What did you think of Trump's primetime address? What did you think of the Senate's rebuttal?

I personally have no comment

0|2
720

Most Helpful Girl

  • The wall is needed, its just a shame they can't come to an agreement with putting Americans that are caught in the middle by this bill.
    The Democrats want to allow Sanctuary cities as they have done in Europe to get more democratic votes. Not caring if Terrorism slips through the cracks as happens in Europe with bombings happening all the time.
    If The President has too he can get the funding from military funds but he's trying to let this play out as Americans through political parties.
    There agenda is all about VOTES NOT CARING A OUT American SAFTEY

    2|6
    3|4
    • Show All
    • The Democrats had dead voters as well as double votes on the ballots found in Florida.
      You as Americans have been fed such lies by your party, its hard to place blame on ignorance of the person that think rhe Democrats are playing above board. All i can say is that the arrest of Kevin Spacey is another big Democratic supporter down and he knows all about pedophilia that has gone on with the Clintons and Obama s
      Have been part of for years.
      Dont think for a second this is random circumstance all of the Hollywood big names that are being arrested this is All part of the big plan Called Draining the Swamp. Sealed indictments are being unsealed as predicted with a lot more to come.
      DoJ being cleaned out
      Complete transparency is the direction we're headed m
      The Federal reserve is coming to an end. As well as federal taxes being abolished. And the biggest part of the IRS being for the most part disbanded.

      So if you want terrorist living freely in the USA OPEN BOARDERS AND CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING TO RUN A MUCK KEEP YOUR PATRONAGE FOR THE DEMOCRATS.

    • You are so blinded by your clear reservations against a changing world, and against equality for all people, that you have chosen to believe alt-right lies over objective truth.

      There is a critically underwhelming amount of voter fraud that occurs, while republicans act like it's still a problem. It's a distraction and it's meant to try to suppress legitimate votes. Are the Democrats the one with an election scandal rn? Nope, just the NC GOP.

      Everything in your post is literally not true. It would take too long to sort through the horseshit and pure falsehood in your post. It's senseless jargon, I wouldn't even know where to begin.
      You sound like an unironic #pizzagator. Did you really believe that shit? Like, how can a grown ass adult actually believe all these conspiracy theories?

      "So if you want terrorist living freely in the USA OPEN BOARDERS AND CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING TO RUN A MUCK KEEP YOUR PATRONAGE FOR THE DEMOCRATS."

      No sane person would type that. Take a look at yourself, and an honest look at who you're associating with. You're being fed lies.

Most Helpful Guys

  • In terms of both speeches, it was the most wasted half hour in politics since television became a social force in the 1950s. As Rep. Amash (R-MI), not normally one of my calendar pin-ups, put it, "No minds were changed."

    Indeed, it is hard to see, other than consolidating their political bases, what either side hoped to accomplish. In total fairness, President Trump's speech was the more substantive. He cited some not insignificant data - some of which was, to be sure, somewhat out of context - and he pointed to recent headlines to give the speech some immediacy and force.

    However, the President's delivery was flat and the speech gave no indication why a wall - or other such barrier - was necessarily the best answer to the problem. Let alone why it was worth risking a government shutdown to get the funding to build one.

    To wit, if you were not persuaded of the President's argument before he made it, you were not apt to be persuaded. It lacked policy context and said nothing the President had not said a hundred times before.

    In the case of Minority Leader Schummer and Speaker Pelosi, their speech was mostly an ad hominem with a ransom note attached. Few datapoints were included. Rather the President was accused of bad faith - and was then informed that as soon as he gave the Democrats in Congress all that they asked for, then they would consider what he wanted.

    That the President would not jump at such an offer is a surprise to no one. Moreover, an argument against the man is not an argument against the policy. So again, the aim of the speech (es) seemed to have been to preach to the converted, not move the undecideds and persuade the persuadable.

