I had an appointment and missed most of Trump’s speech; needless to say I don’t really regret missing such moral wretchedness. But I was actually looking forward to Joe Kennedy III’s speech. David and I had a chance to meet him a few years ago, and he was unpretentious, smart, and real — not coasting on the family heritage, even while obviously availing himself of it.
Anyway, I thought he was darned good, in an unenviable position:
Usually it seems like the SOTU response is aimed at the same audience as the address itself. This time it seemed different, based on the assumption that Trump has already alienated much of America — and that segment needs moral support. It was extremely candid about the viciousness of this very administration, not simply its inadequacy in facing exogenous threats. The Trump administration is itself the cancer on our country, it seemed to say.
Russia knee-deep in our democracy.
An all-out war on environmental protection.
A Justice Department rolling back civil rights by the day.
Hatred and supremacy proudly marching in our streets.
Bullets tearing through our classrooms, concerts, and congregations. Targeting our safest, sacred places.
And that nagging, sinking feeling, no matter your political beliefs: this is not right. This is not who we are.
It would be easy to dismiss the past year as chaos. Partisanship. Politics.But it’s far bigger than that. This administration isn’t just targeting the laws that protect us – they are targeting the very idea that we are all worthy of protection.
For them, dignity isn’t something you’re born with but something you measure.By your net worth, your celebrity, your headlines, your crowd size.
Not to mention, the gender of your spouse. The country of your birth. The color of your skin. The God of your prayers.
Their record is a rebuke of our highest American ideal: the belief that we are all worthy, we are all equal and we all count. In the eyes of our law and our leaders, our God and our government.
That is the American promise.
And it clearly delineated the methods and habits of mind that define Trumpism: Life and politics as a sadistic “zero-sum game.” It recognized implicitly, if ruefully, the appeal of sheer spite, particularly when people do not feel like they’re getting a fair shake themselves. Not by name but by implication, it called Trumpism bullying, which it surely is. It identified, at great length and specificity, with the underdogs of American life.
It wasn’t the definitive liberal (small-l) credo-as-rebuttal, but it was one very decent draft of it.
Regarding the optics: The setting was excellent – a voc-ed school in a working-class town; a friendly audience obviating the necessity to stare straight into America’s living rooms. His delivery was decent — he has a habit of speaking too fast, which he curbed; but some words were thrown away or clipped. But he seemed sincere.
There are plenty of talented people on the Democratic side who could have done a good job; JKIII probably skipped the line because of his last name. But he delivered the goods, rather better than most previous contestants. For now, I’m less interested in his own political prospects than what this speech does for developing a common language of resistance and rebuilding. Our words matter. These were good ones.
Allow me to indulge myself a bit here. I met Joe a few weeks before he announced his first run for the house, but it was clear by the tone of the gathering that he was going to run. I was not impressed at first. Unlike many at the event who were lifelong Massachusetts residents and Democrats, I was neither. I did get the opportunity to meet Joe and I expressed my non-approval of what I called “legacy candidates”. We spoke for several minutes and he impressed me, not enough to jump on the bandwagon but enough to realize that he ought not get the position because he’s a Kennedy anymore than he ought not because he’s a Kennedy.
In the end, and to this day, I have come to know that Joe has one thing that is severely lacking in politics today. Joe has a heart, a big heart. Now, sometimes a big heart can get one into trouble and distort ones perception, but on that, Joe has a clear and focused mind on what’s in front of him. Joe knows what’s going on in Washington. I watched him in an early debate with Bielat run through names of members of congress in both parties and where they stood on issues and where he could compromise or gain leverage. It was a brilliant display.
This speech is who Joe is. I could watch it over and over and over. Well done Joe. Thanks.
Kennedy impressed me as well. And he definitely gets points for doing it in Fall River.
Loved the fact that they did it in Fall River, though the symbolism was likely to be lost on a national audience. And thought framing it as an actual speech, in front of a cheering audience, was great. Far better than cheesy folksy diner-sets or those muted talks in DC living rooms.
I’m not certain that an uber wealthy white guy from MA was the best choice, but the speech itself, while light on policy, did capture the essence of Democatic values. Wish he’d mentioned climate, though. Glaring ommission for someof us, just it was on the part of the front-runner in last year’s primaries.
It was a fine speech rhetorically, it was well delivered, and the location and choice of speaker were a vast improvement over last year’s response. I absolutely agree with the content and tone of the speech.
That said, our issue is going to be moving the 9% of voters who defected from Obama to Trump back into our corner. The vast majority of these voters are white working class voters in communities like Fall River. Did this really speak to them? I am not sure. I get a sense that it was Stronger Together Redux. Trump is a racist bully, we aren’t, we win. Yet we didn’t win. That message was not enough for the Democrats last cycle.
Has Trump delivered on bringing back jobs to our country? Has he delivered on fair trade? Has he delivered on working class raises? Has he delivered on solving the opioid epidemic? Has he delivered on fixing our infrastructure? Has he drained the swamp or drained it straight into his family’s coffers? Those are the hard hitting attacks we have to be making. They are universal and based on class rather than identity. I am a both/and kind of guy, but I felt this speech was heavier on the identity stuff and not as clear or strong on the class stuff.
For the midterms this may be enough. Hillary isn’t on the ballot anymore to turn off R leaning suburban moderates. Our base is bigger than their base. Our base is more motivated than their base. Our candidates are competing in every district while theirs are retiring in droves. The midterms go through suburban Philly, suburban NY, California and the Southwest.
The White House goes through WI, OH, MI, and PA. We have to win those states back or we won’t win the presidency. I don’t know if this speech appealed to the voters we need to win back in those places. I do know that we have to hone in on the rhetoric that moves those voters, not just the ones already in our corner.
If you get a chance google “Diamond and Silk on SOTU”.
Not sure if they saw Kennedy’s speech but they did watch Trump.
One major, embarrassing omission: https://newrepublic.com/article/146817/democrats-massive-foolish-omission
Not every speech can be about everything and this one seemed to focus on helping people in their daily lives and getting ahead. Climate change doesn’t really fit that category.
I think that’s incorrect. Climate change is the issue of our time and overlaps with so many other issues. When it comes to a “focus on helping people in their daily lives and getting ahead,” think about everyone in Puerto Rico right now, or in Houston, or in California, or in West Virginia, or elsewhere in the world, like in Capetown, which is about to totally run out of water, and is a criminally underreported story in the US.
Climate change is an everyday economic issue, it is an inequality issue, it is a public health issue, it is a social justice issue, it is a national security issue, and overall it is the one issue that is critically existential.