Trump SOTU

[BDKJMU]

Credit where credit is due.

Incredulously, only half the chamber stood for DJ -- the Republican side. Democrats, in their blind hatred for anything remotely related to Donald Trump, sat and did nothing while a child who has survived cancer was honored. Today, social media has not been kind to them. I'm sure they have no idea why. But what many people might not have seen (I did not see it myself as I watched the speech) was that one Democrat, ONE, did stand up and applaud DJ Daniel, and probably the others as well. That Democrat is Rep. Laura Gillen, who represents New York's fourth congressional district.

https://redstate.com/beckynoble/2025/03 ... s-n2186305
She also did vote for the Laken Riley Act..

[UNI88]

Ha Ha

Bitter, juvenile and no better than Rep Al Green.

Are they in Congress or pre-school?

[BDKJMU]

Ha Ha

Bitter, juvenile and no better than Rep Al Green.

Are they in Congress or pre-school?

The twat in pink holding the sign? I agree.

[UNI88]

Bitter, juvenile and no better than Rep Al Green.

Are they in Congress or pre-school?

The twat in pink holding the sign? I agree.

The signs were more stupid than juvenile. The twat who grabbed the sign away from her and threw it in the air was the juvenile pre-schooler and his behavior shouldn't be celebrated or encouraged.

Your MAQA yahoos keep talking about the adults being in charge but Lankford is the only one who's come close to behaving like an adult.

[houndawg]

Credit where credit is due.

Incredulously, only half the chamber stood for DJ -- the Republican side. Democrats, in their blind hatred for anything remotely related to Donald Trump, sat and did nothing while a child who has survived cancer was honored. Today, social media has not been kind to them. I'm sure they have no idea why. But what many people might not have seen (I did not see it myself as I watched the speech) was that one Democrat, ONE, did stand up and applaud DJ Daniel, and probably the others as well. That Democrat is Rep. Laura Gillen, who represents New York's fourth congressional district.

https://redstate.com/beckynoble/2025/03 ... s-n2186305
She also did vote for the Laken Riley Act..

The rest were probably stunned by the cynicism, (even for maggats), of using a kid with brain cancer as a cheap political stunt while the junkie you put in charge of our healthcare is cutting funding for researching things like brain cancer. Thats he and his so-called administration in a nutshell.

[GannonFan]

The twat in pink holding the sign? I agree.

The signs were more stupid than juvenile. The twat who grabbed the sign away from her and threw it in the air was the juvenile pre-schooler and his behavior shouldn't be celebrated or encouraged.

Your MAQA yahoos keep talking about the adults being in charge but Lankford is the only one who's come close to behaving like an adult.

This should be a good wakeup call for the Democrats - they're being pilloried, correctly, for being feckless and juvenile in their response to the Trump administration and its first few weeks in office. They're the party in opposition, so start really being in opposition. Don't like something Trump is doing, then say you don't like it and then, maybe even more importantly, say what you'd want to do instead. And, since you're the party in opposition, see if you can get some idea in the middle of the Trump craziness and what you want so that you can peel off enough Republican support to either block what Trump wants to do or make the middle option viable. We've existed so long in outrage politics that everyone seems to have forgotten how to actually govern, both the majority as well as the opposition. We're much too conditioned now to throw up our hands in disgust and accuse the other side of either being evil, or being moments away from being evil, that we've forgotten how to work with the other side to create meaningful and beneficial compromises. Probably because we've also said compromise is unacceptable. So rather than compromise, we just lurch from partisan idea to partisan idea and we just spin our wheels. Super.

[houndawg]

The signs were more stupid than juvenile. The twat who grabbed the sign away from her and threw it in the air was the juvenile pre-schooler and his behavior shouldn't be celebrated or encouraged.

Your MAQA yahoos keep talking about the adults being in charge but Lankford is the only one who's come close to behaving like an adult.

