Noted political strategist and pollster, Mark Penn, who has previously worked with the Clintons, made a public observation indicating Vice President Kamala Harris’s decision to not participate in a time-honored Catholic charity event, is perhaps not the best image she could present. This sentiment arises from the fact this traditionally bipartisan affair has always witnessed active presence and participation from the presidential nominees representing both major American political factions.
Without fail, the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, scheduled for October 17 this year, forms a quintessential part of the political calendar. It, therefore, sparks curiosity that Ms. Harris’ team very recently expressed her non-availability for the event; more so because former President Donald Trump’s excitement for presence at the event was declared on the very same day.
Penn attempts to decrypt Vice President Harris’s rationale, suggesting her positioning Donald Trump as a menace to democratic processes might have made her presence alongside him at an event of such nature, rather challenging. She might have found it difficult to show camaraderie and share a light-hearted joke with Trump at a forum usually marked by congeniality, without validating his political stature – something she seems consciously wary to do.
Penn went further to express disappointment at Harris’s decision to give the dinner a miss, while he acknowledged Trump’s astute strategy with respect to a debate. He concluded that considering the risks involved for Trump in the final stretch of his journey, it does make sense for him to tactfully avoid a debate scenario.
The particular dinner event normally sees presidential nominees exhibit their humorous side, in a friendly banter against their respective opponents. Penn stated that there might, however, be a distinctive curve in both their political ogives with Harris possibly reaching the peak of her political parabola.
The former President took to social media to express his dismay at the Vice President’s decision. In his characteristic manner, Trump wrote, ‘It’s both tragic and unsurprising that Kamala has chosen to stay away. It makes one wonder what her issues might be in dealing with our Catholic friends. Her lack of kindness towards them is evident; one could even argue they seem persecuted by the present Administration’.
Trump was yet to finish presenting his critique: ‘Any Catholic mulling over a vote for Kamala should sincerely reconsider. Her proactive stance against The Little Sisters of The Poor signifies the democrats’ lack of compassion. More so, she was at the forefront of leading UNTHINKABLE and UNLAWFUL offenses on The Knights of Columbus – challenging the religious beliefs prerequisite for the Supreme Court Justices’.
Trump didn’t withhold his thoughts on Harris’s stance towards other religious matters either. ‘The audacious TRANSGENDER DAY OF VISIBILITY celebration that Biden and Kamala hosted at the White House on Easter Sunday is hardly an event most would forget’, Trump cited.
However, Trump also took this opportunity to assuage everyone that he is most certainly looking forward to meeting everyone on October 17th. He expressed his hope for it to be a night where they could all have a wonderful time working together towards the well-being of the Catholic charities.
In a concluding remark, Trump said, ‘It’s unfortunate that Kamala doesn’t seem to give due consideration to these benevolent acts. But taking into account her history of anti-Catholic actions, it may have been an awkward situation for her to comfortably navigate.’
This exchange was more than vitriolic banter; it underscores significant ideologies held by both parties and respectively, how they interpret the concept of religious freedom and mutual respects. This incident will likely echo with future political discourses concerning such matters.
The absence of Kamala Harris from this traditional event, regardless of any personal considerations, will be noted, as it is the first time a prominent political figure from either party has made such a decision. This breaks a tradition which was upheld by both Democrats and Republicans alike.
This just demonstrates the latest manifestation of a deep political divide that has come to define the American political landscape. While both parties constantly strive to advocate their respective political narratives, the common populace could have potentially experienced a softer, more uniting aspect of these figures, had this tradition been upheld.
The event, typically filled with some friendly banter, humor mixed with policy discussions, presents a unique opportunity for the citizenry to view their leaders in a different light. It disheartens to think that this year’s event could be shrouded in political tension and less of the friendly atmosphere that was once its hallmark.
As the event rolls closer, it’ll be interesting to see how this revelation plays out. Will it amplify the political friction or pave the path for newer traditions? The answer, it appears, will have to wait until the din of the dinner settles.
Former Clinton strategist and pollster Mark Penn says Trump’s decision to not debate Harris is smart because she has likely already “peaked” in the polls pic.twitter.com/1LtZxTuTzA
— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) September 24, 2024