Making voting easy and accessible for all citizebs is the cornerstone of a democracy.
4
Stacey Abrams's speech was a welcome relief in calm but heartfelt cadences from the jagged highs and lows of Trump's SOU where he would praise a guest like the little girl fighting cancer and then descend into abortion lies by pretending late term abortions are not rare grim necessities when the life of a woman is at risk or a fetus isn't viable.
This kind of emotional manipulation with Trump's boomerang between normal speech and bigoted lies (e.g., immigrant crime in El Paso) was exhausting. Ms. Abrams returned us to reality with her own life stories, GOP voter suppression, and the need for healthcare and effective government.
Black and white, male and female, old and young, dark fantasies and American promise were contrasted through the speakers, the colors worn, Pelosi in white over one shoulder and Pence in black over another, and the up and down waves of older white men in dark suits who rose and fell to Trump's words.
Oddly enough Stacey Abrams came across as an authentic woman of the people--both representative and attuned to the rich beautiful complexity of America--while Trump retained his character as a populist demagogue whose words will be diminished by subsequent tweets and by dubious contradictory actions that bely his speech and shadow his presidency.
15
Ms. Abrams comes out of one of the most corrupt political machines in the nation.
(If you have any doubts, refer to the nearby NYT article, and consider her Soros-funded "non-profit" organizations, one that she had the gall to advertise last night.)
After many "soft" years of Georgia state office, with re-election without opposition, it is unlikely she can withstand much more scrutiny.
It is unfortunate that Ms. Abrams is the best Democrats have to offer.
1
I missed this speech last night but reading about it, I can see it was a clear contrast to the bigotry and hate spewed by our racist President and cheered on by his monochromatic party.
The most interesting thing about last night speech was the contrast between two parties. The Democrats look like America. The Republicans look like the Jim Crow speech.
Trump’s speech revealed truly what the GOP a party of bigoted racist Evangelicals, who live in desperate fear of people of color and who have no interest in letting them have a say in our government.
4
She had me at "Happy Lunar New Year."
3
Ms. Abrams' speech was only OK. Strong in inspirational appeal, weak in refutation of Trump's lies and misdirections. A little time should have been taken to refute some of Trump's more egregious lies, misleading statements, and twisted self-aggrandizement. I say this because as things stood at the end of the evening, he was granted 80 or so uninterrupted minutes to spew his lies and bile. Some time should have been taken in the Dem response to hold him accountable for his false assertions and blatant dishonesty. The sweet pastel oratory of Ms. Abrams was not enough to paint over and mute Trump's day-glo pleonasm.
2
I applaud Ms. Abrams' speech -- it was clear and no-nonsense. Had she picked apart Trump's speech (or just Trump in general), she'd turn off a good number of independents and perhaps even some worried Republicans. Hers was a speech to America to lay out what needs to be done, not a rebuke against Trump. She delivered it well, with warmth and authority. I look forward to seeing more of Ms. Abrams in the coming years.
2
Unlike Stacy Abrahams, I do want Trump to fail, because Trump's definition of success is to make We the People into his private servants. The president of the USA is supposed to be our public servant sworn to uphold the Constitution and faithfully execute the laws of the land. But Trump is unable and unwilling to do his job. Instead he attacks the Constitution as he blatantly us the Oval Office for his private gain. That makes every thing Trump does corrupt by definition.
Trump is attacking the Constitution and our Republic and I am fighting to make sure he fails.
4
Why does the media not acknowledge the suspicious circumstances that underlie Kemp's supposed victory? The first line of this piece should read: "Stacey Abrams, who APPEARS TO HAVE narrowly lost her race in November to be Georgia’s governor..."
1
It was a well-delivered boilerplate that seemed to have been written by the American Federation of Teachers.
Ms. Abrams is a very attractive candidate for liberals,
but she seemed to feel that she was entitled to victory last November. She should have used her intellect and political savvy to have run for a lesser state office before running for governor. She should eschew a race against Senator Perdue, who does no have the political liabilities of her most recent opponent.