This should be a good wakeup call for the Democrats - they're being pilloried, correctly, for being feckless and juvenile in their response to the Trump administration and its first few weeks in office. They're the party in opposition, so start really being in opposition. Don't like something Trump is doing, then say you don't like it and then, maybe even more importantly, say what you'd want to do instead. And, since you're the party in opposition, see if you can get some idea in the middle of the Trump craziness and what you want so that you can peel off enough Republican support to either block what Trump wants to do or make the middle option viable. We've existed so long in outrage politics that everyone seems to have forgotten how to actually govern, both the majority as well as the opposition. We're much too conditioned now to throw up our hands in disgust and accuse the other side of either being evil, or being moments away from being evil, that we've forgotten how to work with the other side to create meaningful and beneficial compromises. Probably because we've also said compromise is unacceptable. So rather than compromise, we just lurch from partisan idea to partisan idea and we just spin our wheels. Super.

Sounds great on paper except that bolded part isn't going to be happening in observable reality.

[GannonFan]

This should be a good wakeup call for the Democrats - they're being pilloried, correctly, for being feckless and juvenile in their response to the Trump administration and its first few weeks in office. They're the party in opposition, so start really being in opposition. Don't like something Trump is doing, then say you don't like it and then, maybe even more importantly, say what you'd want to do instead. And, since you're the party in opposition, see if you can get some idea in the middle of the Trump craziness and what you want so that you can peel off enough Republican support to either block what Trump wants to do or make the middle option viable. We've existed so long in outrage politics that everyone seems to have forgotten how to actually govern, both the majority as well as the opposition. We're much too conditioned now to throw up our hands in disgust and accuse the other side of either being evil, or being moments away from being evil, that we've forgotten how to work with the other side to create meaningful and beneficial compromises. Probably because we've also said compromise is unacceptable. So rather than compromise, we just lurch from partisan idea to partisan idea and we just spin our wheels. Super.

Sounds great on paper except that bolded part isn't going to be happening in observable reality.

So great, do nothing and continue on the road where Trump of all people is actually seen as not only viable, but preferable, for large portions of the voting population. The Democrats will of course get their turn at the steering wheel, politics, especially in our duopoly, is certainly cyclical. But we just had Biden, or whoever was really pulling the strings for him, at the wheel for the past 4 years and that wasn't really rosy either. At some point we need to try to change.

[kalm]

The signs were more stupid than juvenile. The twat who grabbed the sign away from her and threw it in the air was the juvenile pre-schooler and his behavior shouldn't be celebrated or encouraged.

Your MAQA yahoos keep talking about the adults being in charge but Lankford is the only one who's come close to behaving like an adult.

This should be a good wakeup call for the Democrats - they're being pilloried, correctly, for being feckless and juvenile in their response to the Trump administration and its first few weeks in office. They're the party in opposition, so start really being in opposition. Don't like something Trump is doing, then say you don't like it and then, maybe even more importantly, say what you'd want to do instead. And, since you're the party in opposition, see if you can get some idea in the middle of the Trump craziness and what you want so that you can peel off enough Republican support to either block what Trump wants to do or make the middle option viable. We've existed so long in outrage politics that everyone seems to have forgotten how to actually govern, both the majority as well as the opposition. We're much too conditioned now to throw up our hands in disgust and accuse the other side of either being evil, or being moments away from being evil, that we've forgotten how to work with the other side to create meaningful and beneficial compromises. Probably because we've also said compromise is unacceptable. So rather than compromise, we just lurch from partisan idea to partisan idea and we just spin our wheels. Super.

I agree. Dems should be fighting back with populist policy ideas. Paid family leave, prescription drug prices, higher wages, labor protections, affordable home prices and housing inventory….the kind of ideas that made FDR so popular. And there are many modern options.

Very little of this should be expected from the Dem establishment though. People like Jefferies who are content to sit on their hands or Slotkin praising Reagan and Bush 2 in the SOTU response just make them look Republican lite. Elections are won through the perception of strength.

The U.S. was not founded on the principles of a political party, partisanship, monarchy, or emperor. It was the First Nation in history to be founded on ideas.

I’d like to think that still matters.

