- Joined
- Apr 20, 2018
- Messages
- 10,257
- Reaction score
- 4,161
- Location
- Washington, D.C.
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Did you go to a SOTU "party," and if you did, what was the primary feedback of the attendees?
I went to one hosted by my best friend. He had a small group there, perhaps about 15-20 people. I know very, very well four people who were there, and the rest were folks with whom I'm well enough acquainted that they've been on some of my "guest lists." I on some of theirs, we encounter one another socially 10 to 20 times a years, and we all have several friends in common. Politically, the group was a mix of Dems, GOP-ers and Indies, but nobody there would self-identify as part of "The Base."
Most folks watched the speech and largely chatted quietly for most of it, and periodically laughing, exclaiming, cheering, etc. somewhat loudly. I and two other folks watched the first five minutes or so and then turned our attention and discussion to other things, tuning back into the speech when we heard a lot of noise from the actual speech watchers.
When the speech ended, we all chatted about it. Though there were points of agreement and disagreement on myriad matters, the one thing on which there was universal agreement was that nobody felt they could believe, let alone "take to the bank," anything Trump said. One could summarize the group's sentiment in that regard as:
"Yeah, the stuff he said that sounded good, sounded good. What, if anything, will to come of his having said? New talking points and political bludgeons? Or actual drives to enact substantive and sage policy? I haven't the first idea."
To be sure, what "sounded good" differed among the various individuals, but that's beside the point.
The other thing that was fairly widely agreed upon was that the speech was targeted at mainstream and traditional Republicans with the intent of declaring to them that Trump isn't the stark-raving mad, demented and boorish lunatic we've seen for the past four years. Of course, there again, the caveat was "okay, so he seems sane enough, but will his behavior bear that out...that remains to be seen."
For my own part, I was surprised at the diffident tone of his delivery; Trump isn't typically shy or nervous before large groups, but he seemed that way (by comparison to his own other speeches) last evening. It reminded me of an address gave whereat I read prepared remarks that I'd not taken/had enough time to practice saying them, and, in turn, revise and become comfortable with saying them before "for real" delivering the address. Like Trump's delivery last night, it wasn't a disaster, but neither was it the rallying point I had rathered it'd have been.
So, if you spent the SOTU with a group and discussed the matter afterwards, what was the dominant sentiment(s) on which your group of friends/acquaintances expressed unanimously?
I went to one hosted by my best friend. He had a small group there, perhaps about 15-20 people. I know very, very well four people who were there, and the rest were folks with whom I'm well enough acquainted that they've been on some of my "guest lists." I on some of theirs, we encounter one another socially 10 to 20 times a years, and we all have several friends in common. Politically, the group was a mix of Dems, GOP-ers and Indies, but nobody there would self-identify as part of "The Base."
Most folks watched the speech and largely chatted quietly for most of it, and periodically laughing, exclaiming, cheering, etc. somewhat loudly. I and two other folks watched the first five minutes or so and then turned our attention and discussion to other things, tuning back into the speech when we heard a lot of noise from the actual speech watchers.
When the speech ended, we all chatted about it. Though there were points of agreement and disagreement on myriad matters, the one thing on which there was universal agreement was that nobody felt they could believe, let alone "take to the bank," anything Trump said. One could summarize the group's sentiment in that regard as:
"Yeah, the stuff he said that sounded good, sounded good. What, if anything, will to come of his having said? New talking points and political bludgeons? Or actual drives to enact substantive and sage policy? I haven't the first idea."
To be sure, what "sounded good" differed among the various individuals, but that's beside the point.
The other thing that was fairly widely agreed upon was that the speech was targeted at mainstream and traditional Republicans with the intent of declaring to them that Trump isn't the stark-raving mad, demented and boorish lunatic we've seen for the past four years. Of course, there again, the caveat was "okay, so he seems sane enough, but will his behavior bear that out...that remains to be seen."
For my own part, I was surprised at the diffident tone of his delivery; Trump isn't typically shy or nervous before large groups, but he seemed that way (by comparison to his own other speeches) last evening. It reminded me of an address gave whereat I read prepared remarks that I'd not taken/had enough time to practice saying them, and, in turn, revise and become comfortable with saying them before "for real" delivering the address. Like Trump's delivery last night, it wasn't a disaster, but neither was it the rallying point I had rathered it'd have been.
So, if you spent the SOTU with a group and discussed the matter afterwards, what was the dominant sentiment(s) on which your group of friends/acquaintances expressed unanimously?