Abrams way of saying, "I lost. It ain't right!" Why the Democrats would pick her to give the Democratic response to the State of the Union Address is a mystery. I guess they figured that picking a Kennedy because he was a Kennedy the last time around didn't have the desired effect so this time they picked an angry Black woman who lost her race and thought they might give that a go. The way the Democratic women were all dressed in white was like watching something straight out of "The Handmaidens's Tale"--what an adolescent stunt! Trump is bad, no doubt, but the Democrats aren't seeming all that much better, at this point. Clown cars to the left of us, clown cars to the right...and our country is stuck in middle of the two.
I fully agree with what Abrams and Sanders are saying, yet wonder why they chose someone to rebut Trump who lost a statewide contest, and another who speaks like a broken record, rather than one or (preferably) more of the incredible dynamic women who won a seat in Congress. Why not have one of the women in the white dresses stand up and show why the Dems stand out this time around??
2
Ms Stolberg’s article should be on the opinion page
Do you mean watch Ga. turn into a state run by Democrats,like CA. filthy ,with homelessness or Chicago ,with uncontrolled murder rates of crime and drugs. Preaching the Harris mantra Ga could be CA.in less than a few years. and the Billionaire socialist Democrats outnumber Republicans by tens of multitiudes ,so Abrams is about 100% propaganda zero [percentage truth and further indications of a proven failed policy.
1
Thank you, Ms. Abrams! I've watched the video I found on NYT 4 times. I hope that will be some sort of indication of just how inspirational I found your speech content and speaking style to be.
Thank you for the hope you bring.
3
I thought what Stacey Abrams showed was a genuineness that is sorely lacking by representatives of both parties and a true working class/middle class vibe that this 56-year-old white male Democrat could relate to.
There was also an underlying sense of optimism that has been so absent during the Age of Trump.
I kept thinking how her loss in November was an even bigger loss for the citizens of Georgia. Hopefully, their loss will be the Senate's gain.
4
The democrats are playing the raise card again - one of the "positions" that they are very successful at. One would think they could have found a more qualified spokesperson to rebut Trump than a former State of Georgia legislator. Perhaps E. Warren could have done the rebuttal.
@shopp
The race card. Hmmm let's think about what that might have gotten you through history.
You might have been enslaved, forbidden to learn to read or write, beaten up for walking on the same sidewalk as a white person or eating at the same lunch counter, hung, more likely to be arrested, convicted for longer sentences, or killed by police while being unarmed, less likely to be hired, more likely to be fired,..
The race card was invented by white "conservatives" when they decided to divide the country by race hundreds of years ago, and never stopped.
When you say "race card," you are using the race card. Stop.
3
@sh
typo correction: raise = race
I would have liked less biography and more substance. Check out Bernie's speech if you want to see a more detailed response.
3
While the NYT has fact-checked Trump’s speech, it has not done the same for Abrams' rebuttal. She said, “ … this administration chooses to cage children …”
A fact-checker would have written that the Administration does not cage children.
According to a 6/15/18 POLITIFACT article titled "Tweeted photo inaccurately indicates boy 'caged' by federal government”, a reporter tweeted a photo of a toddler who had wandered into a cage at a protest rally. He wrote "This is what happens when a government believes people are ‘illegal.’ Kids in cages.”
The public wrongly assumed that the photo was actually of a toddler in custody. It became an example of “fake news”. Stacey Abrams perpetuated this myth in her speech, last night, by stating that the Administration cages children. It does not.
1
@ann
I saw video of Congress people visiting those detained at the border and there were children in jail cells. A jail cell is essentially a cage.
1
Ms. Abrams is a class act, plain and simple. She makes me proud to be a progressive liberal and gives me hope for the future. I’m sure Republicans are working overtime trying to find dirt on her and AO-C, but after they hitched their wagon to a liar, cheater, divider, swindler, etc., etc., etc., anything they find will fall on deaf ears and we will look the other way!
3
Why was there not more light focused on Ms. Abrams? She looked as if the Democrats had just thrown up a couple lights and
said go for it. She could have looked so much better.
Yawn. Snoozefest. I think it is clear that times have a-changed, and voters today want to see blood (metaphorically, of course). Missed opportunity.
Big mistake to let Abrams give the Dem response. Dull. She made Trump seem like a spellbinding orator!
@marrtyy
Did you even bother to listen to anything she said?