[GannonFan]

This should be a good wakeup call for the Democrats - they're being pilloried, correctly, for being feckless and juvenile in their response to the Trump administration and its first few weeks in office. They're the party in opposition, so start really being in opposition. Don't like something Trump is doing, then say you don't like it and then, maybe even more importantly, say what you'd want to do instead. And, since you're the party in opposition, see if you can get some idea in the middle of the Trump craziness and what you want so that you can peel off enough Republican support to either block what Trump wants to do or make the middle option viable. We've existed so long in outrage politics that everyone seems to have forgotten how to actually govern, both the majority as well as the opposition. We're much too conditioned now to throw up our hands in disgust and accuse the other side of either being evil, or being moments away from being evil, that we've forgotten how to work with the other side to create meaningful and beneficial compromises. Probably because we've also said compromise is unacceptable. So rather than compromise, we just lurch from partisan idea to partisan idea and we just spin our wheels. Super.

I agree. Dems should be fighting back with populist policy ideas. Paid family leave, prescription drug prices, higher wages, labor protections, affordable home prices and housing inventory….the kind of ideas that made FDR so popular. And there are many modern options.

Very little of this should be expected from the Dem establishment though. People like Jefferies who are content to sit on their hands or Slotkin praising Reagan and Bush 2 in the SOTU response just make them look Republican lite. Elections are won through the perception of strength.

The U.S. was not founded on the principles of a political party, partisanship, monarchy, or emperor. It was the First Nation in history to be founded on ideas.

I’d like to think that still matters.

If they want to fight for those things they also need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable. They all sound great, but how do we achieve that? Fanciful ideas are only suitable if they're also obtainable.

[kalm]

I agree. Dems should be fighting back with populist policy ideas. Paid family leave, prescription drug prices, higher wages, labor protections, affordable home prices and housing inventory….the kind of ideas that made FDR so popular. And there are many modern options.

Very little of this should be expected from the Dem establishment though. People like Jefferies who are content to sit on their hands or Slotkin praising Reagan and Bush 2 in the SOTU response just make them look Republican lite. Elections are won through the perception of strength.

The U.S. was not founded on the principles of a political party, partisanship, monarchy, or emperor. It was the First Nation in history to be founded on ideas.

I’d like to think that still matters.

If they want to fight for those things they also need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable. They all sound great, but how do we achieve that? Fanciful ideas are only suitable if they're also obtainable.

Raise taxes on the rich and corporations. Their popularity is low.

[GannonFan]

If they want to fight for those things they also need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable. They all sound great, but how do we achieve that? Fanciful ideas are only suitable if they're also obtainable.

Raise taxes on the rich and corporations. Their popularity is low.

Sure, as long as that doesn't 1) raise unemployment and 2) negatively impact people's savings/401K plans. People tend not to like when they don't have jobs or when their 401k's don't grow fast enough so they can retire on time.

[Bobcat]

If they want to fight for those things they also need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable. They all sound great, but how do we achieve that? Fanciful ideas are only suitable if they're also obtainable.

Raise taxes on the rich and corporations. Their popularity is low.

Thats why you lose. Our money isnt your money to spend, get it through your head. If you want to pay for some chick to get balls sewn on write a check. We want to pay for roads, border security and our military. Fuck you on everything else

[UNI88]

I agree. Dems should be fighting back with populist policy ideas. Paid family leave, prescription drug prices, higher wages, labor protections, affordable home prices and housing inventory….the kind of ideas that made FDR so popular. And there are many modern options.

Very little of this should be expected from the Dem establishment though. People like Jefferies who are content to sit on their hands or Slotkin praising Reagan and Bush 2 in the SOTU response just make them look Republican lite. Elections are won through the perception of strength.

The U.S. was not founded on the principles of a political party, partisanship, monarchy, or emperor. It was the First Nation in history to be founded on ideas.

I’d like to think that still matters.

If they want to fight for those things they also need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable. They all sound great, but how do we achieve that? Fanciful ideas are only suitable if they're also obtainable.

Too many Dems are speaking and voting in ways that win primaries and lose general elections. They need to focus on issues that will resonate with moderates/independents and pull them away from voting for trump and MAQA candidates. They need to focus on issues important to those moderates/independents (i.e. not immigration or trans rights) while not forgetting their base. trump will continue to push the envelope and eventually he's going to push it too far and Dems need to have their messaging ready to go.

[kalm]

If they want to fight for those things they also need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable. They all sound great, but how do we achieve that? Fanciful ideas are only suitable if they're also obtainable.

