The UnSpeech

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 08:50:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Update: If, like me, you intentionally skipped Trump's speech, here's a worthwhile recap.

Trump launched his campaign with lies—slandering Mexicans as rapists and criminals—and has continued to lie ever since. The only variation is the degree of cruelty with which he delivers his propaganda.
...Every autocrat flirts with benevolence, promoting themselves as the sole protector against threats, the strongman who remembers “the forgotten people.” Trump is actually worse at this game than most authoritarian leaders due to his erratic temperament, leak-prone staff, and combative relationship with the US press.
...But there is only one winner in an autocratic state: the autocrat and his lackeys. Citizens function as pawns and props, conned into complicity until their regret carries no weight. The US currently has an authoritarian-leaning government but is not yet an authoritarian regime, due in large part to the constant vigilance and pushback of citizens. If you seek to stop the slide into authoritarianism, do not let yourself get played.

[More...]

I didn't watch Donald Trump's speech. I won't watch anything which contains his words or voice. Jimmy Kimmel declared it a "Trump Free Tuesday on his show last night -- no references to "the orange colored man and his Russian boyfriend."

All I want to do when I hear Trump's name or see his face (or that of his family or staffers) is take another shower.

If you watched it and have something to say, go right ahead.

< Monday Open Thread | Trump Panders Some More to the Xenophobic >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

The UnSpeech | 64 comments (64 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

All he had to do was not poop in his hands and (5.00 / 3) (#2)
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 08:12:46 AM EST

Throw it at us and the morning news says 70% of us had some sort of positive thrill up our leg during the speech. Talk about reframing the soft bigotry of low expectations.

Nobody mentioning that crap about we must have his travel ban or we risk refugees building a Beachhead of Terrorism. Not one word. It's almost like he never even said it. But I'll watch Ryan Owen's poor exploited widow sob all morning over and over and over again.

The press is supine (5.00 / 2) (#19)
by smott on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:41:59 PM EST

SO ready to say something positive.
CIllizza at WaPo might be the worst of them all.

No, Chris, the optics do not outweigh the substance, which was lies, exploitation of a war widow, and promoting an agency to focus on immigrant crime.

Nauseating.


I did hear (none / 0) (#21)
by MKS on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:47:10 PM EST

that Trump ratcheted up the anti immigrant attack--now we will have a whole sub-agency devoted to bashing immigrants. And this was a good speech?


Per the MSM yes (5.00 / 2) (#23)
by smott on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:52:09 PM EST

Van Jones was especially grotesque.
But I guess that visit Jared paid to CNN has had an effect.

These guys don't realize that when the shite really hits the fan, they might be the first ones lined up against a wall.

The myopia of the press is stunning.

I will say that Tapper has had his good moments, but my God we need a lot more where that came from.

Cillizza must literally be on Trump's payroll. About once a month I email a Cillizza The Fix link to Wapo and let them know as long as he is on their roster I will NEVER renew my subscription.


I think Van Jones is trying to find a way (5.00 / 2) (#32)
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 04:08:09 PM EST

To save himself now. Because I was doing the Twitter together thing I checked on BTD at the end after it had wound down. He was giving Van Jones and the love train cult some HELL! Van Jones got on the hack train last night. I was trying to read some of the back and forth but people deleted their tweets to Armando on it, because they were wrong and Van Jones effed up. Van Jones showed us all his arse last night.

Anyhow Armando told several tweeters that if they think Van Jones is part of the resistance, they've been conned.


: Yep, Van Jones (5.00 / 1) (#42)
by MKS on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 05:07:03 PM EST

is trying to boost himself. He really is a master of the both sides do it shtick.
But the future is with those who clearly stake out a path and take it--not with the flatterers and arse kissers.

Chris Cillizza is a gossip hound. (none / 0) (#38)
by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 04:52:06 PM EST

Whenever I see him or read him, I think of Billy Crystal's Fernando from 1980s SNL: "Remember, dahlings, it's more important to look good than to feel good."

Because I've come to expect non-substantive analysis and superficiality from him, he doesn't disappoint me.

;-D


As with Jimmy Kimmel's (5.00 / 2) (#9)
by KeysDan on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 12:12:49 PM EST

Trump-free Tuesday, Trump's Tuesday speech was Trump-free. Free from the customary insults and attacks, choosing what is being acclaimed as a "toned-down" speech.

