User Tag List

Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: The 2019 Trump SOTU

  1. #1
    Administrator Green Arrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Posts
    64
    Thanks Given
    140
    Thanked 59 Times in 36 Posts
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    The 2019 Trump SOTU

    Overall, as I feel I've made clear at multiple points on this forum, I find the presidential State of the Union speech largely pointless. Presidents for as far back as I can find have used it as a government-sponsored stump speech for their own reelections and their party's midterm elections. They pretty much always put whatever spin they need to on the facts to make things look good for them. I wouldn't be disappointed if they eliminated the SOTU altogether.

    I also want to point out that I am not a Trump fan by any means. I didn't vote for him in 2016 and I won't vote for him in 2020.

    That said, credit where credit is due, Trump knocked this one out of the park. He largely avoided open partisanship and made multiple olive-branch statements towards Democrats. In particular, I thought his bit about the accomplishments of women over our nation's history and particularly the number of women currently serving in Congress was a great moment that demonstrated that bipartisanship could actually be possible, as the loudest cheers and most standing ovations came during that point, with almost no one sitting down. I felt in that moment Trump came across as probably the most statesman-like he has ever been in his first two years thus far. Overall, I feel he did a pretty good job articulating the plans for his next two years (and possibly beyond if he can pull off a win in 2020).

    Obviously, it wasn't perfect. His comment about investigations around 20 minutes into the speech fell flat even among Republicans, with the Vice President most notably looking confused (not that this is new for Mike Pence). That was a major misstep that made him look petty and defensive, and gave Democrats an opening to attack him in a manner that they would not have had if he had just skipped that portion. It was completely unnecessary. I think that was the only portion of the speech that Republicans didn't cheer for.

    For the other side, I thought Democrats played political theatre well. They applauded and sometimes cheered and offered a standing ovation at multiple key points, but they also straight up booed at multiple points that I felt was a little much and kind of hurt them a little bit. In particular, toward the beginning Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (now an announced 2020 candidate) openly rolled her eyes and huffed at one fairly benign point of Trump's, which I felt made her look very bad and did not help her already flailing 2020 campaign rollout. If she keeps this up, she may not make it beyond June of this year.

    Overall, as I said before, credit where credit is due, it's a good speech and probably the best of Trump's administration thus far. I was pleasantly surprised. This should tick his approval ratings up and boost his 2020 game some. Should be interesting to see how both sides handle the rest of the year.
    "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob."
    - Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882-1945), 32nd U.S. President

  2. #2
    Administrator Gamewell45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    457
    Thanks Given
    219
    Thanked 332 Times in 257 Posts
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Green Arrow View Post
    Overall, as I feel I've made clear at multiple points on this forum, I find the presidential State of the Union speech largely pointless. Presidents for as far back as I can find have used it as a government-sponsored stump speech for their own reelections and their party's midterm elections. They pretty much always put whatever spin they need to on the facts to make things look good for them. I wouldn't be disappointed if they eliminated the SOTU altogether.

    I also want to point out that I am not a Trump fan by any means. I didn't vote for him in 2016 and I won't vote for him in 2020.

    That said, credit where credit is due, Trump knocked this one out of the park. He largely avoided open partisanship and made multiple olive-branch statements towards Democrats. In particular, I thought his bit about the accomplishments of women over our nation's history and particularly the number of women currently serving in Congress was a great moment that demonstrated that bipartisanship could actually be possible, as the loudest cheers and most standing ovations came during that point, with almost no one sitting down. I felt in that moment Trump came across as probably the most statesman-like he has ever been in his first two years thus far. Overall, I feel he did a pretty good job articulating the plans for his next two years (and possibly beyond if he can pull off a win in 2020).

    Obviously, it wasn't perfect. His comment about investigations around 20 minutes into the speech fell flat even among Republicans, with the Vice President most notably looking confused (not that this is new for Mike Pence). That was a major misstep that made him look petty and defensive, and gave Democrats an opening to attack him in a manner that they would not have had if he had just skipped that portion. It was completely unnecessary. I think that was the only portion of the speech that Republicans didn't cheer for.

