In an escalating public spat, former President Donald Trump has taken aim at Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt amidst a controversy surrounding the invitation list for an upcoming White House dinner featuring governors from across the United States. The feud has sparked discussions about political inclusivity and the dynamics within the Republican Party, as both figures trade barbs over the exclusion of certain Democratic leaders from the event.
Trump’s Accusations
On Wednesday, Trump used his social media platform, Truth Social, to criticise Stitt, who currently leads the National Governors Association. The former president labelled Stitt as “mediocre” and claimed that he had misrepresented the administration’s invitation policy for the dinner. Trump specifically mentioned that most governors were included, with the exception of two he deemed “not worthy” of attending.
“The invitations were sent to ALL Governors, other than two,” Trump stated, adding that he had even invited Democratic governors such as Illinois’ J.B. Pritzker and California’s Gavin Newsom, despite their controversial leadership. He further accused Stitt of misunderstanding the situation, declaring, “So, as usual with him, Stitt got it WRONG!”
The Exclusions Explained
Trump clarified that the only governors excluded from the dinner were Colorado’s Jared Polis and Maryland’s Wes Moore. He took particular aim at Moore, whom he described as “foul mouthed” and accused of dishonesty regarding his military record. Moore, who is notably the only Black governor in the United States, has previously acknowledged an error in his application for a fellowship, where he inaccurately claimed to have received a Bronze Star.
The White House has since defended its decision to limit the guest list, asserting that the president retains the authority to choose his invitees for such events. A White House official remarked, “Many Democrats were invited to dinner at the White House, and others were not,” reinforcing the notion that these are presidential events with a degree of discretion involved.
Reactions from the Governors
Stitt, in a message to fellow governors, sought to clarify the situation, asserting that Trump had, in fact, invited all governors from the 55 states and territories to a business breakfast scheduled for February 20. He expressed that any misunderstanding regarding the event’s organisation had been resolved. However, the National Governors Association (NGA) initially indicated that the White House had opted for a Republican-exclusive meeting, prompting Moore to announce his feeling of being “uninvited” from the dinner, an exclusion he suggested could be racially motivated.
In light of the unfolding drama, the NGA stated it would no longer facilitate the meeting, and several Democratic governors declared their intention to boycott the dinner in protest. Dr. Brandon Tatum, the NGA’s CEO, later stated that they were pleased Trump would welcome governors from all states and territories, highlighting the importance of bipartisan dialogue.
Historical Context and Future Implications
This isn’t the first time Trump and Stitt have clashed. The Oklahoma governor, who is unable to seek re-election due to term limits and will leave office in 2027, previously criticized Trump’s deployment of out-of-state National Guard troops for law enforcement purposes in other states. Stitt emphasised the importance of states’ rights, arguing against federal overreach in local matters.
As the political landscape continues to shift in the United States, this incident highlights the ongoing tensions within the Republican Party, particularly as it navigates relationships with both moderate and far-right factions.
Why it Matters
The exchange between Trump and Stitt underscores a growing divide within American politics, particularly within the Republican Party. As party members grapple with issues of representation and inclusivity, the implications of such public disputes can shape voter sentiment leading up to future elections. The exclusion of certain governors from significant events raises questions about the nature of bipartisan cooperation and the potential for political discourse to become increasingly fragmented. As the nation moves forward, these dynamics will be crucial in determining how effectively leaders can unite diverse perspectives within their ranks.