    As an aside, from a presentation perspective, the President got the edge. Though he did not look great, the Oval Office has a certain gravitas that attaches to it. By contrast, the sight of two Congressional leaders, one talking while the other stood there like a grim faced stick figure, was bad visuals.

    So, in terms of the speeches, there was no there there and fundamentally the dynamics will remain unchanged. The President gets the slightest of edges in terms of presentation and content, but nothing that could be measured without a micrometer.

    In terms of policy, the wall - or whatever - has been blown way out of proportion. It ought be one part of a larger toolkit. In tandem with other policies and technologies it would be useful in terms of controlling the border - not least by serving as a complicating deterrent to human traffickers - which was it legal would amount to a $33 billion industry according to Justice Department statistics.

    In that connection, walls, even in the 21st century, do work - as Israelis in Jerusalem can attest. The dismissal of them as outdated relics ignores a fair amount of evidence, as well as the request by the border patrol that some barriers be erected.

    That the wall - or barrier - will not by itself solve the border/immigration issue is the fallacy of the false alternative. By itself, it fails. In tandem with other programs, policies and technologies, it is a useful tool.

    That this has been boiled down to a stark all or nothing is because such oversimplifications spare people the torture of having to think. Nuance is hard.

    The inclination is to blame the politicians, but the truth is that the public is content to operate on the basis of caricature. It is all so simple - why don't they just compromise? Well, yes, by which the public, to the extent that its short attention span is engaged at all, defines compromise as "Be reasonable, do it my way."

    Neither the President nor the Speaker and Senate Minority Leader will get any kudos. Their presentation was dreadful, their message predictable where not simply vapid.

    However, thus is politics in a populist age. As H. L. Mencken put it, "Democracy is the theory that the people should get what they want - and get it good and hard." So they are.

    0|2
    0|1
    • Most people don't want the wall on principle. You say it's an ad-hominem and a ransom note?

      We are attacking the wall from a policy perspective, on the grounds that we don't want a wall. A separate question from border security or spending in abstract is "Do we want this racist eyesore to be erected at all?" and the answer is no.

      You say this is a ransom by Democrats, but wasn't this bill written by Republicans and passed 100-0 in the senate just a few weeks ago? The Republicans seem to have retroactively chosen to disagree to this legislation? No? Why is a bill that passed 100-0 being abandoned by so many people all of the sudden? Could it be... political reasons?

    • Show All
    • Nightdrot, you might be more optimistic than me about these people and their intentions.

      I have had these conversations before. You try to talk about this issue, and start somewhere perhaps logistical and policy-based. Somehow though, after a few steps deeper into the discussion, it always changes. You start getting into one thing, get to the why and the how. Peel back layer after layer, and you start to get to the same place. Why is it that I entertain the idea that maybe "s/he's one of the good, non-bigoted rightists", but 5 layers deep into the conversation, it always turns into "Why do I have to press 1 for English if I'm living in 'merica?" You start with DACA, it turns into "Only white countries are forced to mix with other ethnic types!!!" You wanna talk about the DREAM Act, or even the wall, as we have, and after 4 rhetorical layers of this conversation, it turns into "demographics is destiny".

      Nightdrot, you may very well be not like that. But here's the thing, there are a huge amount of people on your side of the wall issue that are. So many, that it is hard to argue with people and even believe it's in good faith. It doesn't feel like a real discussion when I'm chasing semantics with the moderate fake version of a guy who's underlying political motivation is to perpetuate some white genocide conspiracy theory, or something. You know the type, Nightdrot. You couldn't possibly be this informed and also unaware of the amount of white nationalism that exists in the shadows.

      We have to call out the alt right, WN, etc wherever we can. If we let the right define our terms, and make the standard that "it's not racism till they want segregation" or "it's not fascism till there's concentration camps", we'll let them lead us on a race to the bottom where they bolt towards fascism, and we stay a few degrees removed hoping that by, what, picking up "moderates" we can fix it all? It'll be like trying to save a plane the last captain was nosediving.

