Did fear of Trump roast make Kamala Harris skip Al Smith Dinner?

The Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, established in 1945 to honour Alfred E. Smith, the first Catholic presidential nominee, is known for its tradition of light-hearted humour and bipartisan camaraderie during intense presidential campaigns. However, this spirit was severely tested in 2016 when Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump took the stage just weeks before the election, exposing the deep divisions of their campaign.
Trump's speech, which began with self-deprecating humour, quickly turned into sharp jabs at Clinton’s email scandal, accusations of corruption, and even jokes about his wife Melania, referencing her plagiarism controversy. His remarks were met with boos, breaking the event’s tradition of civility. Clinton responded by maintaining a more comedic tone, mocking Trump’s reluctance to accept election results, his treatment of women, and his debate performances. Despite her efforts, the event's mood remained tense.
By the evening's end, it was clear that the dinner had failed to provide the expected moment of unity, instead highlighting the country’s stark political divides. The customary handshake between Clinton and Trump felt more obligatory than genuine, underscoring the deep animosity that defined the 2016 campaign.
Fast forward to 2024, and the Al Smith Dinner is once again in the spotlight, but this time for a different reason. Vice President Kamala Harris has decided to skip this year's event, raising eyebrows and sparking questions about whether she wishes to avoid the confrontational atmosphere that characterised 2016. Harris’s absence is notable, particularly given the dinner's status as an essential stop on the campaign trail for those seeking national office. Her choice will likely be seen as a way to avoid being roasted by Donald Trump in an environment where she wouldn’t be able to control the narrative. While Harris wants to face Trump again in a debate, he is currently refusing. It’s fair to say that Harris came out on top during their ABC debate, but that was a highly moderated session compared to the free environment of the Al Smith Dinner, where Trump wouldn’t be expected to restrain himself.
New York Times/Siena College polls show Donald Trump leading Kamala Harris in key Sun Belt battleground states. Trump has gained a 5-point lead in Arizona, leads by 4 points in Georgia, and maintains a slim 2-point lead in North Carolina. This shift highlights a challenging path for Harris, who initially led in some states in earlier polls. Latino voters in Arizona, once leaning towards Harris, now seem undecided, while concerns about Trump’s character are particularly strong in North Carolina. Harris’s favorability has slightly declined since August, whereas Trump’s has remained steady. Despite this, Harris enjoys relative strength in other battleground states, especially Pennsylvania, where she holds a lead. Voters in the surveyed states expressed concerns about the country’s future, with 31% citing inflation or the economy as the top issue. Trump’s "America First" message resonates with many, as over 50% believe he’d handle the economy better. Despite Trump's lead, 15% of voters remain undecided, indicating the potential for shifts in this tight race.
Harris's decision not to attend comes at a time when American politics is deeply polarised, making the possibility of finding common ground increasingly elusive. Her campaign stated that she would focus on swing-state campaigning, reflecting the intense demands of modern political strategies. However, many speculate that Harris, recalling 2016, recognises that the Al Smith Dinner may no longer serve as the unifying force it once was. Her choice to skip the event, a tradition for presidential candidates, could be a significant misstep, risking backlash from Catholic voters. This marks the first absence by a major party candidate since 1984. Harris’s team likely avoided the dinner to prevent Trump from attacking her record on Catholic issues from her time as Attorney General and Senator. However, this decision to evade potential confrontation may come across as dodging tough questions, potentially alienating the crucial Catholic voters needed to win key battleground states.
The importance of the Al Smith Dinner lies not just in its role as a major fundraising event for Catholic charities but also in its ability to showcase candidates in a different light. It offers a chance for political figures to demonstrate humility, humour, and the ability to laugh at themselves—qualities that are often lost in the heat of campaigning. The dinner is one of the few remaining spaces in American politics where politicians from opposing parties are expected to share a stage and, for a few hours, at least pretend to engage in civil discourse.
Harris’s absence this year suggests that even this bastion of bipartisan engagement may be losing its relevance. As political campaigns become more focused on targeted outreach and less on shared experiences, events like the Al Smith Dinner risk being sidelined. The question now is whether this tradition can adapt to the changing nature of American politics or if it will fade into obscurity as candidates prioritise direct voter engagement over symbolic gestures of unity.
Kamala Harris's decision to skip this year's event underscores how dramatically the political climate has shifted since 2016. The Al Smith Dinner still serves as a rare opportunity for a more civil and charitable side of politics to emerge, if only for one evening. However, as the pressures of campaigning intensify and the desire for unity fades, one might question whether this once-vital tradition can continue to find its place in American political life. Perhaps Harris aimed to avoid a "Last Supper" type scenario, where tensions would overshadow any attempts at goodwill, leaving her vulnerable to an unrestrained verbal assault from Trump.