However, his "American Carnage" continued, on display with his casual relationship with the truth, fear mongering such as terrorist beachheads, and his exploitation of a widow's grief. And, his "concerns," for Chicago shootings, shortly after signing the Republican bill to permit the social security-determined mentally disabled to buy assault weapons. However, these qualities are just par for his course.

The speech appeared to be aimed at the Congressional Republicans; while he will be fixing every problem confronting the nation by himself, he may need the Republicans in Congress to give him a bigger hand than he has available to him. After all, no one knew the complexities of governing, including the Republicans.

It has been about 15 years since House Republicans have been involved in major domestic legislation (e.g. Medicare Part D, Sarbanes-Oxley) and only 51 of the 238 current House Republicans were around in those days. Compromise has no place for them in crafting legislation. House Republicans have more experience in the prevention of governance, which leaves a bad mix of an unfocused Trump, a far right Cabinet and sorry Congressional Republicans.

Trump, essentially, called for an "Amexit". Trump appears to offer himself, first and only, as an American leader not as a world leader--as if the two are mutually exclusive.

As with Brexit, his American Firstness sees America as the only winner, save, perhaps, for Russia. The possibility of undermining global stability, rule of law, and peace since WW II, through NATO, UN, EU,trade agreements, and Bannon's vision of economic nationalism are given short shrift. A bigger military budget will do.

The targets of the joint session speech included the needy: the Congressional Republicans--to assure them that Trump is functioning, and Trump, to provide juicing applause. The Democrats could have helped in achieving those needs by reactions from a Wilsonian calling out, "You Lie," or by giving an Alito nod of authoritative disagreement. They did not take the bait; they were decorous.

: Murder? Out of control (none / 0) (#33)
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 04:14:15 PM EST

Murder by illegal brown people? So scary you'll $hit yourself just pondering it. Sheriff's? Only got plastic badges out of Cracker Jack boxes to wear and they're about to be overrun. Beachheads of Terrorism? Being built as I type. Dead SEALs smiling down on us from heaven? Of course, even though we're killers and morally equivalent to Russia. All Murika goes to heaven hell yeah!

I watched the first 10 minutes before losing (none / 0) (#1)
by McBain on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:15:41 AM EST

interest. That's longer than I can usually tolerate political speeches.

Well (none / 0) (#3)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 08:26:44 AM EST

apparently if you're a Republican and you don't drool all over yourself it is considered a good speech. Personally though since most of his agenda seems to be DOA I don't know why anybody would spend their time watching the speech.

Don't agree that most of his agenda is DOA (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by Green26 on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 10:52:43 AM EST

Significant deregulation is coming in multiple areas. Some of this will be quite significant. EPA rules and enforcement will change, probably fairly significantly. DOJ enforcement and priorities will surely change. Portions of Dodd-Frank will likely go away or be changed. Two pipelines have received approval, but will have to go through court challenges. Many Obama era orders have been withdrawn. Changes will come in immigration, but not clear how far changes will go. Can't imagine much progress will be made on building a wall, but who knows what could happen with this guy.

Federal courts and Sup. Ct. judges will be selected and be fairly conservative. Changes will come in Obamacare, but not clear what will be done or how big changes will be. Think method of funding Medicaid will likely change. II would think some sort of tax reform will be done, and perhaps even larger changes.

The US will be more aggressive and less passive in foreign policy. Probably more aggressive against ISIS and other tough group/areas/wars.

Not clear what DeVos will or can do. Assume DOE will back away from some of the Dear Colleague letter.

Global trade is going to change at least to some extent. See withdrawal from Trans-Pacific partnership. This all may develop into big fights and a mess.

The US will back off from Climate Change initiatives. Barriers will be lifted from expanded energy production.

Don't know what will be done with Infrastructure. Smaller programs like funding for Planned Parenthood, arts, etc. probably going away or in serious jeopardy.

Israel will receive more support. Not clear what will happen with the Iran deal. The US will be more aggressive in enforcement, or at least talk big, at a minimum.

Legislative agenda may be tougher to agree on or get done. Not DOA, but harder to get agreement on and move it forward.

Not clear if anything big will be done with social security and medicare, given the difference between Trump's view and most Repub's views.


