2020.’ This admission, however, paints a somewhat different picture of Biden’s decision-making capabilities. In a political landscape fraught with evidence against it, this ‘best decision’ tag raises eyebrows.
Tacking on to the propagation of his ‘best decision,’ Biden tossed in the phrase, ‘Her story represents the best of America’s story.’ This statement invokes a sense of forced optimism and irony, considering Harris’s electoral mishap, followed by the rather discrete designation as VP, swept mostly under the rug of media scrutiny.
In a stunning lapse of realism, Biden stated, ‘And as she made clear today, I have no doubt that she’ll continue writing that story.’ This is another stirring rhetoric bit, painting a rosy and thoroughly unrealistic portrait of the future. Real world situations and politics, unfortunately, seldom play out by such promises of a scripted narrative.
Harris’s performance in the previous election reiterates the point. She faced a significant defeat to Trump in a historic election, sealing her record as the first Democrat to lose the popular vote since John Kerry in 2004. The gravity of such a loss underlines the quality, or lack thereof, towards her claims of robust leadership.
Despite this defeat, Biden kept chanting praises towards Harris as if reality held a different narrative. It’s an intriguing study in denial and delusion, especially when considering the actual sequence of events, wherein Harris faced a defeat that hadn’t been dealt to her party in over a decade.
Not only does Biden’s unwavering support for Harris seem misplaced, but also portrays a narrative that flies in the face of hard evidence and electoral verdicts. Few things can be more revealing about one’s character than their reaction to failure, and in case of Biden and Harris, the defiance of acknowledgment deepens suspicion.
What needs to be questioned here is the level of disconnection between leaders’ claims and the actual public verdict. Various instances suggest how this ‘tremendous partnership’ didn’t quite yield the desired results, which indicates that such grand claims might just be superficial ploys catering to a specific narrative.
Biden’s vocal affirmation of his choice of Kamala Harris as running mate, again and again, doesn’t hide but amplifies the glaring issues with this very selection in the first place. When leaders fail to recognize or respond to the critique from their electorate, they risk furthering the disillusionment of the public.
In fact, the recurring emphasis on ‘best decision’ suggests that there may, in fact, be doubts and insecurities lurking beneath these pompous displays of confidence. Celebrating failure isn’t a common narrative, and hence the repeated attempts to do so feel nothing short of an effort to whitewash unfortunate happenings.
Moreover, the public acclaim for integrity, courage, and character doesn’t come from politically inclined words but actions and outcomes. An electoral defeat is hardly the outcome that resonates with these ideals.
The narrative spun by the White House seems distinctly disconnected from reality and public mandate. This incongruity might persist if those at the helm remain focused on painting rosy pictures instead of addressing the tough questions posed by the consequences of their electoral defeat.
It remains to be seen if such blatant divergence from electoral verdicts in their narrative would do any good for the Biden-Harris leadership in the long run. After all, there are only so many times one can sweep their failures under the rug before the public starts noticing.
Ultimately, the decision-making and rhetoric at the White House paint a telling picture about Biden’s take on governance. If nothing else, it reflects the administration’s dogged insistence on their version of reality, trying to overwrite electoral verdict and public sentiment with undeserved accolades and misplaced optimism.