1
Liberals do not even have the good sense to feel embarrassed about the deficiencies of their constituents. After all...how difficult is it to find your assigned polling place, register to vote--or to provide a valid ID? Meanwhile, these same folks can register their cars, fly on planes, purchase alcohol, or firearms. Somehow voter registration is a bridge too far. What would Ms. Abrams say is the overriding deficit that prevents Blacks from voting as easily as Whites do?
Which brings me to this point: if you're too dumb to figure how and where to vote, can't provide a valid ID or even figure out how to get yourself to the poll, I'm not sure you constitute the kind of informed voter the Framers had in mind when they designed our representative democracy.
And as far as our African American voters are concerned--they should be angry not at state election boards, or legislators--they should be roiled at an education system that doesn't teach future citizens the importance of voting--or how to make it happen.
@Jesse The Conservative Repeat after me, Jesse: "Let's blame the victim!"
Ms. Abrams was also appealing to white working-class voters, but that's not something that "fits" in national media's view of her or what the party is "signaling".
It is sentences like this one -- "Just two years ago, the party selected Steve Beshear, the former Kentucky governor, to deliver the response to Mr. Trump’s first address to a joint session of Congress, in a clear bid to appeal to the white working-class voters who had helped elect the president." -- which give away the writer's preconceived ideas.
Democrats won the House on many of the very same themes that Abrams' touched on. These ideas benefit working-class Americans of all "colors". If only the media would acknowledge so.
2
'A rising political star from Georgia'.
I liked her speech. Hope we see more from her.
Would have preferred a speech form an elected member of Congress but maybe 'bench strength' is a problem for Democrats?
1
@JK
If you think "bench strength" is a problem for Democrats, you must have overlooked the results of the midterm elections -- Better take another look at the House of Representatives.
It’s clear that Ms. Abrams speech was written before the SOTU address and while a fine and moving speech, except for a couple of lines, it didn’t do the job.
I recognize that writing a speech at the last minute is stressful and anyone thrust into the spotlight Abrams was in last night would want the comfort of preparedness. But there were so many missed opportunities.
Donald Trump as a sudden champion of women? Nuclear war with North Korea but for Donald Trump? A peace summit in Vietnam, a place Donald Trump has been avoiding for 40 years.
El Paso’s past as a crime-ridden city?
The list is too long to include here but it was a litany of lie upon prevarication upon bafflegab.
That said, let us ask ourselves this question. In what other ‘democratic’ country in the world is the right to vote dependent upon politicians. It is long past time that professional, independent commissions or bodies be given the responsibility. I’m looking at you Governor Brian Kemp of Georgia and at you Mitch McConnell for equating the right to vote with a ‘power grab’.
2
Excellent speech! I’m not sure why race always has to creep into the issue of voting rights; when I sent in my registration to vote here in Colorado, it was rejected by my local election board because the “signatures didn’t match” so I voted in person - glad I had time to do so, many working people don’t. I didn’t realize my (Republican) election officials were also handwriting experts as well. The fact is they go off your signature when you register for a driver’s license; you sign your name on a dinky little contrapation with a bulky stylus so naturally your signatures don’t match. That’s part of the plan.
There are a litany annoying laws big and small designed to make it harder to vote. Time to make Election Day a national holiday.
1
Race has to “creep into” discussions of voting rights because voter suppression in this country has historically been so often targeted at people of color, disproportionately.
1
Stacey Abrams was more presidential than the President.
5
I heard Abrams' and Sanders' responses (not Harris'). Abrams had good things to say, and is an impressive person with an inspiring background. But her speech seemed weak and contrived, and didn't touch all the bases it should have.
I thought Sanders' response was superb. Not so much as oratory but as a spot-on and articulate summary of the most important things that are wrong with the country, what needs to be done to fix them, and how to come together to do so.
I'm not 'loyal' to any party or candidate, but to me, looking over the current field of contenders, Sanders leaps out as the leader we need.
2
So disappointed in Abrams response to the SOTU. It sounded more like a campaign speech than the Democratic response. Too "pleasant" and too much smiling. And too conciliatory. Abrams does not want to see Trump fail? This country has endured two years of Trump seeking to destroy this nation on a daily basis. Has that all been forgotten? Why does Trump get a pass? This is one of the reasons Democrats lose. We are simply "too nice." We need bolder, stronger, tougher voices who aren't afraid to call out Trump (and the GOP). Americans respect strong leaders who tell it like it is.
6
Last night, I viewed both Trump's speech and Stacey Abrams response. I have to admit that I was surprised at the sometimes conciliatory tone of Trump's speech. (Although from my point of view he has disrespectfully and manipulatively acted out and lied so many times during the last two years that I find it hard to trust or believe a word he says.) I found Ms. Abrams speech compelling, forthright but a bit off point. This morning, I found myself concerned about four important issues: the survival of public education, the imperative need to address climate change, the preservation of affordable health care for all American Citizens and Trump's disturbing relationship with Putin/Russia and North Korea. None of these issues were adequately addressed in either speech.
6
@Leslie374
In 7 minutes? Why aren’t you troubled by the 7 minutes?
1
Having just read Carol Anderson’s book on minority voter suppression efforts undertaken by Republicans over the past few years, “One Person, No Vote: How Voter Suppression Is Destroying Our Democracy,” I am convinced that it contributed to Hillary Clinton’s surprise defeat in the 2016 presidential election and to several eye opening outcomes in the recent 2018 congressional midterm elections, including the GOP gubernatorial and U.S. senatorial victories in Florida and the surprise drubbing suffered by incumbent Indiana U.S. Democratic Senator Joe Donnelly, among other surprising results. The Democratic Party must invest serious money, time, and personnel to the issue of minority voter suppression if Democrats want to recapture the White House and the U.S. Senate, and regain parity with the GOP in the states at the state government level.
2
The idea that it matters that she was the first Black Women to issue a response to the State of the Union is a nice sound bite.
The reality is it would be better if she was known as the last person to issue a response to the State of the Union.
She seems like a sincere, wonderful person, who would be a terrific representative or even President at some point. It had zero impact on countering the President State of the Union.
While the State of the Union speech was terrible, it did significant damage to democrats with Independent voters. The response did nothing to change that.
1
The Times bias against Bernie Sanders continues. Harris' response is at length and in detail. Sanders' got short shrift and it was made to sound as though Harris is the leader on progressive policies. In fact she is a recent convert and we've already learned that she's quite willing to settle for incrementalism.
7
@ELK Ugh! Bernie . Is . Not . Getting . Elected . President . Ever ! Give it a rest. It’s time for Bern-outs to come to reality and help us elect a winner. Your option will only lead to a Trump 2020 Victory.
@ELK
Really???-- Already starting with that same old Sanders "We-was-robbed" routine.
Didn't you learn from last time around a house divided doesn't stand.
Can we really stand four more years of Donald Trump?
The Democrats missed another opportunity. Abrams speech was filled with a long description of her background and her complaint (probably justified to some extent) against losing the election for Governor. However, the speech was very short on ideas, specifics, or any reply to Trump's speech. A wasted opportunity.
4
I have a simple message:
I not only had tears “in my eyes” as Stacy Abrams spoke, the longer she spoke, they were streaming down my face.
I’ll be 74 next month. And I kept thinking: God, I wish she were president!
I’m a leftist from the 60’s. I love this woman!
2
Odd speech.
She lacks pizzazz.
But glad to implement most of what she suggested.
2
I thought it was a lovely and thoughtful speech. Does anyone know if she wrote it herself, or had a speech writer? The anecdote about her father was lovely. I think Stacey Abrams would make a senator to do Georgia proud!
3
@PNK
I read that she wrote it herself. I believe it!
1
Stacey Abrams
No one knows how to irk the Republicans better than Nancy Pelosi. Given that her first choice for rebutee, Al Sharpton, wasn't available then - judging by some of the comments here - Ms Abrams succeeded handsomely.
2
We must not forget that when Stacy Abrams was running for the governor's job, she made a conscious decision to rely on her base - black voters for sure but also those, irrespective of color, who supported liberal values.
Many thought that she should tone down her message to appeal to the white working class. She refused.
There is a larger message here for Dems. Do not try to tone down your message to attract the white working class.
They are happy to get govt handouts, provided the blacks do not get them.
Unless the white working class can see common ground with working class of all colors, they should be abandoned to their fate - namely, looking for table scraps from the rich white elite.