Too many Dems are speaking and voting in ways that win primaries and lose general elections. They need to focus on issues that will resonate with moderates/independents and pull them away from voting for trump and MAQA candidates. They need to focus on issues important to those moderates/independents (i.e. not immigration or trans rights) while not forgetting their base. trump will continue to push the envelope and eventually he's going to push it too far and Dems need to have their messaging ready to go.

Hence the populist/middle class ideals I mentioned. Those apply to moderates too.

[kalm]

Raise taxes on the rich and corporations. Their popularity is low.

Thats why you lose. Our money isnt your money to spend, get it through your head. If you want to pay for some chick to get balls sewn on write a check. We want to pay for roads, border security and our military. Fuck you on everything else

Your money? Are you rich? How rich? So no more subsidies for Musk’s ventures? Or resource extraction on public lands? They should pay their own way, right?

And what does trans surgery have to do with this?

You seem angry about insignificant things.

[UNI88]

Thats why you lose. Our money isnt your money to spend, get it through your head. If you want to pay for some chick to get balls sewn on write a check. We want to pay for roads, border security and our military. Fuck you on everything else

Your money? Are you rich? How rich? So no more subsidies for Musk’s ventures? Or resource extraction on public lands? They should pay their own way, right?

And what does trans surgery have to do with this?

You seem angry about insignificant things.

Bobqat's argument is a two-way street - why should a pacifist have their money spent on the military, law enforcement or border protection? Bobqat and his friends can write checks for those.

[UNI88]

Too many Dems are speaking and voting in ways that win primaries and lose general elections. They need to focus on issues that will resonate with moderates/independents and pull them away from voting for trump and MAQA candidates. They need to focus on issues important to those moderates/independents (i.e. not immigration or trans rights) while not forgetting their base. trump will continue to push the envelope and eventually he's going to push it too far and Dems need to have their messaging ready to go.

Hence the populist/middle class ideals I mentioned. Those apply to moderates too.

As Ganny posted, they "need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable".

So tell us, what do mean by the following and how will they be paid for:
- paid family leave
- higher wages (minimum? average?)
- labor protections
- affordable home prices and housing inventory (how do you square this with protecting our environment?)

Taxing the wealthy can't be the answer to every question about resources. Republicans are correct that the government can and should be more efficient.

[Bobcat]

Thats why you lose. Our money isnt your money to spend, get it through your head. If you want to pay for some chick to get balls sewn on write a check. We want to pay for roads, border security and our military. Fuck you on everything else

Your money? Are you rich? How rich? So no more subsidies for Musk’s ventures? Or resource extraction on public lands? They should pay their own way, right?

And what does trans surgery have to do with this?

You seem angry about insignificant things.

I haven't been angry since 1997. I'm perfectly happy with the way things are going right now. I just need to see people in jail for what they have done then I will be ecstatic

[kalm]

Hence the populist/middle class ideals I mentioned. Those apply to moderates too.

As Ganny posted, they "need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable".

So tell us, what do mean by the following and how will they be paid for:
- paid family leave
- higher wages (minimum? average?)
- labor protections
- affordable home prices and housing inventory (how do you square this with protecting our environment?)

Taxing the wealthy can't be the answer to every question about resources. Republicans are correct that the government can and should be more efficient.

Well I was t prepared to write a book but I’ll have a go later when I have more time.

[kalm]

Your money? Are you rich? How rich? So no more subsidies for Musk’s ventures? Or resource extraction on public lands? They should pay their own way, right?

And what does trans surgery have to do with this?

You seem angry about insignificant things.

I haven't been angry since 1997. I'm perfectly happy with the way things are going right now. I just need to see people in jail for what they have done then I will be ecstatic

Bob, you’re the angriest person on this board. Wanting to see more people in jail is fear or anger based.

[UNI88]

As Ganny posted, they "need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable".

So tell us, what do mean by the following and how will they be paid for:
- paid family leave
- higher wages (minimum? average?)
- labor protections
- affordable home prices and housing inventory (how do you square this with protecting our environment?)

Taxing the wealthy can't be the answer to every question about resources. Republicans are correct that the government can and should be more efficient.

Well I was t prepared to write a book but I’ll have a go later when I have more time.