    • @DanoMR98 The problem, of course, is that you are questioning motives that you cannot know and are presuming your own moral virtue. The gravaman of your remarks is that there may be valid reasons for an action - in this case building the wall - but those must obviously wrong because not everyone shares your pristine motives.

      The bottom line is that in any culture, in any political system, in any given situation there will invariably be a mixed set of motives. The problem for you is that you have no way of knowing whose motives are valid, whose not, nor more to the point, what relevance that has to addressing the issue.

      In this case, there is a problem with controlling the southern border. Is the wall a valid tool in solving that problem? Yes. So is it relevant if the motives of everyone - whose heart of hearts you have no way of knowing - are not pure? No. In politics, if you can get the right thing for the wrong reason - take it.

      In any case, it is eccentric - to say no more - to suggest that wall is racist given that the wall would block anyone of any any race, color, religion or creed who wants to cross the southern border illegally from doing so. It is not as if a wall would magically open up to admit the preferred race while excluding the others.

      (Indeed, I would also point out as a not entirely irrelevant aside that racism suggests a schematic doctrine and philosophy. This as distinct from bigotry. So if it is, indeed, racism we are dealing with here, then what are the specific tenets of that philosophy. Indeed, if it is a philosophy, then why no wall on the northern border as well. After all, the Berlin Wall kept in everyone.)

      At any rate, your argument is based on motives you cannot know and fails to address a problem that actually exists. The wall has arguments for and against it, but those arguments for or against it must be reasonably related to the problem, not tangential to it.

      Great that your motives are pure - now solve the problem.

  • 50% lies followed by 50% fearmongering. At no point did he actually factually lay out the problem, reveal a solution and demonstrate how the solution would solve the problem. This combined with the fact that a presidential address is not meant for the President to push politics.

    A good example of what a presidential address is supposed to be is when George Bush announced that USA was at war or when Obama announced that Bin Laden was dead. What Trump did however was just a glorified political speech. To be fair I doubt he actually understand its purpose in the first place.

    3|2
    0|3

Recommended Questions

Have an opinion?

What Girls Said 6

  • I disagree that the wall is needed—many illegal immigrants are getting into the US through other means... I agree with my Mum, putting up a wall works two ways: it keeps people out but also traps people in... the President is being illogical, to say the least, and I believe there are better ways of defending our border and a wall is not the right way, nor will it stop the crime we are seeing in the US. Many of the large scale shootings are done by citizens of the US. People like Brock Turner get off easy with three months in jail for assulting an unconscious woman. These are crimes from our own people, not illegal immigrants. The world has crime, everywhere and in every country. The crime in the US won’t suddenly disappear with a wall. I also believe that he needs to stop this nonsense about “a state of crisis.” He doesn’t get to be President for longer because he didn’t get his way. And right now, the longer HE refuses to cooperate, Americans are going broke, unable to make ends meet because they still have to work but are not being paid. This needs to end. It is hurting a lot of people.

    4|1
    0|1
    • No one, especially not Trump, ever said the wall will stop everything, or that the wall will stop anything. He’s talking about slowing down the rate of people thinking they can easily get over the wall. It’s NOT the be-all/end-all single remedy, and that’s not his position. Whether or not you think he’s being “illogical” doesn’t really matter to anyone, but you. Lol no offense, but “illogical” is subjective, no two people agree what it means. I respect your opinion, and I would defend it. But I also have one, and it happens to differ from yours.

    • Some of the reasons I disagree with you are that all of that about mass shootings, or Brock Turner, or world crimes or any and all crimes are even relevant. No one is saying the this wall will stop all crime. It is a way of slowing down the mass storming of the border and attempts to overwhelm by sheer numbers that we see happening recently. Everyone across the political divide agrees in a physical barrier of some kind. The president has NOT manufactured anything, and he we will continue to educate Americans like you of the reality of the crisis. You said so, when you acknowledged the people working without pay- is that not itself a crisis? Where’s the “nonsense” you claim he’s pushing?
      You are the nonsensical one, which happens when you remain uninformed and willfully ignorant.