More aggresive against ISIS???? (5.00 / 1) (#25)
by MKS on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:58:55 PM EST

You mean like the Yemen raid?

You mean U.S. ground forces to take Raqqa?

More aggressive....maybe bigger talk, or maybe more "bigly" talk. But Trump has no idea what he is doing, so his "bigly" talk will be incoherent.


: During the campaign, (5.00 / 2) (#29)
by KeysDan on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 02:39:46 PM EST

Trump said he had a secret plan for defeating ISIS, but he could not divulge this secret plan, since it was too secret to tell. Subsequently, he ordered all the big generals to come up with their own plan, although he also said he knows more than all the generals. Wonder what happened to his plan?

The TPP was already dead (none / 0) (#5)
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 11:10:40 AM EST

I'm so tired of hearing Trump did it...no he didn't


: I don't agree with you (none / 0) (#6)
by Green26 on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 11:30:20 AM EST

While the TPP was not yet approved by Congress, and Congress was split, there was significant support among Repubs and others. Trump killed TPP.

The debt (none / 0) (#7)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 11:56:05 AM EST

ceiling is going to interfere with all his plans unless you think the GOP is going to do a 180 and do a 10 trillion dollar increase.


lol; that's exactly what they'll do. (5.00 / 4) (#10)
by Mr Natural on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 12:18:35 PM EST

that's what everybody does when change comes to Washington. The lobbyists line up at the taxpayer feeding trough and dig in with their shovels. Congress works for the lobbyists, not us.


well (none / 0) (#11)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 12:28:35 PM EST

if they do raise the debt ceiling by 10 trillion I will laugh and laugh and rub every Republican's nose in it. And then laugh some more and rub their nose in it some more.


I agree on the debt ceiling thing, but (none / 0) (#13)
by Green26 on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 12:47:12 PM EST

also enjoy seeing Dems being so concerned about spending increases and paying for new programs. Glad they now have the religion. Ha.


: The GOP (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 12:54:48 PM EST

has never believed in paying for anything since Reagan. It's all gonna be free you know. And Bill Clinton balanced the budget and got no thanks from you guys only hatred and Obama actually did pay attention to debt though obviously you've bought into the alternative facts agenda where the GOP actually thinks it should pay for something. Your statement is not fact based. It is fantasy based.

: "Found religion"? (none / 0) (#27)
by Yman on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 02:16:11 PM EST

Democrats do not support universal spending increases. They have frequently opposed massive increases in defense spending, as Trump is proposing, particularly when such spending is at the expense of other, vital programs.

Actually, debt ceiling isn't going to interfere (none / 0) (#12)
by Green26 on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 12:45:22 PM EST

with many of his plans that I cited above. Infrastructure, for sure. He can be more aggressive militarily without his announced increased defense spending, but yes debt increase debt problems with the announced defense spending increase. Tax reform, probably yes, but depends what is done. Don't know how Obamacare changes shake out in terms of cost/debt.

What else listed above causes increased debt problems? I may have missed something.

Personally, I think the previously cited things will be huge changes in the US.


Tax reform (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 12:51:55 PM EST

DOA, infrastructure DOA, increased military spending DOA, anything that requires money is DOA unless you guys raise the debt ceiling and then I am going to laugh in your face and rub your noses in it for a long, long time.

As far as being more aggressive militarily, you want more repeats of the disaster in Yemen? The guy has no clue here what he is doing.

And as I said below reforms to Obamacare are going to fail because the GOP has already said they don't want to own it and have to face the voters with any sort of "reform". Besides the GOP plan is basically You Pay for Everything and Insurance Pays For Nothing. Yep, definitely understand why congress wouldn't want to have to face the voters with THAT plan.


Ga6, I am not so sure (none / 0) (#35)
by Green26 on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 04:39:05 PM EST

infrastructure, tax reform, or increased military spending are in fact DOA, but even if they are, Trump is already on the road to making a ton of large charges. Personally, the only thing of the 3 above I care about is tax reform. Not saying it will get done, though.

I noticed that you didn't address the other 10 or so things in my list of what Trump is doing. In my view, those are big changes.

Don't know what you mean by "you guys", but don't include me with Repubs or Trump.


