Kamala Harris was present at the NAACP Image Awards in Los Angeles, on an evening that ended in her collecting the Chairman’s Prize. A trophy set aside for individuals who, according to NAACP’s own description, create change using their public positions. With the stage set and all eyes on her, Harris used this platform to throw subtle jabs at the newly inaugurated Donald Trump, revealing her inability to accept the recent defeat.
She handed out unsolicited advice for ‘justice, equality, and opportunity’, advocating for everyone in attendance to stand against the perceived injustices. According to her, the destiny of America does not hinge on the occupancy of the oval office or the wealthiest members of society but rather the common citizen. An intriguing idea, belittling the powers that lead the nation.
Harris exaggerated the challenges faced by the nation under Trump’s administration, proposing that dystopian vistas filled with flames and rising waters were imminent threats. It appeared as an attempt to sow the seeds of fear and uncertainty, discrediting the new administration just into its first month.
Her response to these ‘imminent threats’ was equally dramatic: ‘we know exactly what to do, because we have done it before. And we will do it again. We use our power. We organize, mobilize. We educate. We advocate.’ A disheartening display of refusal to collaborate and work towards a common goal, choosing instead to use polarizing rhetoric.
Her rallying cry for power utilization, organizing, and mobilization was laced with the promise of struggle, something she seemed to be advocating for. As if the path to genuine progress and harmony had to be mired with hardship and resistance. Unfortunately, this reiterates the common misconception: progress must be born out of strife.
Religious beliefs too weren’t spared from her politicking. In a bid to create a deeper connection with her audience, Harris asserted that our strength originates from faith: faith in a deity, faith in one another, and an obstinate refusal to give in to cynicism. One can’t help but question the authenticity of such statements at a political event.
Following her defeat to Trump in November 2024, Harris has largely remained silent. Her occasional public appearances, like the NAACP event, are her main outlets. Alas, her reluctance to openly discuss her political loss may hint at an inability to confront her failures or solace in silence.
Meanwhile, Trump’s reaction to his victory contrasts deeply. He’s referenced the defeated duo, Biden and Harris, in his speeches multiple times. One such instance was during his address at the Conservative Political Action Conference. Therein, he appeared unafraid to ridicule and critique their political records and impacts.
While Harris and Biden tend to shy away from discussing their performance during the election, Trump openly mocks them. He regards the duo’s handling of the economy as less than optimal, emphasizing that he hasn’t uttered their names in quite some time. Despite these public displays, it’s clear that they still hold significance in the political sphere.
In his characteristic style, Trump used sharp humor, even resorting to expletives, to underscore his thoughts about the performance of the 46th president. Unfiltered and unabashed, his words paint a poignant picture — competence and control contrasting starkly against the backdrop of their unsuccessful predecessors.
Ultimately, the situation gives us two narratives to contrast — one draped in defeat and denial, clinging to consolation prizes, and another basking in the glory of just victory, ready to take the important, possibly tough, calls for the nation’s welfare.
Where Harris insists that ‘the American story will be written by you’, Biden and she fail to acknowledge the part where the American people, while scripting their own stories, rejected their version of the narrative. A one-sided view often fails to paint an authentic picture, something essential for any public service position.
In hindsight, Harris’s speech at the NAACP event comes across as an effort to spin a defeat into a rallying call for divisive action, ironically dishing out the same denial that Biden and her often criticize in others. Consequently, whether these narratives are seen as eloquent rhetoric or veiled manipulation, largely depends on your point of view.