3
I congratulate Stacey Abrams for an excellent response well delivered. I wish her every success as she works in Georgia to make it more civilized. I urge every Good Person in Georgia -- and I know that there are many -- to give her the help that she and others need to make certain as soon as possible that every citizen has an equal right to vote. NOW IS THE TIME; YOU CAN NO LONGER SAY THAT I DO NOT LIKE WHAT IS GOING ON BUT I CANNOT CHANGE IT.
YOU CAN.
4
Brava, Ms. Abrams. Brava. You are the perfect antidote for Trump.
5
I don't understand the Democrats infatuation with this woman, she ran a campaign with the momentum of all of the anti-trump momentum in the world in Georgia.......lost.......she's p a student debt deadbeat he doesn't pay her bills to the federal government, seriously, I don't get it
7
Not to mention the sniff of impropriety around her signing up new voters - which came out from her last opponent. Might just be smoke but you know the saying.
She can be as crass as Trump so maybe that’s the allure.
It was suppose to be a response to the SOU speech instead it was a response to her lost campaign. We lost a chance of a rebuttal here.
10
Abrams gave an excellent, well-delivered speech. We’d be a lot better off if that had been the Presidential address, and Trump was still just some dingbat, iffy businessman screaming on Newsmax.
1
Ms. Abrams gave a very good speech, and I learned much of her background; but this was not a rebuttal nor a response speech to #45's SOTU. In that sense, it was disappointing.
Hers was a separate speech, only peripherally relating to the SOTU, though it was a positive Democratic vision she presented. The SOTU speech, on the other hand, was the expected grandstanding, scapegoating, and out-and-out lying that is the warp and woof of #45's being, as well as tenure in office. Dragging so many victims of tragedy to be examples of his policies and prescriptions, his faux-patriotism, I found to be absolutely disgusting and disgraceful, as is the person presenting such. But the real loser here was the art of rhetoric, a totally lost art in the USA.
4
In Georgia and Florida, African-Americans were running in opposition to Republicans whose predecessors were both Republicans. Aside from the obvious conflict of interest and corruption in the Georgia Gubernatorial election, one thing proved to be quite clear in both states.
In Rick DeSantis in Florida and Brian Kemp in Georgia, the voters elected candidates whom are both quite openly racist in their attitudes. Clearly, the South still has a loooong way to go.
1
@Deus She wanted to make Georgia a sanctuary state for illegal immigrants. I won't vote for that and it doesn't matter what party or race of the candidate who advicates it. Nope.
3
This speech seemed delivered from a time capsule during an earlier century. Based on election disappointment, this meandering family history tale was essentially a campaign speech filled with vague clichés and an agenda from a bygone era.
This sour grapes episode with voter bias as a reason for defeat is a house built on sand. Over 50,000 fraudulent votes were cast in Texas alone by unlawful aliens in 2016. Instead of hollow voter suppression agendas, can the
Democrats suppress their intentional racial division agenda?
Please, Enough of the bias, and the puppet-like white clad ladies reacting on cue via hand gestures from the denture challenged Speaker.
15
@Grant Heh. The president actually ran on restoring a bygone era, coal and arms race and all, and his fans complain that Democrats aren't forward looking enough. Oh, and to make fun of Pelosi for looking old in those moments we could see her over Trump's ridiculous combover and triple chin.
Let me give a response with an actual conservative principle: voting and equality are ideals embedded by our forefathers in our nation. Made up fake stories about 50,000 votes cast by aliens in Texas (yep, nobody ever said that happened, not even the TX AG) is not.
1
I am really sorry to write that if Ms Abrams is the best orator that the Dems have to offer, we are not close to changing power in Washington. I have nothing against her, I actually think that she is a very fine person, but her address was flat, boring, staged and utterly non inspiring. I know that there is much more oratory skills in the democrats ranks. If you do not use these skills, you will lose once more.
15
@Marie-Odile Marceau
Are you actually going to judge the contents of a person's character and integrity by just one speech?
No offense -- But it appears you have a bit more research to do.
1
For those who missed it, Abrams' speech had three steps-
1) I, me, myself.
2) We have been wronged.
3) GOTO Step 1.
Oh, and in case you haven't seen her since November- No, it doesn't look like she has quit her rigorous diet of nine Big Macs and two entire pizzas per day.
8
To Nate and others who Recommend his comment: body-shaming women is the last refuge of misogynists and 12-year-olds who weren’t raised right. Grow up and get a real argument.
It’s a masterstroke to have a public figure defeated in an election bid to deliver the SOTU response. Most politicians in this thankless task just come away totally diminished. But a free agent clearly doesn’t have to work within those expectations.
2
Ms. Abram’s life and personal journey is extraordinary given the hurdles she and her family overcame, but I fear this message. It was an opportunity to reach out to all of those who are completely disenchanted with Trump’s America, and all we got was a bunch of milk toast political speak.
Please tell me we’re walking into 2020 with a message more compelling than voter suspension! Don’t we have an authentic voice that can speak to affordable health care, global warming, and restoring the world’s faith in America as the leader of democratic ideals?
5
I doubt anyone could have provided a clearer contrast to the vitriol and insanity of republicans than Ms. Abrams did. Her honest and articulate expression of hope is what this country desperately needs right now.
81
Mrs. Abrams speech seemed stilted and didn't address Trump's points. It was more a construction of a dueling narrative rather than a rebuttal. I agree with the point she ultimately made about voter suppression, but I felt the speech was too narrow in scope for such a target rich environment.
6
I am shocked at how many people don’t believe that there are so many different ways to suppress votes that are used in every election. My own voter suppression story is about how voting machines are distributed among districts.
When I lived on E 9th Street between 1st and Avenue A in Manhattan in the ‘80s and early ‘90s my voting machine was in the Sirovich Center our on East 12th Street. Voters from a wide swath of the East Village (at that time mostly poor and diverse populations) used one machine. That led to long lines and many discouraged voters especially during national elections.
When I moved to Stuyvesant Town, a few blocks north, there is a voting machine in my building. There’s never long lines. Stuyvesant Town is mostly a financially stable, White community. Whose votes are valued more by the people who make the decisions about how the machines are distributed?
What’s your voter suppression story?
5
@Diana Scalera Since when is waiting in line voter suppression?
3
@Len319 Since Republicans made a conscious effort to make long lines and inconvenient polling places in minority and democratic areas in order to discourage voting.
@Diana Scalera How is it now?
The speech was merely okay. She could have torn Trump up to bits if she had just refuted his lies and exaggerations, one by one, and maybe mocked the split personality that was on view last night, Trump the Benign.
She could have pointed out that California's golden beaches are strewn with oil and garbage, Wisconsin's snowy woods are dying under climate change. She could have said that health care is the most important thing for most people, not the wall, not space, not another hundred billion for defense.
Too earnest, she seemed to be interviewing for the senate seat she no doubt will seek. We didn't need to hear about her father giving away his coat. She was there to refute Trump and she almost did. That's almost okay but I don't think a star is born exactly.
23
@George Dietz
Never critiqued SOU? Focus was on voting rights? A big
disappointment.
2
@George Dietz
You do realize that she did not compose her speech in the few minutes after the State of the Union? She addressed what was offered in preview as his focus on “unity”. She did that very well.
@George Dietz
I've felt forgotten ever since Reagan stepped into the govenernor's office in California. Yes, I lived there then and all I heard from my then husband was what a great man Reagan was 'always thinking about the common working man'. Unfortunately he never once gave a single glimmering thought to the school teacher, to single mothers whose father's of their children had vanished into the mist. Reagan didn't care about gender equality because for him there was only one gender and that was male; every non-male was put on earth simply to be of supportive use to males.
If you don't like the trash on California's golden beaches and freeways, why aren't you out there picking it up? I was in California a few years ago visiting. Guess what, I was picking it up and I don't live there any longer.
You're concerned about climate change? How did you vote. As a hippy in the 60's I was concerned have voted as such. I gave up my car to ride a bike or take a bus. Did you?
I am so very bored about nit-pickers who have never done the wash. Here it is:
If you, Mr. Dietz, acknowledge the problems but are not out there working on the resolutions I must ask, what are you're objectives? Just critic commentary? To be honest, the world needs people who are observant critics. If we don't have them, we will eventually come to believe those problems you spy out are all settled. We will relax believing our job is done. So, stand up and be counted, Mr. Dietz! You're providing a function!
If you want to vote in America and you follow the rules, you can vote. It's that simple. I voted for Stacey, but her endless whining about voter suppression and her endless implication that it led to her election loss is getting tiring. Democrats need to grasp middle-of-the road issues that benefit the majority of Americans and ride that populist brand of politics to victory. I fear that repeatedly invoking the "unfairness" excuse is seen by many as disingenuous. And I fear it is formula for further defeat.
44
@John Jabo Middle of the road policies don't help a majority of Americans, and the reason is math. The American social hierarchy is skewed heavily due to wealth concentration, meaning that a moderate position would disproportionately benefit the rich. For example:
A 70% tax on incomes over $10 million like AOC proposed, and a 2% tax on fortunes over $50 million like Elizabeth Warren proposed are considered "leftist." But they would benefit 99% of Americans.
19
Of you ignore the fact that many people who followed the rules were removed from voter roles and that it is now SOP for the GOP to remove non-Republicans from voter roles using the lie that voting fraud is rampant, then you have a point.
24
@John Jabo
Well said
2
Her explicit calls for identity politics couldn’t be more divisive. She attacks the notion of E Pluribus Unum and dreams of a Balkanized American state (the word “nation” would no longer apply).
This the figurehead of the Democratic Party.
29
@Jon, ah yes. Demanding that every American have access to the ballot is “divisive” and acknowledging that white middle-class interests aren’t universal is sooooo damaging to actual unity.
These arguments used to suppress anything but run-of-the-mill Republican views are just tired and anti-democracy. Democracy, like the gene pool, thrives on a real diversity of positions, not on enforced honogonization of opinions (read: tyranny of the majority).
36
@Tad Davies
I am anxious to understand what your interpretation of "White, middle-class, interests" are?
3
@Tad Davies Or with a Republican dominated Senate, tyranny of the minority.
5
Of course Trump’s speech was hokum and filled with nonsense, and his showing off Holocaust survivors was bizarre. As for the Democratic response, I was disappointed in Abrams’ speech, and thought it was pretty pallid. I know other people describe her as charismatic and strong, but I didn’t see it. There were stories of her family and vague uplifting nostrums, but not much substance. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, in a five minute interview afterward, actually did a better job. She said what Democrats are proposing and why we need it: boom, boom, boom. Elizabeth Warren could have done that, too. I haven’t yet seen Harris’ or Sanders’ responses.
28
@Jonathan Ben-Asher The purpose of the Holocaust survivors was to hit the Democrats right in their anti-Semitism caucus: AOC, Tlaib, and Omar.
2
Fairly, she seemed to promote herself more than respond to President Trump, in my view. She speaks well and offered bipartisan participation; yet, the Democrats are the ones that have staked out a patently absurd position on the border barrier matter and don’t have “a dollar” for it. All listening Americans know the ridiculousness of their position.
29
@Truthbeknown
“Patently absurd“ — surely you’re describing Trump.
74
He is - but don’t call him “Shirley”.
4
When you use the fact that people are presenting themselves at the border crossings to request asylum as justification for a border fence you are being patently absurd.
11
Stacey Abrams' speech was excellent, clear, concise, and delivered with authority. I feel sorry for Georgia for not getting the governor they deserved. She made clear Democratic values and policies to help the middle class gain decent salaries, health care, more affordable college educations, and fair elections. She proposed a path to citizenship for millions of immigrants who help build and support our country every day, and investment that acknowledges climate change. Her speech spoke to reality from a leadership stance of problem solving.
President Trump's speech was frankly odd. As a Jewish person, I, of course, was deeply touched by the Holocaust survivors, and the heroic Swat team officer who rushed into the Tree of Life Synagogue to save congregants. But how can we care about these refugees while separating children from their families at the border and putting them in cages? I know that the State of the Union is pure propaganda, but claiming the economy is wonderful and asking for unity after shutting down the government for 35 days over a wall gave me whiplash. Calling the investigation into his collusion with Russia to win the election "ridiculous" is equally unbelievable when nearly all of his associates are indicted. Nor could I believe his foreign policy claims on North Korea. In short, he loves the lime light, but how do Republicans help Americans? Guess we'll see in 2020.
112
@Dr. Conde
Talk about whiplash...we've got a lot more coming up.
After all that focus on unity, he's going to shut the government down again in less than 10 days. The threat was pretty clear in his speech.