If you think (none / 0) (#43)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 05:28:29 PM EST

having the majority of the country rise up against you yeah, well, that's an accomplishment. I'm not going to address everything. I have no idea if they will get passed or not though the GOP sure seems intent on all of us drinking tainted or poisoned water as in the case of Flint MI.

You constantly apologize and make excuses for the GOP. You're not fooling anybody despite your protestations.

All these accomplishments will make oh, around 40% or so of the country very happy. The Vichy Republicans will be happy as long as they get a tax cut. How many people drink poisoned water won't matter to them.

As for me and the rest of us here we are part of the resistance and we are mushrooming all over the country.


If you think Trump isn't already (3.50 / 2) (#50)
by Green26 on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 11:13:08 PM EST

taking significant action in a variety of areas, and his agenda is DOA, then you are not paying attention. The point is not that any of what he is doing is an accomplishment or not; the point is that it's significant. Can you not even admit that taking the EPA in a different different direction, backing off on lots of regulations, appointing conservative federal and Sup. Ct. judges, backing away from climate change initiatives, supporting more fossil energy development, getting rid of some parts of Dodd-Frank, changing DOJ policies, changing DOE policies, and being more aggressive with ISIS and in the Middle East, and changing parts of immigration policy; are significant. Jeez, you just bob and weave and avoid the obvious.


Of course (5.00 / 1) (#53)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Mar 02, 2017 at 06:48:30 AM EST

he has instated harassing American citizens at the airport. He has done a lot of things through executive orders. Vichy Republicans like you will celebrate the least little thing he does as a "major accomplishment". LOL. However I'm glad people like you are embracing Trump and the Putin agenda.


Ga6, you continue to violate forum rules (2.00 / 1) (#56)
by Green26 on Thu Mar 02, 2017 at 09:40:57 AM EST

Either stop or I will contact Jeralyn to suggest that she put a stop to it. Posters are not allowed to make up stuff and lie about other posters. You do this frequently. You disruptive to the forum and good and civil discussion.

I am not a Repub. I have not characterized anything Trump has done as an "accomplishment". I have not embraced Trump or Putin on anything.

And, back to the point, you refuse to recognize the many very significant actions that Trump is taking.


: Green (5.00 / 2) (#58)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Mar 02, 2017 at 10:15:25 AM EST

quit trying to deflect from yourself. There is a history of your posts here and they all are about pumping up Trump and taking down Hillary.
I don't consider selling the country out to Russia as any significant accomplishment. You consider that a good thing. I do not. You certainly can continue to apologize for Trump all you want. That's your right.

: We have so many personal accounts now (none / 0) (#59)
by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 02, 2017 at 11:19:16 AM EST

In the press...good luck with that Green ;)

Money talks...... (5.00 / 2) (#17)
by NYShooter on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:36:57 PM EST

The Stock Market (Dow Jones Industrial Avg.) is up almost 3000 points since last year's election (up 300+ today.)

Of course, this doesn't mean that investors think that things will be looking up for most Americans. Just like many people don't understand why a company's stock price shoots up after it announces "bad news," laying off thousands of its employees, this "Trump Rally" doesn't mean investors think Americans will be better off in the future. It, simply, means they believe company profits will be going up.

Trump proposals: Lower Corporate taxes, less regulation, less foreign competition, more automation and, greater use of robotics will increase profits, even if there's no increase in sales.

Unfortunately, a lot of the profit increases will be done on the backs of their employees.

The only solution to this bleak situation, IMO, is election finance reform. But, as long as both major political parties are beholden to the corporations no relief for average, working people is possible. Unless we, somehow, can get more political parties into the system, the only future I see for most Americans is bad, or, less bad.

And, fwiw, I don't believe either Party can be reformed from within. They are simply too corrupt after years and years of selling out to the highest bidder. Obamacare is just one example of a good idea being destroyed due to our "Pay to Play, Congress.


Third parties (none / 0) (#22)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:48:02 PM EST

are a pipe dream. The only way they will work is to start by getting rid of the EC as the first thing. Then you would need to reform the entire system to a parliamentary system. Can that be done? Sure. But you have to realize you might not live to see it happen.


Election Finance Reform... (none / 0) (#30)
by kdog on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 03:13:32 PM EST

Universal Basic Income, and massive preparations for the effects of climate change...those three things, and perhaps those three things alone, can save this nation from a lot of ugliness and put us on a path to a century of relative peace and prosperity.

