2019 State of the Union Address


#121

(Worth the click to see the GIF)


#122

Think it was just online (Facebook, etc)


#123

#124

Possessive plural in a compound noun is pretty much pedantic English, to be fair, and probably a geeky thing. But still neat. :)


#125

So much hope riding on this Mueller report…


#126

Hahaha


#127

Not expecting a whole lot, TBH. I think it’s clear that he’s handing off a bunch of criminal stuff to the Southern Disrict, and that a lot of what might be in his report exists already in the indictments and sentencing docs of people already charged and who have taken a plea.


#128

I sort of agree with this…although the real actual story of the SOTU might be the subtext: we’re nowhere near a deal before a shutdown in 9 days.


#129

Though I don’t think Trump would know. I actually think Congressional Reps/Dems are negotiating in secret so as not to alert Trump’s advisors (Coulter/Hannity/Limbaugh) before they pass a compromise bill that has no wall money.


#130

Good point. It does kinda feel like McConnell, Schumer, Pelosi, and McCarthy are the ones actually doing the lift on this, and if they can make a deal they’re likely to drop it on Trump’s head with “You’re gonna sign this thing.”

McConnell looked crankier than you’d expect the Majority Leader of the party occupying the White House to look at a SOTU tonight.


#131

TBH, those actually seem like decent numbers for streaming online.


#132

Facebook views at the moment - 241k.

I think this whole situation shows how stupid the Democratic party can be. It’s just a facebook video he gives to his supporters. He gave one last year too, except because it was a white guy doing the Democratic response to the SOTU noone cared, but now that it’s Abrams it’s suddenly a terrible thing to do. As if she needs any protecting. Not that anyone here would have watched it but the very first thing he said was congratulating her on a great speech. It’s just dumb.


#133

McConnell did not look happy during Trump’s incoherent rambling, but that’s fine, fuck him.


#134

That you can’t seem to see the optics here speaks volumes too. This is a presidential candidate who really does need support of mainline Democrats who vote in primaries, and who really does need to shore up some of his bona fides with women and persons of color, and you seem to not be grasp that it’s not the best thing he could’ve done. It isn’t a good look for him, regardless of his deference to Abrams within the speech.

And a hint: it isn’t “stupid” of Democrats to nick him for this. Doing so does stir the strength of the Democratic primary base, and if you’re one of the 12-20 potential Democratic presidential candidates who will be a member of the party after November 2020 regardless, it’s throwing some smart elbows.

It’s politics. Perception often equals reality. This is probably one of those cases. If I was a Democratic candidate for president – or thinking about it – I’d chip him for this too.


#135

I don’t think that “attorneys general” is so much a possessive as it is a formulation inherited from (probably Norman) French, where the modifier “general” follows its noun. But I agree that it takes special attention to nitpicky stuff like that to use it right.*

*Disclaimer: Stupid stuff like Rubio’s flub really grates on my ears because I’m a person who works with a couple of different languages and documentation therein as my career, and come by it honestly because my late father was a college Spanish language professor who started out monolingual in English but ended up reading novels in at least three other foreign languages. In fact he translated his dad’s WW1 memoir The Right Place into French (with some help here and there from native speakers) and got it published around the time of the 100 year anniversary of the start of that war.


#136

ezgif-3-1d9ba21ab1d6


#137

We need likes…


#138

I agree with everything you wrote, politics is optics, the optics here can be construed in a certain way here (whereas it couldn’t last year), and it is rational for his opponents to have a go at him for it. Yet, the only reason why all of this is true is that voters are often very dumb and prone to superficiality, and Democratic voters aren’t excluded.

It’s like Trump’s take down of Jeb in the primary. His attacks were perfectly rational, not stupid of him at all to do, yet the only reason it worked is because Republican voters are very stupid. That was my only point.

Yeah yeah, @abidingdude, whatever, I am a sexist now. Why don’t you state your thoughts plainly?


#139

I didn’t watch the speech (I care too much about my blood pressure) but I’m hearing that the Daily National Embarrassment who currently occupies the Presidency didn’t even mention the shutdown where he made people work for free and screwed over thousands of people working on government contracts, nor did he turn around and acknowledge Nancy Pelosi as the new Speaker?


#140

Posted in the wrong spot and now Discourse doesn’t want me to post it, so adding words to make it do what I want because software.