  • I honestly don’t know how to feel. There is already a wall. The wall is old. We have border security , but not properly funded. America shouldn’t rip children from their mothers. People shouldn’t be getting killed by illegal immigrants. Then again thousands are murdered by us citizens. My opinion? Fix the wall, stop making this about race. Deal with the immigration crisis humanely and smartly , repair the wall which ALREADY exists. And open the government so the hundreds of thousands of government workers can take their paychecks home to support themselves or their families

    3|2
    0|0
    • @SuburbanBarbie- you’re not the only one who wants all that you just listed. Millions of Americans of both parties want that. Obviously, the political side of this has gotten out of control. So you do know how you feel, you feel like most Americans feel. Now the problem is getting the politicians to get off their collective asses and fix this one and for all.

    • Well they’re not really going to fix it, cause the government don’t really care about the American people. They care about their pockets.

    • I hope you’re wrong. This MUST be fixed, we have no choice. Yes they seem to have their priorities mixed up, but that’s no reason to not fix this. The only question now, is who, besides we the people, will be most harmed?

  • It shows a divided nation.

    2|5
    0|0
    • Which is not what we need to be illustrating to the world right now...

  • I didn't watch it. What was said?

    0|1
    0|0
  • I never listen to him :(

    0|1
    0|0
  • Ewwwwwwww

    1|0
    0|0

What Guys Said 18

  • President Trump right on. Nancy and Charles fear mongering

    2|6
    3|1
    • Sweden Germany Has shown depleted resources and not able to take care of there own citizens because of refugees that came in because of liberals. Allowing criminals to get in our country unchecked by not being able to funnel them through choke points that the wall will provide . The free trade agreement will pay for the Wall on the back end ad stated tonight by our President.

    • Show All
    • 5d

      Correction on figures the cost as of Monday is 3.4 billion

    • 4d

      @AlwysWet Since you're a conservative, and I bet you are a pretty strong constitutionalist. Why are you not blaming the Senate for not acting as a coequal branch? The Founders wanted congress to be equal to the president, not the president's lackeys.

      That conservatives in this country have abandoned their own closely held views about our constitution when it serves the president is a testament to how much of a cult of personality he has. That's how the ball gets rolling before the authoritarian right take over. It's scary stuff.

  • The wall is a waste.

    A wall didn't stop the NAZIs.

    Google "Maginot Line".

    3|1
    1|1
    • It just made Germany more divided

    • Show All
    • 4d

      Your seeing the need for the boarder security plan... good
      Now by funneling the terrorist, smugglers and refugees to choke points such as the Canadian boarders we can concentrate on these areas and the wall is doing it job.
      You see the less minded would of seen it as just some big wall and not a 1226 page security plan. That covers your concern. Great job studying up on a subject and not JUST THINKING IT A BIG DUMB WALL ON IT'S OWN MERRIT.
      Smart man

    • 4d

      @AlwysWet Oh, yes, I never had a problem with border security.
      I am a New Yorker and have wanted much greater border security and zero-as-in-0 immigration. We don't need anymore.

  • Are we supposed to believe that the Dems oppose Trump on grounds it’s a waste of money? Historically, the Dems have NOT been known for being fiscally responsible. Now, suddenly, they’ve learned the error of their ways?
    That’s laughable.
    The real reason is, and everyone knows this, OPPOSE everything Trump.
    Even at the expense of Government workers.
    This is on the Dems.

    0|3
    2|1
    • This is on that idiot trump that wants to play with legos on Mexico's border.