    For the other side, I thought Democrats played political theatre well. They applauded and sometimes cheered and offered a standing ovation at multiple key points, but they also straight up booed at multiple points that I felt was a little much and kind of hurt them a little bit. In particular, toward the beginning Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (now an announced 2020 candidate) openly rolled her eyes and huffed at one fairly benign point of Trump's, which I felt made her look very bad and did not help her already flailing 2020 campaign rollout. If she keeps this up, she may not make it beyond June of this year.

    Overall, as I said before, credit where credit is due, it's a good speech and probably the best of Trump's administration thus far. I was pleasantly surprised. This should tick his approval ratings up and boost his 2020 game some. Should be interesting to see how both sides handle the rest of the year.
    I didn't get a chance to watch the speech, however I saw a clip where he threatens the American people regarding the investigation and it's impact on pending and future legislation & to me that was vintage Trump; he had a chance to reunite and instead acted as a divider. Guess I should have known better then to be optimistic with him. Who know's if the congress will commence an impeachment proceedings against him, but if they do I hope they include statements made last night since I think that was a definite threat against the American people.
    When you cuss a farmer, don't talk with your mouth full

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Gamewell45 For This Useful Post:

    Green Arrow (02-06-2019)

  4. #3
    Member jet57's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    71
    Thanks Given
    54
    Thanked 56 Times in 41 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Green Arrow View Post
    Overall, as I feel I've made clear at multiple points on this forum, I find the presidential State of the Union speech largely pointless. Presidents for as far back as I can find have used it as a government-sponsored stump speech for their own reelections and their party's midterm elections. They pretty much always put whatever spin they need to on the facts to make things look good for them. I wouldn't be disappointed if they eliminated the SOTU altogether.

    I also want to point out that I am not a Trump fan by any means. I didn't vote for him in 2016 and I won't vote for him in 2020.

    That said, credit where credit is due, Trump knocked this one out of the park. He largely avoided open partisanship and made multiple olive-branch statements towards Democrats. In particular, I thought his bit about the accomplishments of women over our nation's history and particularly the number of women currently serving in Congress was a great moment that demonstrated that bipartisanship could actually be possible, as the loudest cheers and most standing ovations came during that point, with almost no one sitting down. I felt in that moment Trump came across as probably the most statesman-like he has ever been in his first two years thus far. Overall, I feel he did a pretty good job articulating the plans for his next two years (and possibly beyond if he can pull off a win in 2020).

    Obviously, it wasn't perfect. His comment about investigations around 20 minutes into the speech fell flat even among Republicans, with the Vice President most notably looking confused (not that this is new for Mike Pence). That was a major misstep that made him look petty and defensive, and gave Democrats an opening to attack him in a manner that they would not have had if he had just skipped that portion. It was completely unnecessary. I think that was the only portion of the speech that Republicans didn't cheer for.

    For the other side, I thought Democrats played political theatre well. They applauded and sometimes cheered and offered a standing ovation at multiple key points, but they also straight up booed at multiple points that I felt was a little much and kind of hurt them a little bit. In particular, toward the beginning Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (now an announced 2020 candidate) openly rolled her eyes and huffed at one fairly benign point of Trump's, which I felt made her look very bad and did not help her already flailing 2020 campaign rollout. If she keeps this up, she may not make it beyond June of this year.

    Overall, as I said before, credit where credit is due, it's a good speech and probably the best of Trump's administration thus far. I was pleasantly surprised. This should tick his approval ratings up and boost his 2020 game some. Should be interesting to see how both sides handle the rest of the year.
    I didn't watch the speech: I abstained. The speeches are just that, more talking, like that's what we need. But they are a tradition and good presidents make interesting attention holding orations.

    I wrote my congressman and asked if any of the Democrats were going to have the stones to yell out "you lie!!", but of course no one did...

  5. #4
    Administrator ATLien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    36
    Thanks Given
    37
    Thanked 38 Times in 25 Posts
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the Democratic response given by Stacy Abrams was “meh”. I understand their push to try and get someone that is not mainstream to give the response, but she was just not ready. I think a Gabbard or Harris would have been better in my opinion.
    Searching for the truth

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to ATLien For This Useful Post:

    Green Arrow (03-05-2019)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •