Dem
47
GOP
53
The returns are in when it comes to Donald Trump's joint address to Congress, and one portion of the night has proven to be very controversial. No, it's not Trump's attacks on various people, or his whopping lies, or his racially charged language, or his transphobia. In fact, the majority of the negative attention is being directed at the Democrats in the room, particularly Rep. Al Green (D-TX), whose demonstrative behavior early in the speech caused him to be ejected from the House gallery.
Needless to say, the Republicans in the House aren't going to hold Trump accountable for anything he might say, in part because they are cowed by him, and in part because presidents get enormous leeway in these speeches. In fact, we suspect that Trump—or perhaps, a member of his inner circle—could end a speech with a Nazi salute, and the Republicans wouldn't say "boo." Or maybe that's just crazy talk.
In any case, Green's transgression caused Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and his colleagues to take swift action. Yesterday, they introduced and passed a resolution formally censuring Green for his outburst. There was a time, particularly when American culture was heavily rooted in honor/shame and in Victorian ideas about decorum, that an outburst like that would have been a national scandal, and a motion of censure would have been mortifying for any member of the House. That time has long passed, of course. Green is unconcerned about other people's ideas of decorum, and yesterday, while he stood in the well of the House for his public shaming, as is required when the House passes a motion of censure, he was joined by a dozen or so colleagues, as they all sang "We Shall Overcome."
We must also note that this issue is bipartisan, at least somewhat. There were 10 Democrats who joined with the Republicans in voting to censure Green. In case you would like to know who they are, it was: Ami Bera (CA), Ed Case (HI), Jim Costa (CA), Laura Gillen (NY), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA), Jim Himes (CT), Chrissy Houlahan (PA), Marcy Kaptur (OH), Jared Moskowitz (FL) and Tom Suozzi (NY). In addition, about a dozen Democratic members who engaged in other forms of demonstration were called into meetings with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA) and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-CA), so that trio could share their views that the speech was not the time or the place for that kind of behavior.
We certainly understand the thinking on both sides of this discussion. And, at this point, we might even summarize the two viewpoints. However, we don't actually need to. We asked for, and got, a bunch of reader comments on the speech (and the response), and this same divide was present in those e-mails. So, we now share some of those comments, as promised, starting with several about Trump, and then moving on to several about the Democrats:
S.A.K. in Karnataka, India, writes: Couple of points here. First, I don't recall reading this in your write-up, but the way senators, representatives and Donald Trump spoke to and shook hands with only their side of the aisle while hardly, if ever, acknowledging the other side so starkly illustrates how deeply divided your country has become. Having watched these things since Barack Obama's second term, Tuesday was a record new low in terms of partisanship. Of course, the complete absence of standing ovations from the Democrats went on to further illustrate those divisions.
Second, the part where you called out families like Laken Riley's was on point. That is exactly what I wondered as I sat watching the camera pan to her and other families in the visitor's gallery. If the message had a been a unifying one, then by all means, such props would be nice. Also, it goes without saying that some of those families have suffered irreparable losses and should have our sympathies. But to be used as means to further divisions in society and develop an "us versus them" narrative is the lowest of lows. Apparently, being famous and on TV, along with earning brownie points with Trump, is far more important than basic decency for those folks.
E.F. in Baltimore, MD, writes: I'm sure we would all feel so much better if Laken Riley had been murdered by a Real American, like most murder victims in America are.
A.B. in Wendell, NC, writes: I had to turn it off, I could take no more, and I would have thrown a rock through my TV screen had I not turned it off when Trump started loving on cops, and suggesting an automatic death penalty for cop killers.
As you already know, I am a Criminal Justice Technology major, and that means I am preparing for a role in law enforcement support. And it occurs to me that Trump not only did he not suggest that the killer of Brian Sicknick on 1/6 should be put to death... HE PARDONED THE SOB!!!
Why can't a single reporter ask him to square that up? How he could pardon the killer of Brian Sicknick, and at the same time suggest all cop killers get an immediate death penalty?
I sat through all the abuse heaped at trans Americans like myself, often screaming at the TV... but I endured it. THIS WAS THE PART I COULD NOT ENDURE!!!
R.E. in Birmingham, AL, writes: I was pretty depressed when I went to bed after watching the speech, but it got worse the next morning as I read The New York Times. The paper ran one of the inevitable "regular people respond" stories, and one lady said that she was most impressed by Trump's "empathy." Empathy! He literally said "no one is treated worse online than me" while in the process of recognizing a young lady who had been treated badly online! I see a man utterly devoid of empathy, and I see no hope that the NYT interviewee and I will ever bridge the chasm between our perceived realities. The pledge of allegiance says we are "one nation," but I don't think that's true anymore.
C.L. in Boulder, CO, writes: Using your categories, here are some of my impressions:
Large Amounts of Talk: (1) How many times did Trump mention the DEBT and how the money saved or collected by Trump actions would help to lower the debt? Yeah, let's see how that goes; (2) Has there ever been such a negative presidential address to Congress? One that talked as much about MURDER, RAPE and VIOLENCE? Most of the guests or their family members seemed to be victims of horrific actions. Where was the uplift and optimism?; (3) What's with turning the speech into a Make-a-Wish Foundation event? What does appointing a young boy a Secret Service agent or announcing that a high school senior got into West Point have to do with the status of the nation? I'm happy for them, but geez.
Missing: Where was talk of Canada becoming the 51st state? Personally, in addition to my Ukraine flag pin, I'm starting to wear my 51 (for 51st state) pin with the 51 over an outline of the District of Columbia. D.C. statehood should be the Democrats' Project 2029.
M.F.H. in Forest Park, IL, writes: We couldn't bring ourselves to watch the "speech," but chose something else that we think pretty well summed up the state of union (acknowledging it was, in fact, a joint address to Congress). This, plus EV's summary of the rambling and ranting, is all that we need to stay informed.
(V) & (Z) respond: As chance would have it, that was the exact movie (Z) had on while doing the write-up.
C.S. in Philadelphia, PA, writes: Back in the summer, the question of ties came up. The last few years, I've noticed the overwhelming majority of Republicans wear solid red for these events and Democrats solid blue. Trump came up in a maroonish/purplish tie. In normal times, I would think that would mean bipartisan, with a lean towards the right. But on Tuesday, my immediate thought was... royalty.
J.L. in Los Angeles, CA, writes: One of my Trumpy friends had this to say: "Yeah, Trump lied. All politicians lie. But the Democrats just embarrassed themselves, and I was very frustrated seeing neither side trying to work with the other."
Interestingly, I found myself in agreement with him. And despite the fact that "all politicians lie" diminishes the sheer magnitude of Trump's dishonesty, it was nice to know that at least my friend was now actively acknowledging that this president is truth-challenged. That said, as a Democrat, I found my party's behavior embarrassing, as well. A decade and a half ago, Joe Wilson stunned the chamber (and America) when he shouted "You lie!" at Barack Obama during a speech in the House Chamber. Now, Democrats like Al Green are normalizing what should have remained the shocking exception to what must be an expected level of decorum from both sides of the aisle. Behavior like this does nothing to bring either side even a hair closer to working together, and I fear that this particular genie ain't gettin' back inside the bottle anytime soon. That saddens me.
S.M. in Pepperell, MA, writes: Decorum be damned. All 213 House Democrats and all 47 Senate Democrats should have joined Al Green and given Trump an earful and then walked out of the chamber. It would not have mattered if no individual member would have been heard. The spectacle itself would have spoken to the moment. The TV cameras for the next hour and a half would have highlighted Trump speaking to a half empty room. Trump would have hated that look and we might have seen him go off-script in anger and pettiness. These things would have been a bigger story than any red meat Trump was throwing to his base. Once again, the Democratic members of this Congress are unable to do what is required to meet this moment in history. They definitely do not understand how to stand up to a bully, even when they knew in advance that Trump was going to spend the entire speech punching down at them.
V.L. in Honolulu, HI, writes: I'm not too sure what the Democratic strategy was with the paddles, but they should have done things differently. To follow Al Green's lead, they could have heckled the heck out of Trump's speech. They could have staged it so that various cadres representing minority groups would interrupt his speech, and be removed by Mike Johnson until there would be no one left but old white men in the room. That could have been a better point to make than, "This is not normal."
S.G. in Chicago, IL, writes: I don't know which was harder to swallow: the firehose of lies or the pathetic non-response of the Democrats. Does Hakeem Jeffries seriously think that waving some stupid little paddles is going to combat the trashing of our institutions and democracy?
Pathetic. If there was a viable third party, I'd be voting for them after last night. I don't know who I despise more: Trump or the Democrats. When are they going to wake up to the fact that this is NOT business as usual?
M.B. in Ward, CO, writes: Al Green is a genius. Rarely has one individual called down upon themselves the approbation of such a large and concentrated collection of sackless losers and feckless nutjobs in such a simple and effective and public a manner. Well done, Rep. Green! I am reminded of the late, great Franklin D. Roosevelt, who said in a speech in 1936: "They are unanimous in their hate for me, and I welcome their hatred."
K.E. in Enumclaw, WA, writes: Sen. Elissa Slotkin's (D-MI) remarks had some good barbs to be sure. Particularly the one about Elon's 20-year-olds going through our personal information.
But no one had any bandwidth left after watching Trump's 1:40 to really process anything... save for remarks that would evoke a visceral reaction. She should have realized this. Her giving us her boring bio, and using "smart people" idioms like she did, likely came across to Trump voters as being talked down to. (No one cares one whit about any of her background, what her parents did for a living, etc).
Democrats are fighting a bare-knuckle match but they seem to have forgotten to take off their gloves. They need to find someone that's going to talk some sh** to all the nonsense spewing out of the Trumposhpere, and make him look like the idiot he is.
J.B. in Seattle, WA, writes: You might want to mention the State of the People livestream that happened during the Trump speech. It featured a steady stream of mostly Black politicians, civic leaders, activists, and intellectuals from across the U.S. and included in-the-lobby interviews with the representatives who had walked out of the speech.
A quick count suggests 100,000 views on the various sites that were hosting it. That doesn't include the number from the State of the People site itself.
Fascinating stuff.
L.R.H. in Oakland, CA, writes: Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) skipped Trump's address and instead held a town hall where he answered questions and spoke with constituents. This report on Bluesky is excellent (alas, only available if you're logged in to Bluesky).
Every Democratic Senator and Representative should do this.
Thanks to everyone who wrote in! (Z)