Till the next tweet
10/2/19 21:25![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fridi posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsPresident Trump (heh) again chose to stick to the script during his State of the Union address, as he had done the year before. His speech sounded like any other State of the Union speech - not the way we're used to hearing Trump sound, spontaneously, and off script.
But it's a different Congress today as well, after all. Now the Reps only control the Senate. So Trump had to control himself too in his address. Cautious not to offend someone, not to threaten any country with military intervention (although he's sanctioning indirect intervention in Venezuela as we speak). Hey, he even refrained from throwing a bombshell and declaring a unneeded, useless state of emergency at the southern border. He could've done that just to spite Congress, right? He didn't even mention "America first". Not once. Nor did he say, "Make America great again". How dull, eh?
Instead, his entire message was all about national unity, and ending partisan bickering. But Trump wouldn't have been Trump if he hadn't found some way to sneak in a mention of illegal migrants, bad, bad Iran, or the niggardly NATO partners. So he did.
He called on all congressfolk to overcome the political deadlock, bury the battle axes, and heal the old wounds in "a spirit of compromise and cooperation". Only if she's united, America could overcome its current division, he said. Only with great shared effort the problems of millions of Americans could be overcome, including access to health-care and jobs, etc.
He's right, of course. All these words sound true. Only through cooperation and compromise, division could be overcome. He's right that bipartisan consensus is a condition for solving big problems like migration, crumbling infrastructure, expensive and inaccessible health-care, inadequate education, etc, etc.
Except, these are all just words. We've never seen Trump as a uniter until now, just the opposite. He's the last person to be concerned about bipartisan consensus, and fair compromise is somewhere at the bottom of his list of priorities. At least that's what his actions have shown up till now. If there's one thing we've learned from the first half of his (first?) term, it is that there's no such thing as a balance of interests, or bipartisanship, in Trump's worldview. Although he often likes to present himself as the master of business deals. One would wonder how he was able to make all those real estate deals, hm?
He's practically the biggest contributor to the country's division in recent years, even more than some other predecessors of his, like GWB. NYT reports that Trump once called a private dinner with some TV anchors, where he viciously attacked some of the leading Dems, Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren included. And this doesn't fit too well into his "unity" story, does it?
A good example of exactly how alien Trump is to compromise, is his feud with the Dems about the budget bill, and the way he held the whole government hostage in his bid to get funding for his "big, beautiful wall". He risked plunging the country into the longest furlough in history, with all the negative consequences for millions of Americans (which he oh so muchcares about). Trump has always tried to impose his will, both in his business times and now as president. The only thing that matters to him is to appear as winner, regardless of the cost.
In thise sense, something rings terribly false in his nice words about the state of the union (which of course is all roses and honey, if we discount the naughty Democrats, illegal migrants, bad, bad Iran, or the niggardly NATO partners). The folks who wrote that speech did of course do their best. They included a few words about the fact that there had never been as many women in the US Congress (many of whom really got there because of their opposition to Trump).
Some people, especially those who are prone to believing such things, or who haven't been paying attention, might be tempted to interpret these words as a turning point in Trump's rule. The rest of us are unlikely to have any of it.
It's true that hope dies last, granted. But it's also true that we shouldn't be drawing big conclusions from a single speech. From what we've learned and seen from Trump so far, it's clear that his State of the Union address does not truly reflect the real Trump. It's not the real Trump who delivers calm, measured speeches and TV addresses - the real Trump is the one speaking through Twitter. Which is why his touching call for bipartisan compromise and unity will only hold until his very next tweet.
But it's a different Congress today as well, after all. Now the Reps only control the Senate. So Trump had to control himself too in his address. Cautious not to offend someone, not to threaten any country with military intervention (although he's sanctioning indirect intervention in Venezuela as we speak). Hey, he even refrained from throwing a bombshell and declaring a unneeded, useless state of emergency at the southern border. He could've done that just to spite Congress, right? He didn't even mention "America first". Not once. Nor did he say, "Make America great again". How dull, eh?
Instead, his entire message was all about national unity, and ending partisan bickering. But Trump wouldn't have been Trump if he hadn't found some way to sneak in a mention of illegal migrants, bad, bad Iran, or the niggardly NATO partners. So he did.
He called on all congressfolk to overcome the political deadlock, bury the battle axes, and heal the old wounds in "a spirit of compromise and cooperation". Only if she's united, America could overcome its current division, he said. Only with great shared effort the problems of millions of Americans could be overcome, including access to health-care and jobs, etc.
He's right, of course. All these words sound true. Only through cooperation and compromise, division could be overcome. He's right that bipartisan consensus is a condition for solving big problems like migration, crumbling infrastructure, expensive and inaccessible health-care, inadequate education, etc, etc.
Except, these are all just words. We've never seen Trump as a uniter until now, just the opposite. He's the last person to be concerned about bipartisan consensus, and fair compromise is somewhere at the bottom of his list of priorities. At least that's what his actions have shown up till now. If there's one thing we've learned from the first half of his (first?) term, it is that there's no such thing as a balance of interests, or bipartisanship, in Trump's worldview. Although he often likes to present himself as the master of business deals. One would wonder how he was able to make all those real estate deals, hm?
He's practically the biggest contributor to the country's division in recent years, even more than some other predecessors of his, like GWB. NYT reports that Trump once called a private dinner with some TV anchors, where he viciously attacked some of the leading Dems, Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren included. And this doesn't fit too well into his "unity" story, does it?
A good example of exactly how alien Trump is to compromise, is his feud with the Dems about the budget bill, and the way he held the whole government hostage in his bid to get funding for his "big, beautiful wall". He risked plunging the country into the longest furlough in history, with all the negative consequences for millions of Americans (which he oh so muchcares about). Trump has always tried to impose his will, both in his business times and now as president. The only thing that matters to him is to appear as winner, regardless of the cost.
In thise sense, something rings terribly false in his nice words about the state of the union (which of course is all roses and honey, if we discount the naughty Democrats, illegal migrants, bad, bad Iran, or the niggardly NATO partners). The folks who wrote that speech did of course do their best. They included a few words about the fact that there had never been as many women in the US Congress (many of whom really got there because of their opposition to Trump).
Some people, especially those who are prone to believing such things, or who haven't been paying attention, might be tempted to interpret these words as a turning point in Trump's rule. The rest of us are unlikely to have any of it.
It's true that hope dies last, granted. But it's also true that we shouldn't be drawing big conclusions from a single speech. From what we've learned and seen from Trump so far, it's clear that his State of the Union address does not truly reflect the real Trump. It's not the real Trump who delivers calm, measured speeches and TV addresses - the real Trump is the one speaking through Twitter. Which is why his touching call for bipartisan compromise and unity will only hold until his very next tweet.
(no subject)
Date: 11/2/19 06:58 (UTC)