Staff Reports
Vice President Kamala Harris recently delivered a concession speech that veered sharply into the territory of the absurd. In a performance that would make anyone question the definition of a concession, Harris managed to name President-elect Donald Trump only once, all while deploying the same worn-out themes from a campaign that could be described, quite generously, as a train wreck. Instead of accepting defeat with grace, she conjured up the mythical moral high ground, as if it were a prize for showing up.
In a display of awkward politeness, Harris claimed to have congratulated Trump and offered her assistance for a smooth transition—a gesture that rang hollow given her party’s relentless accusations of Trump’s insidiousness during his previous term. Apparently, she and her allies seem to have forgotten their own narrative about undermining democracy when it suited their interests. It appears the only consistent trait in the Democratic playbook is hypocrisy.
Incompetent candidate takes no responsibility for her ignorance & inability to speak to a crowd or one-on-one with media w/o a script. Most unliked VP in our history! Pitiful!
"Kamala Jabs at Trump, Takes No Responsibility for Loss in Concession Speech" https://t.co/0TRMlhMcUv
— God Bless🙏USA🇺🇸 (@therayban) November 7, 2024
While she sat there comically asserting the virtues of accepting election results, Harris seemed blissfully unaware of how her own party has often treated this principle. Anyone with a memory that stretches back to 2020 would recall the theatrics surrounding Trump’s transition to Biden, where her side staunchly questioned the legitimacy of the election results for months on end. Yet here she was, positioning herself as a bastion of constitutional fidelity, despite having previously called Trump a “petty tyrant.” One can’t help but wonder if she had a case of the dramatic amnesia while preparing her speech.
When she spouted off about loyalty to the Constitution, conscience, and God, it almost sounded like she had stepped in from a different time or universe—where her team had actually believed in those principles. It’s remarkable how the Democrats pick and choose their sacred tenets, often discarding them when they are inconvenient. Harris’s invocation of these values only highlights the rather pronounced chasm between what they say and what they practice.
Harris’s predictions of an impending “dark time” under Trump had a kind of comedic undertone, almost as if she was reading from a script meant for a soap opera and not a significant political moment. As the audience witnessed this melodrama unfold, it became clear that the only thing dark about the current political landscape was the sense of denial radiating from the Democratic camp. Instead of embracing the change, they appear stuck in a loop of despair, reminiscent of a party that doesn’t quite grasp that losing every so often is part of the grand democratic process they profess to cherish.