But we probably can't really address the other two until election finance is addressed.


I don't recall (none / 0) (#51)
by TrevorBolder on Thu Mar 02, 2017 at 06:05:19 AM EST

The Donald actually proposing anything regarding robotics.

That will occur, as the push for $15 minimum increases
Wendys is already rolling out the kiosks

The business community loved the speech

If the economy ever gets back to a 3% growth, not a high bar either,

As a former President once said, Its the economy stupid


: Trevor (none / 0) (#54)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Mar 02, 2017 at 06:50:51 AM EST

you have zero understanding of anything if you think increasing minimum wage has anything to do with robotics. Most of the cut and sew textile business is going to robotics and they are overseas and paying 25 cents an hour. We may not even need much of a military once robotics takes off either.

Republicans (none / 0) (#8)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 11:57:30 AM EST

are already admitting the Obamacare repeal and replace is DOA because none of the GOP wants to own the abysmal plan the GOP has put forth.


Those changes are not (none / 0) (#24)
by MKS on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:54:09 PM EST

the heart of his agenda. All of that will follow from any Republican President and does not require Congressional legislation.

How about the big ticket items: The Wall being built, the Wall being paid for by Mexico, manufacturing being brought back to the Midwest, expelling the undocumented, repealing Obamacare, cutting taxes for the wealthy.

No progress on any of that.


He's going to be (none / 0) (#26)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 02:15:50 PM EST

eating most of those. The wall will probably never be built and it's not going to be paid for by Mexico. He's already doffed on repealing Obamacare. Expelling the undocumented is already ticking off people in rural America because they mean not "their undocumented" they mean "those undocumented". There was a story in the NYT about an undocumented immigrant who owned a restaurant in rural IL and was a big contributor to the community who got hauled off into somewhere nobody knows about because he had two DUIs 10 years ago.


Perhaps not, but look at all of the other (none / 0) (#36)
by Green26 on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 04:40:33 PM EST

big things that are already starting to be done.


All depends on how you look (5.00 / 2) (#37)
by MKS on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 04:50:12 PM EST

at it.

It appears you approve of the GOP agenda.


MKS, the point was that those things (2.75 / 4) (#49)
by Green26 on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 11:00:37 PM EST

that Trump is currently doing are very significant, and those things are certainly not DOA.

I have not said I support or like all of those things. I said Trump is doing those things.

I am an independent. I support pieces of what Dems believe and Repubs believe.

Don't accuse me of stuff that I have not said. Learn to read. Learn to comprehend. Your view is that anyone who doesn't agree with you is a Repub and gets his views from Fox News. Very shallow thinking and ignorance by you.


The hypocrisy ... (5.00 / 1) (#57)
by Yman on Thu Mar 02, 2017 at 10:03:48 AM EST

... in that last paragraph - telling someone else not to speak for you while doing the very same thing for them.

Funny.


I know how to read (5.00 / 2) (#60)
by MKS on Thu Mar 02, 2017 at 12:21:02 PM EST

I know how to comprehend. I am not ignorant.

Your insults show I hit the mark.


I beg to differ (1.00 / 2) (#61)
by Green26 on Fri Mar 03, 2017 at 12:54:51 AM EST

Can't read. Can't comprehend. Your failure to respond with any substance confirms that you know I am right.


You gave up (5.00 / 2) (#62)
by MKS on Fri Mar 03, 2017 at 03:42:01 AM EST

any pretense of substance awhile ago and are now engaged in childish name calling. I called you on your sh*t and you can't take it.


No name-calling from me (2.00 / 1) (#63)
by Green26 on Fri Mar 03, 2017 at 10:20:28 AM EST

Just good information and good analysis. Ha.

Oh, and take a look in the mirror, MKS,


: That's funny (5.00 / 1) (#64)
by Yman on Fri Mar 03, 2017 at 11:18:55 AM EST

Ya know, ... in a 6th grade, Trumper sort-of-way.

It will be easy (none / 0) (#52)
by TrevorBolder on Thu Mar 02, 2017 at 06:08:01 AM EST

To get a lot through.

Just reversing written regulation by departments will undo a lot of the economic damage that has been done.

