It was a concession speech as bland and vague as her campaign, but at least Kamala Harris seemed quite cheerful and positive. Perhaps it was the sheer relief that the fight for the White House and the 2024 presidential election was over – and that she did not win. Maybe Harris decided she was ill-equipped to handle what may very well be the world's most stressful and demanding job after all. That being said, the speech she delivered outside Howard University in Washington, DC, contained little in the way of actual concessions.
The VP didn’t congratulate her opponent for his resounding win during her speech, but she did say that she had called to congratulate him earlier that day. She barely tipped her hat to her running mate, Tim Walz, and her boss – the man who in 2020 picked her as his running mate – Joe Biden.
“The outcome of this election was not what we wanted, not what we fought for, not what we voted for,” the vice president said, which is not really an admission of defeat or a concession to one's opponent. “But hear me when I say, hear me when I say, the light of America's promise will always burn bright as long as we never give up and as long as we keep fighting.”
An interesting side note is how this opening statement was reported on the ABC News website. Trump has been frequently criticized by his opponents and detractors for using “violent rhetoric.” When challenged for examples, those Trump critics will cite his fondness for encouraging his supporters to “fight.” When ABC News quoted Harris, the last part – “and as long as we keep fighting” – was omitted. Never mind that when Trump, Harris, and other political candidates use the words “fight” or “fighting,” they rarely mean it literally. Still, one could certainly be forgiven for thinking ABC News deliberately edited out Harris' comment about fighting because Trump is always slammed for using similar phraseology.
Kamala Harris Searching for a New Gig?
The rest of the speech was heavy on platitudes and sounded as if it were being delivered by somebody who wanted to be thought of as a motivational speaker. It was about not losing hope, struggling together to achieve goals, and that kind of thing. Maybe Harris wished she could set herself up as a leader of “the resistance.” If so, this was a singularly unconvincing attempt. Leaders of real rebellions and revolutions – whether their motives are pure or heinous – are usually passionate, fiery, and inspiring orators. Harris has never demonstrated the ability to be any of those things.
Leaders of the Democratic Party, the left-leaning establishment media, and countless political pundits and podcasters who backed Harris are going to spend the next few weeks, or perhaps even months, pointing the finger of blame for Trump's victory in every direction. But for every failed political campaign, there is one constant: The candidates must shoulder some blame. Harris spoke as someone who seemed oblivious to the idea that she might have been at least partly responsible for her defeat. She came across almost as the victim of some terrible misdeed who had decided to put on a brave face and have her supporters marvel at her resilience.
Still, Harris didn’t dissolve into a confounding word salad as she so often did on the campaign trail. Nor did she rail against Trump for all the terrible things she and her Democrat colleagues claimed he would do if he returned to the White House. After all, the race is now over, and there’s no longer a need for her to spout such overdramatic rhetoric.
Harris entered the presidential contest peddling joy and the promise of great things, but she was unable to convince enough voters that she was a person of substance, knowledge, or wisdom. With her less-than-15-minute concession speech, she exits the race in the very same manner. The smart money will surely be on her never again returning to presidential politics.
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