I ask because what you mean by those benefits and how they will be paid for matters to voters and I don't think you're going to sway moderate/independent voters away from trump/MAQA with high level descriptions. MAQA will just take and highlight the worst case scenarios for each and beat Democratic politicians to death with them (see immigration and trans in sports for examples). Democrats have to beat them to the punch by defining the issues/benefits in a positive light before MAQA can do the opposite.

Examples:

• Higher wages - if you mean minimum wage, the increased costs aren't born by the business owner. They're passed on to the consumer. Are people willing to pay more for a Big Mac so that McDonald's workers can make $20/hour?
• Labor protections - this is really broad and most would think that labor already has pretty good protections. Governor Kotek is getting push back in liberal Oregon over an executive order requiring project labor agreements (essentially requiring union labor) on state-funded projects. How do increased labor protections play in purple Colorado or the battleground states where presidential elections are won and lost?
• Affordable home prices and housing inventory - another really broad issue that could mean a multitude of things. The left has long tried to restrict development and protect the environment but that has contributed to the lack of inventory. A lot of people want yards for their kids so they're not interested in condensed urban living and the left's policies don't resonate with them.

[Bobcat]

I haven't been angry since 1997. I'm perfectly happy with the way things are going right now. I just need to see people in jail for what they have done then I will be ecstatic

Bob, you’re the angriest person on this board. Wanting to see more people in jail is fear or anger based.

Its called justice that why you cant relate, you want George Floyd running the DOJ so he can let off the CEO shooter you two celebrated the murder of.

#NoAccountability2028

[GannonFan]

Well I was t prepared to write a book but I’ll have a go later when I have more time.

I ask because what you mean by those benefits and how they will be paid for matters to voters and I don't think you're going to sway moderate/independent voters away from trump/MAQA with high level descriptions. MAQA will just take and highlight the worst case scenarios for each and beat Democratic politicians to death with them (see immigration and trans in sports for examples). Democrats have to beat them to the punch by defining the issues/benefits in a positive light before MAQA can do the opposite.

Examples:

• Higher wages - if you mean minimum wage, the increased costs aren't born by the business owner. They're passed on to the consumer. Are people willing to pay more for a Big Mac so that McDonald's workers can make $20/hour?
• Labor protections - this is really broad and most would think that labor already has pretty good protections. Governor Kotek is getting push back in liberal Oregon over an executive order requiring project labor agreements (essentially requiring union labor) on state-funded projects. How do increased labor protections play in purple Colorado or the battleground states where presidential elections are won and lost?
• Affordable home prices and housing inventory - another really broad issue that could mean a multitude of things. The left has long tried to restrict development and protect the environment but that has contributed to the lack of inventory. A lot of people want yards for their kids so they're not interested in condensed urban living and the left's policies don't resonate with them.

A good start. I can't imagine he's thinking that minimum wage increases will do anything. I'm all in favor of moving all the minimum wages upwards, but gradually. And in the end, since the market corrects for this, you move the wage upwards gradually so not to jettison jobs or shutter businesses, and in the end the buying power for that worker is still unchanged. But you do it so some people aren't left completely behind.

As for the labor protections, unions are just not a winning political strategy. Most people don't want to be a part of a union (the collectivism takes away the individual incentive) and the environmental/safety reason for unions in the past is long gone with the advent of numerous regulations and regulatory bodies. It's only in the public sector that union membership continues growing and outside of teachers, I can't think of a good area where it is justified to be growing. But come election time, unions aren't a winning strategy.

Finally, the housing, is tough because it's not just one thing and because the federal government isn't the only nor the biggest impactor of this.

But, these are things that should be talked about and debated and delved into the details for, and it's what has been lacking in political dialogue for too long. Histrionics during a speech, at this point, do really nothing. The Dems should aspire for something more than that.

[Caribbean Hen]

Your money? Are you rich? How rich? So no more subsidies for Musk’s ventures? Or resource extraction on public lands? They should pay their own way, right?

And what does trans surgery have to do with this?

You seem angry about insignificant things.

Bobqat's argument is a two-way street - and why should a pacifist have their money spent on the military, law enforcement or border protection? Bobqat and his friends can write checks for those.

Because they are necessary