When you govern by executive action, it makes it easy for those actions to be reversed.


i found this (5.00 / 1) (#45)
by linea on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 07:37:22 PM EST

A CBS News/YouGov poll of people who watched the address found 76 percent of viewers approved of the speech and 82 percent found it "presidential." Seventy-one percent of viewers -- and even 36 percent of Democrats -- found the speech "unifying," according to the poll. A CNN/ORC poll of speech-watchers found about 70 percent made them feel more optimistic about the direction of the country and nearly two-thirds felt Trump had the right priorities.


: Defining Deviancy Down (none / 0) (#46)
by MKS on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 07:39:45 PM EST

: Nothing unifying about VOICE. (none / 0) (#48)
by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 08:06:22 PM EST

The entire concept of demonizing immigrants is both repulsive and incendiary. Undocumented immigrants do not commit violent crimes at any higher rate than the rest of the population; statistics suggest quite the opposite, in fact, that they are LESS likely to do so.

I can't watch that guy. (none / 0) (#16)
by desertswine on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:16:13 PM EST

I watched an X-Files re-run instead. He's just a con-man.

I watched West Wing (none / 0) (#31)
by Towanda on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 03:17:23 PM EST

And the next episode that came up was about President Jed Bartlet's first State of the Union address.

I had an enjoyable evening.


: That's right. Go ahead and ... (none / 0) (#47)
by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 07:41:52 PM EST

... live in your fantasy world where the president, his staff and administration are both competent and rational. I suppose they're also all about being indivisible with liberty and justice for all, too.
;-D

: Rafael Nadal live (none / 0) (#55)
by fishcamp on Thu Mar 02, 2017 at 07:29:49 AM EST

on Tennis channel was much better than Trump lying his butt off. He merely told America what they wanted to hear while he kept on signing all the executive orders completely opposite of what he said. He's nothing but an actor, and not a good one.

I went with (none / 0) (#44)
by Chuck0 on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 05:54:52 PM EST

Dirty Grandpa with Di Niro.


CNN Polls were shocking (none / 0) (#18)
by smott on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:39:57 PM EST

78% viewers had positive reaction.

And before you say the viewers were 99% Repub, the audience was only 8% more Repub than country as a whole.

WASF.

: Ha ha! (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 04:20:29 PM EST

I even had people in my family who used to call themselves Conservatives who couldn't watch it. I'd call them pu$$ie$ but we all know pu$$ie$ have triumphed on the vapors of Trump breakdown sweat. I watched it cuz I committed. 10 minutes into a Trump speech though and the life has been sucked out of me, like a B horror film.

: The 78% include a woman (5.00 / 4) (#39)
by Towanda on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 04:56:20 PM EST

who, interviewed about the speech, said that she liked it because it reminded her of the movie La La Land . . . although she has not seen the movie.
I am outa f*cks to give about these people.

: The advantage of setting ... (none / 0) (#41)
by Yman on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 05:01:25 PM EST

... the bar low. People are so used to his tantrums and juvenile tirades that, when he gives a semi-traditional speech full of hopeful fluff without acting like a 6th grader, they're pleasantly surprised.

I think it's a little odd that Trump (none / 0) (#20)
by jondee on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 01:45:22 PM EST

and "the Whitehouse" seem so phobic about specifying the ethnicity and/or religion, of the men attacked in Kansas, while being so intent on being specific in mentioning the Jewish cemeteries and Jewish community centers..

After some prodding after the Kansas shooting, the Whitehouse issued a somewhat generally-worded condemnation of "racially motivated attacks", but still, as far as I'm aware, no mention of the specific ethnic background of the victims.

Why is that?

: Because it (none / 0) (#28)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 02:19:34 PM EST

undercuts the GOP narrative that all the people who kill are POC and all the victims are white.

: We need look no further than ... (none / 0) (#40)
by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 01, 2017 at 05:00:11 PM EST

... the White House Chief Policy Advisor. And only yesterday, Trump suggested at a meeting of state attorneys general that Jews themselves may have been behind recent bomb threats targeting Jewish day care centers and pre-schools, as a means to make others look bad.

The UnSpeech

The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

Menu

Search

Login

Creator and Principal Author

TL Alumni

Contribute To TalkLeft

Sections

Site Credits

Legal

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment