Quick Analysis Of Trump's Speech To Congress

You can tell how low the bar is for Donald Trump by the positive reaction to what was really basically a sober campaign speech he gave last night. Yes, by Trump standards it was a tour-de-force. He managed to stay on script and avoid ad-libbing and wandering off topic. He looked and acted Presidential, doing all the obligatory things a President is supposed to do in a speech like this, capped off by his highlighting the appearance of the wife of the Navy Seal who was killed in the Yemen raid. But the speech just rehashed his litany of campaign promises, with no details on how that will be accomplished or funded.

At least he finally did acknowledge the attacks on Jewish cemeteries and the hate crime in Kansas, but, to be honest, that just seemed like an obligatory nod before he got into the heart of his campaign speech. While his tone was much more upbeat, his vision of America was still quite dystopian. He talked about "leaving our own borders wide open, for anyone to cross -- and for drugs to pour in at a now unprecedented rate", "gang members, drug dealers and criminals that threaten our communities and prey on our citizens", a "beachhead of terrorism...inside America", and a "strategy to dismantle the criminal cartels that have spread across our Nation". If, by the latter, he meant the oligopolies that dominate our economy, I might actually agree with him but that was not who he was talking about. His description of the economy was just as grim (and filled with lies) and "overseas, we have inherited a series of tragic foreign policy disasters."

The speech was also filled with inherent contradictions. In one breath, he talked about curtailing "current system of lower-skilled immigration, and instead adopting a merit-based system", claiming that it will lift workers' wages. But a merit based system would bring in more skilled workers, driving Americans out of higher paying jobs. He once again proposed a $1 trillion infrastructure plan, saying that we could have rebuilt our country two times over with all the money we spent fighting wars in the Mideast. Minutes later, he proposed abandoning the military sequester and called for "one of the largest increases in national defense spending in American history." He promised "to invest in women's health" but called for the repeal of the ACA only seconds earlier. Trump talked of "American leadership based on vital security interests that we share with our allies across the globe", but seconds later said, "America respects the right of all nations to chart their own path.  My job is not to represent the world.  My job is to represent the United States of America."

And those are just the internal contradictions in the speech. His praise for the Navy Seal was after blaming his great generals for having "lost" the soldier earlier in the day. His promise in the speech "promote clean air and clear water" comes after repealing the rule that bars mines from dumping waste in our streams and rivers and reinterprets a portion of the Clean Water Rule so that many fewer waterways will be covered by the Clean Water Act.

These addresses to Congress are always a litany of items a President wants or promises to do. This speech was no different in that regard. I won't go through Trump's whole raft of promises, that would be repeating most of his speech. But other Presidents have usually grounded those promises in some kind of reality, highlighting the trade-offs that would need to be made and the priorities that President would like to see the Congress address. This speech had none of that. It promised corporate and middle class tax cuts, repealing the ACA which would also be a massive tax cut, the largest military buildup in American history, and a trillion dollar infrastructure program. There was not one mention of exactly how any of this would be paid for.

Worse for the GOP in Congress, which is in increasing disarray, Trump laid out no priorities for what he wanted to get done. Nor did he provide any specifics on how that must be accomplished. As I have written, for the Republican GOP, the real tax cuts come from repealing the ACA. With those cuts in the bank, they can then go about tax reform that their corporate overlords really want. Trump provided nothing in this speech that will help resolve the conflicts within the GOP to actually get this done.

Matt Yglesias had an interesting take on the speech which I think is largely correct. This was just another performance for Trump, an hour-long version of the Apprentice. As he so aptly puts it, "He [Trump] doesn’t want to be president, he just wants to play one on TV." And that's what this was. His tone may have been less crass and mean, but, by and large, the message was the same as his campaign. His supporters may love it and some may be temporarily persuaded but being President is more than just giving campaign speeches. It actually requires hard work, understanding policy details, and making tough decisions. Trump has shown no inclination for any of that. And I doubt he ever will.

One note about the Democratic response. It was a decent and relatively forceful response from former Kentucky governor Steve Beshear. In reality, avoiding a catastrophe like Bobby Jindal and Marco Rubio is about the best you can hope for and Beshear clearly did much better than that. And perhaps he did appeal to some white working class voters that the Democrats lost in the last election. But, when the energized base of your party is primarily under 40 and diverse, I'm not sure that a white guy from a deep red state who is older than Trump and has no future in Democratic politics is the face the Democratic party wants to put forward. Steve Schmidt noted this on MSNBC and asked the obvious question of why it wasn't Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillenbrand, Julian Castro or someone of that ilk who at least represented the future or the party. Tom Perez better get to work quickly.