Donald Trump and Kamala Harris were both present—a bit of a stretch—at the recent Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, but their attendance took different forms. Trump took the stage for nearly half an hour, employing the dinner's tradition of lighthearted jest, whereas Harris opted for the usual course of sending out pre-recorded remarks. The dish served at the charity gala was meant for humor and charity, but this year's features bore reflections of real political tension as well as cultural clashes.
Held annually to raise funds for Catholic charities, the Al Smith Dinner has been traditionally dominated by bipartisan fun, where attendees often let loose with comedic jabs at each other. Nevertheless, the 2024 edition saw Trump seemingly misunderstand or maybe wholly disregard this customary decorum. He delivered what critics characterized as a transphobic, grievance-laden monologue. Instead of the usual camaraderie, he revealed just how serious the political divisions have become.
Trump kicked off the evening with his signature bravado, trying his hand at humor with his political rivals, but veered off script rather quickly. His attempts at entertainment transformed from light quips to barbed barbs directed toward Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and the absence of Vice President Harris at the event. “Look on the bright side, Chuck,” Trump said, drawing laughter from the crowd, “considering how woke your party has become, if Kamala loses, you still have a chance to become the first woman president.”
This comment, meant to provoke chuckles, dug at the heartstrings of societal divisions over gender and politics. Adding to his standing as the polarizing figure, Trump unleashed barbs on Harris and her fellow Democrats, even stretching the bounds of decency with comments about Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, who has come under fire for supporting legislation on providing menstrual products to schools. Trump cracked, “I used to think Democrats were crazy for saying men have periods, but then I met Tim Walz.”
Trump’s routine went well beyond what attendees expected, losing the light-hearted essence the dinner normally encapsulates. Vice President Harris, who chose not to show up to the gala, left the field open for critique. Many attendees, and even comedians performing anecdotes included, pointed out her absence. Jim Gaffigan, who was the event's master of ceremonies, didn’t hold back when noting, “I’m sorry, why is Vice President Harris not here? This is a room full of Catholics and Jews!”
This marked Harris's conscious decision to avoid the night, which some speculated was due to the predilection for cutthroat humor at these events during tense pre-election months. While Harris skipped the dinner, she sent out a pre-recorded segment involving comedian Molly Shannon reprising her infamous character from Saturday Night Live. The comedic talent poked fun at the situation, saying, “mocking Catholics would be like criticizing Detroit in Detroit.”
Harris’s absence drew some audible disapproval from the crowd, hinting at the repercussions her no-show might entail. The expectations set by prior attendees stand high during such events, and her decision not to attend fueled ammo for her critics, who viewed it as politically vulnerable.
Critics were particularly surprised by the reception afforded to Trump’s performance. Rev. Dr. Rob Apgar-Taylor expressed dismay over the event, arguing the attendees—including Cardinal Dolan—ignored the charm and principled values traditionally emphasized during charity gatherings. He called it, “an affront to everything it means to be a follower of Jesus.”
Further animosity grew as Harris's team seized the moment afterward to critique Trump's conduct. Ammar Moussa, director for Harris's campaign, claimed Trump struggled on the podium, saying he could hardly read off scripted notes and couldn’t effectively engage the crowd, turning the evening to self-serving insults rather than actual entertainment. He stated, “The rare moments he was off script, he went on long incomprehensible rambles, reminding Americans how unstable he’s become.”
Even though both Harris and Trump took vastly different approaches at the Smith Dinner, their appearances fueled discussions reaching far beyond political comedy. Trump's aggressive remarks was positioned within his campaign strategy for 2024, aiming at energizing his base by targeting transgender rights and the progressive movements tied to the Democratic party. Despite the laughter and scorecards attributing points on who won the night, experts note such ruthless rhetoric may backfire as it risks pushing moderates and independents away.
Meanwhile, boasts of female leadership took on new shapes during the night as both campaign teams utilized the dinner's platform for broader purposes. Trump, with his antics clearly aimed at deriding his opposition, sought to mobilize support among conservative voters who remain uneasy about societal shifts surrounding gender and sexuality, especially catering to longstanding narratives around traditionalism. Harris’s approach, albeit indirect, provided cover by projecting the idea of inclusivity and solidarity, even from afar.
With the election season stretching local sentiments to their limits, the evening became less of the joke-filled escapade expected from the dinner and more about the stark reality underlying deep-seated cultural battles. Traditional light-hearted political roasts transformed; across the board, past activists and clergy warned against such performances veering too deeply away from the original soul of the Smith Dinner. Concern remained ever-present among those gauging the field's morale during pre-elections. Where humor should light the path for unity, it began to spark division instead.
Harris's absence and Trump's performance will likely be debated for weeks to come, as both sides pivot to take advantage of momentums established—or missed. The Al Smith Dinner didn’t just represent two candidates meeting around charity; it embodied the kind of political face-off reflective of something greater as America inches toward the 2024 election. A time for solidarity diminished and instead became one for deepening trench lines among competing values and ideologies.
