The Pelosi-Trump State of the Union Address Chess Match

Yes, I think so. It's a matter of degree, but I think the line is deeper on Pelosi's side.

Consider that Trump has an out if he accepts either less funding, or some other alternative. He hasn't, for example, said that it will either be 234 miles of wall, or nothing. Nor has he said it will be $5.7B or nothing.

Pelosi, on the other hand, initially said absolutely no funding at all for a wall. None. When pressed, she said fine, $1. Hard to see how she backtracks from that if indeed funding for the wall is included in whatever plan is arrived at. Can probably say she did it to get government going again...but her position itself doesn't leave really any room for movement.

Since this may not technically even be a 'true' SOTU....will he provide a transcript ahead of his speech? If not...the rebuttal, if there even is one, could be pretty interesting, for once. (I've never really paid much attention to the 'rebuttals' regardless of which side they came from)

 

I would say the 30%. 1. 18 - 20 million would be my guess.

 

It's peculiar your posting history given your claim that you voted for a flaky liberal actress in
New York. I'm curious how you vote extremely liberal and post the opposite.

 

All possible. Trump has gotten a lot better at staying on message. Consider that he'll be well aware that it will be heavily watched. 2 years ago, I'd probably have agreed with you. Now...I suspect he'll deliver a good SOTU, albeit one likely with more politics than normal in it. This is his big chance to make his case before the American people. Not just his base. I guess we'll see.

Do agree that viewership will likely be higher. The SOTU had become a bit boring. This one will be anything but. People will come. People will most definitely come.

 

I think Democrats have to make a concrete offer at this point - it can be extreme, but they should make a wishlist of everything they want (permanent DACA, Obamacare fixes, raise minimum wage, etc) and say they'll trade all of that for a border wall. Either the GOP accepts something or other and the Dems get a policy win that they'd never get otherwise, or the ball is back in the GOP's court. If Dems did get a major policy win, no one on their side is going to complain about $5B for a partial wall that isn't designed and can't be built for years (and could ultimately be cancelled by a future Dem president).

 

@Os Trigonum's sole purpose is to plant a seed and see where the roots grow. Will it bloom into a beautiful tree or will the roots f-ck up your house's foundation? He is all about reactions.. I've been on to him for a while now.

 

I kind of agree. I think that if this had happened with zero drama, Trump would have stayed on message pretty much and just delivered the speech prepared for him. I feel like with the added drama, and especially if he only has a cheering section watching him that he will start to 'feel it' and go off on his crazy stuff.

It will be interesting to see which of our guesses plays out in the end, or if it ends up being something different altogether.

 

Maybe two. One at 34%, another at 36%. Not so fake.

https://www.apnews.com/dad8086738a64b4ba78c0404d5d04e79
Overall, 34 percent of Americans approve of Trump’s job performance in a survey conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. That’s down from 42 percent a month earlier and nears the lowest mark of his two-year presidency.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/polls-show-trump-is-bleeding-support-during-shutdown
A Politico-Morning Consult poll, released Wednesday, showed the president now has a 40-percent approval rating—a 17-point dip from last polling.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/23/18194184/trump-shutdown-polling
The CBS poll finds that Trump’s approval rating has dipped three points since November, to 36 percent, with an all-time high of 59 percent of Americans now disapproving of the job he’s doing

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_jan23
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 44% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Fifty-six percent (56%) disapprove.

 

Keep trolling.

 

But there can be arguments. I certainly can't completely rule out 1) politic, 2) miscalculation but sincere try to end the shutdown earlier, 3) actually a good calculation to end the shutdown earlier (which I don't think it will), 4) childish behavior without any calculation, but just pure reaction out of anger, 5) combinations of those

 

You asked a question that no one can answer. But a good estimate is who still support him - it's max out at around 40-41%.

If "core base" is cult followers, it's likely much lower. These are people that stand with him no matter what.

If "core base" is the current GOP base, it's around that.

I don't consider anyone outside of the above two as part of his core base.

 

Or, their first and # one priority - anti-corruption (aka Trump and many of the GOP operations). Give him the useless wall and $5 B. Get back real changes with actual impact in 2020.

House Democrats Introduce Anti-Corruption Bill As Symbolic 1st Act

Voting and election laws

• Voter registration would be made easier. Citizens could register online or get registered automatically, via data from driver's licenses or other government sources. For federal elections, states would have to provide same-day registration and at least 15 days of early voting. Election Day would be a federal holiday.
• The bill would crack down on efforts to take voters off the rolls or prevent them from casting ballots. Felons could regain their voting rights after finishing their sentences.
• Federal elections would require paper ballots to prevent computer tampering. State chief election officials couldn't get involved in federal campaigns.
• The bill would declare an intent to revive core anti-discrimination provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that were effectively shut down by the Supreme Court six years ago. It would also state that failing to vote isn't grounds for taking away a person's voter registration.

Campaign finance

• Provisions from the Disclose Act would expand the prohibition on foreign political money and mandate the disclosure of the big donors behind politically active 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations.
• Digital companies, like Facebook and Google, would have to set up public databases cataloging political ad purchase requests of $500 or more and create new measures to block ad buys by foreign nationals.
• Presidential inaugural committees would have to disclose expenditures, in addition to the existing requirement for donor disclosure. This is a response to reports of unexplained spending by Trump's inaugural committee.
• A new matching-fund program would support House candidates who agree to raise only small-dollar contributions. (Similar provisions for Senate candidates would have to come from the Senate.) The public financing system for presidential candidates, largely irrelevant since 2012, would be updated.
• The bill would quash "sidecar" superPACs that support individual candidates.

Ethics

• Presidents and vice presidents would have to release their tax returns, something that happened routinely in past administrations but not in this one.
• Presidents-elect would need ethics plans for their transition teams and would have to file financial disclosures within 30 days of taking office. The bill would tell presidents and vice presidents they should act as if they are covered by the conflict-of-interest law, which actually exempts them. Again, this wasn't an issue in previous administrations because past presidents did not have the volume of business entanglements that Trump has.
• House members would be barred from serving on corporate boards. Rep. Chris Collins, R-N.Y., is under indictment for allegedly using inside information he gained as a corporate board member.
• House members would be forbidden to use taxpayer money to pay penalties for employment discrimination. Former Rep. Blake Farenthold, R-Texas, used $84,000 in federal funds to settle a sexual harassment claim by a former staffer, said he would repay it, but changed his mind after leaving office. Congress passed a bipartisan measure in December requiring members to pay out of their own pocket for some settlements and court judgments in sexual misconduct cases.
• The Supreme Court would have to get a code of ethics, something it has never had.
• The laws regulating foreign and domestic lobbying would be expanded.

 

I'm glad someone posted this, deserves its own thread. Of course Republicans are against it. Shocking.

It is time our laws caught up with trash politics.

 

tony schwartz wrote "the art of the deal" for Trump, so he knows the dotard.

​

he offered this observation after seeing the extremely angry Trump, after being rebuffed again by Pelosi, unable to

• come up w biting words to blast Pelosi, nor a disparaging "nickname" for her

 

I believe he was already prepared to call her Ugly Nancy or Lying Nancy but he backed out last second.

 

suddenly, he has morphed to be a PC snow flake,

no biting words, no disparaging nicknames !​