    • Show All
    • I understand your inclination to be cautious, to be wary of such conversations with someone you know nothing about. I’ve had plenty of frustration with those same exact things, but what can you do?
      Disengage and you risk further frustration, at least that’s how Id be, more frustrated because maybe this time, you could really make a positive difference in someone’s life. I do that other ways, rhetorical analysis is still new to me, so I don’t expect that to be an effective tool, all I can do is be as honest as I can with myself and others. I also stay engaged because I will always learn, especially when I least expect it. You surprised me with your apparent experience in the issues that come with public discourse, like we’re talking.
      Thanks for your opinion, a unique dive into some of the underlying issues most are not aware of.

    • Thanks, bruh. It's always good to end a debate on a positive note.

  • Address was fine overall, presentation wasn't amazing because it was prompter read and the one distraction was I noticed his right eye lid slowly slowly slowly close lol. But it wasn't bad really.

    Schumer and Pelosi lol. That was bad presentation. Like I get the night of the living dead memes going around last night. I do think Schumer shot himself in the foot a bit, because he went the route of saying illegal immigration is 100% fabricated. That no illegal immigrants commit crimes of anykind whatsoever. When there are current examples of illegal immigrants committing murder and other crimes in multiple states. So even if you disagree with Trump that it's a State Emergency or a crisis. You at least know he's not lying about there being a problem. With Schumer not even acknowledging the problem nearly everyone sees they're being lied to. It's like if your kitchen is on fire and someone says, "YOUR HOUSE IS ON FIRE!" and another guy says "There's no fire. That guy is making shit up". When you yourself see the fire you will see the second guy as a liar, when he saw the fire and chose not to acknowledge it.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Didn't see it, couldn't be bothered to listen to his bullshit

    3|1
    0|1
  • Ill watch clips of it tomorrow. I'm not watching an entire full length video of that idiot speak. Makes my brain feel like I landed in a kindergarten class full of retarded kids.

    3|2
    0|1
  • I recorded it cause I'm watching WWE Smackdown
    but i will check it most likely not worth taping. LOL

    0|2
    0|0
  • I had better things to do than listening to the clown

    2|1
    0|2
  • Most presidents use oval office addresses to calm frightened citizens. Trump used his oval office address to frighten calm citizens.

    2|3
    0|2
  • Well not surprisingly, Pelosi and Schumer made complete idiots of themselves and even CNN had to admit it - now THAT was a surprise.

    0|0
    0|0
  • One side peddling BS, and the other peddling a bit more BS. Nothing new or unusual unfortunately.

    2|1
    0|0
  • Nobody said anything material new. I mean trump said the democrats asked for steel, i imagine he's confusing them with willbur ross, but in the grand scheme of things its pointless.

    0|0
    0|0
  • I dont really like trump but the left is becoming just as bad as him but more radical so its starting to make him look a little better to me, and his oval office speech was pretty decent, the democrats response just made him look better then he is

    0|1
    0|0
  • if you have no comment then whyd you ask?

    you obviously have some sort of opinion

    thats what this site is

    OPINIONS

    and i think trumps a blowhard

    0|0
    0|0
  • didn't watch. unlike him, i was training to actually be in the military

    0|1
    0|0
  • Fuck Pelosi. What would a wall hurt?

    1|7
    2|1
    • It would hurt the democrat packing scheme. It would hurt the progressive plan to destroy American culture via demographic shift.

    • Show All
    • No, I'm talking about ideology and demographics. You can permanently change a nations voting habits and culture by having an influx of immigrants fast enough and large enough instead of keeping it at a trickle and making sure only those who want to assimilate are allowed to enter, become citizens, and remain.

    • @Sixgun77 I understand, and that's why I called out the message you're sending. I have never met a single person saying "demographics is destiny" who didn't have some seriously bigoted and reactionary beliefs.

  • waiting for the other shoe to drop

    0|1
    0|0
  • Im at work, didn't get to hear it.

    0|1
    0|0

Recommended myTakes

Loading...