Posted on 01/08/2019 7:55:48 PM PST by Pinkbell
I hoped for a long time for him to do this address, but I thought, while okay, it could have been better in terms of detail. I was hoping for something longer and infused with stats. I'm afraid what we heard was general comments usually made. I would have had border patrol there if I could have & local sheriffs - have a couple step forward & give their experience at the border & the impact a wall has had in the places where it is and would have.
I guess the format I'd have used is:
~Number of illegal entries per month and year (complete with some video from border patrol of those entries)
~Number of criminals who cross illegally per year
~Amount of drugs brought in per year
~Trafficking statistics
~Discuss the Flores settlement and how that leads to Catch and Release and an increase in family units crossing
~Discuss the human smuggling that occurs, particularly of families, due to Flores
~The overflowing facilities
~The annual crime regarding drugs, number of Americans raped, assaulted, and killed
~The annual cost of illegal immigration
~The dangers of sanctuary cities
~The magnets & loopholes that must be closed - need a wall, E-Verify, Biometric Visa, to end birthright citizenship (being taken advantage of by people as far away as Russia & China), and end sanctuary cities and welfare to those coming illegally
~Reiterate that the wall works in areas that it is tried with statistics & that it isn't immoral or Chuck & Nancy wouldn't have supported the Secure Fence Act years ago, that wealthy have walls around their homes because they work.
~Chuck and Nancy know it is a crisis because it was going on under Obama & they were giving him money. They have had decades to deal with the situation, but they have failed and have no plan except status quo. They don't even think it is a problem and are only offering some form of security because Trump is raising the issue. Why say they support enhancing border security at all via different means than a wall if there is no problem to fix in the first place? The border patrol agree that drones & technology can't replace a physical barrier - that's why they have physical barriers around wealthy homes of prominent celebrities and politicians. If it's immoral to keep people out with an visible wall, then why would an "invisible" wall be moral? Should current, existing wall be torn down as immoral? Why aren't they protesting it?
I just feel that this speech was general & didn't get into the detail that people don't know. I feel it won't move the needle in terms of the beliefs people are already have.
Thankfully, Chuck and Nancy's speech was worse than even I could have anticipated, and they did nothing to help their own cause. They said there was no crisis while admitting that they needed to do something but offered vague generalities and the status quo.
Trump's next chance is seemingly the State of The Union. I don't know if the shutdown will still be ongoing, but he needs to convey all of this to the people in more detail.
That said, he could do something even sooner. If I were his staff, this is his signature issue, I'd have him down there visiting all the border towns, meeting with patrol and sheriffs and speaking at every place. I'd pound the issue so the media has to show it.
When I heard it was only going to be 8 minutes, my heart just sank. This is too complex an issue for 8 minutes. I would taken longer. I had such high hopes for this speech as I wanted him to do it for a long time.
The ABC Twitter account is already promoting the Chuck and Nancy spiel like it like it was the Gettysburg Address, but their speech, in reality, did not help their cause at all but rather elevated Trump’s speech. Imagine if Trump had gone into detail - he’d completely have washed them away.
“The guy is such a showman it is shocking that he settled for an eighth grade speech on the border.”
He wasn’t speaking to his base. He spoke to the many who don’t pay attention or who listen to MSM. The contrast was effective. I think he’s brilliant.
President Trump looked serious and presidential. I like that he kept it short and I liked he stayed focused. This was not the place for a Trump Rally.
Moderates will like this speech
The ‘fact checkers’ are working overtime trying to find something
The democrats bombed, it was awful, they would have been better NOT giving that response. It was lame, vague, and angry. Chucky looked like he was going to kill somebody. Nancy looked scared. Not the message they wanted to give to the American public.
I thought the speech came across as awkward and mechanical.
He did bring up some good points, though, and he kept it brief.
A lot of the things they usually castigate him for, just weren’t there.
I think that what with his relationship with the press lately, like after that briefing, he’s trying this new tactic. to throw them.
And it appears that it’s working.
I turned it off when he was done.
I was not interested in Schumer’s or Pelosi’s vapid speech not in some liberal talking head analyze his speech for me as if I were too stupid to get the points he was trying to make.
Me too.
He just laid out the things he and we all knew about before the shutdown.
No solution offered, other than, it’s the democrats’ fault.
He needs to declare a national emergency and then turn over the wall construction over to the military, with military funding.
Then, propose that the border wall is a defense issue, and that the military will control the borders going forward. Borders are about defense of the country, and it’s not about politics or personal agendas or party agendas.
And after all the long-winded, self-important Democrat addresses we’ve been through, the succinct shortness of this speech was brilliant.
I think the license to broadcast should be stripped from the treasonous lame stream media and the talking heads should be tried for sedition.
I watched the whole speech and my only complaint is that he left off 'God Bless America' at the end.
He took it to the democrats without heat and remarkable restraint. If I were President I would be seriously mad about the antics of the Dems and the rinos.
He does not read from a teleprompter very well. I like him better when he is ad libbing and off the cuff. As another commenter said, it was an eighth grade level type speech.
You really don't understand politics nor speech making at all!
I was looking for something around a half hour. I think that would be doable. I felt there were too many stats missing that the people need to know to change their opinions out in middle America if their opinions are malleable (and some people are).
I think he was trying to start out light. The next speech will be the one you like.
SPOT ON and then some! BRAVA!
Short and sweet and to the point.If you start showing a bunch of statistics then people will tune out.
I listened to the speech on the radio. Thought it was excellent. Serious. Slow. Almost a sadness. Comprehensive.
I thought it was excellent.
On the other hand, Pelosi and Chuck were weak and whining.
Boy, those two REALLY look like the miserable retarded douchebags they are, don’t they...
Two halves of the same jackassh*le...
Exactly. I think he hit a homerun. Short and simple enough for normal people to understand.
This was a speech for EVERYONE; EVERYONE...NOT JUST HIS BASE...but also for those who hate him, those who don't pay much to any attention, and those who believe that he is 1) insane 2)lies 3)were just panting for him to look like an idiot and say something they could prove wrong. The speech did not provide any of the things the above groups yearned for.
And it really doesn't matter one teensy bit that YOU stupidly diodn't like it!
We haven’t yet got to the point where a Presidential Address includes him introducing videos. But it’s probably coming.
Everything he says they’re just going to call him a liar anyway. They were doing it before he made the speech even.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.