And the Republicans heard it, and cheered. Enthusiastically.
3
For those criticizing Stacey Abrams for what she wore, her skin color, her delivery, her gender, her failure to call out Trump point-by-point, her mention of God at the end (which has become de rigeur in national politics, folks, sorry to say), her anecdotes about her family, and her just general wrongness: the rebuttal was addressed to the entire nation, not just to people on the left who want to hear a laundry list of grievances against the so-called POTUS. There is an abundance of professional politicians and talking heads filling that role already.
What Abrams did was outline a vision--the Trump alternative--and she addressed it to Republicans who share most of the same values as Democrats. It was an opportunity to demonstrate what unites us as a nation rather than engage in political flame-throwing which would only serve to turn off moderate Republicans and Independents. This is what it looks like when women and people from diverse backgrounds are given an opportunity to speak about their experience and values. Get used to it.
176
@Judith YES!
15
@Judith Extremely well said, and thank you.
3
@Judith
"This is what it looks like when women and people from diverse backgrounds are given an opportunity to speak about their experience and values."
Thanks for sharing that perspective. It is true that we benefit by hearing the voices of those from more diverse backgrounds. I wanted her to eviscerate Trump's phony speech. I am a trial attorney, and expected a sort of "closing argument" based on the evidence, since her exercise was called the "Democrats' Rebuttal." But it wasn't a rebuttal; it was merely a different viewpoint. But there is surely value in that.
1
Ms. Abrams made this old Georgia boy proud by addressing the needs of Americans head-on in a manner that invoked the spirit of fellow Georgians like Dr. King, Jimmy Carter, Andrew Young, Ralph McGill and John Lewis. She presented a contrast between corrupt government that serves the interests of greed, privilidge and division headed by a man who proudly carries their banner, with the methodical process of striving toward the greater good where government works for all instead of a few.
Voter suppression is real, the result of Republican efforts to make voting more difficult. In this, they've largely succeeded in destroying the fabric of our democracy. Even with this almost insurmountable barrier, Ms. Abrams scared the daylights out of Team Trump and its minions by nearly defeating their poster child, the present Georgia governor who campaigned with an ad showing him with a shotgun pointed at a young man. He was enthusiastically supported by the president.
Dr. King's words resonate: "How long? Not long."
141
It was the first time I heard Ms. Abrams speak. She was very likable but, in my opinion, not on point. I wanted to hear a rebuttal of Mr. Trump’s nonsensical calls for unity while doing everything he can to divide us. I wanted her to point out his billionaires’ tax break, his choice of criminally indicted colleagues, his billionaires’ Cabinet, and his complete disregard for the truth.
It was upsetting to see all of the sycophants gleefully shaming Trump’s hand, chatting him up with well wishes, even though we all know he is a pathological liar, a criminal, and the worst President in our Nation’s history. Seeing Trump gloating as he spoke, knowing that he SHOULD be arrested, was frustrating.
We have a Fox in the henhouse/Oval Office, and we must quit pretending there is anything remotely normal or ok about that.
And I was also disappointed that Ms. Abrams threw in the old canard about “God bless America” at the end of her speech. It came across as insincere and obligatory. It’s the 21st Century. Let’s say “God bless us all” or let’s leave God out of it. I just don’t think there is a God that chooses teams or countries to bless.
85
@Scott F
"I wanted to hear a rebuttal of Mr. Trump’s nonsensical calls for unity while doing everything he can to divide us. I wanted her to point out his billionaires’ tax break, his choice of criminally indicted colleagues, his billionaires’ Cabinet, and his complete disregard for the truth."
Check out Bernie's rebuttal for that.
16
@Dorothy N. Gray
will do. Thanks for that.
2
@Scott F A black man or woman couldn't do that. Not in America. Not yet. She had to be calm and reassuring otherwise... That said, I love her. She's a fighter.
7
"“We must reject the cynicism that says allowing every eligible vote to be cast and counted is a ‘power grab.’ "
Stacey Abrams is just so classy. Without bitterness or malice, but with firm determination she outlined a positive vision that was a joy to watch.
Mitch McConnell is going to rue the day he said legislation to protect voting rights is a power grab, after decades of GOP gerrymandering and dirty tricks to restrict poll access for African Americans.
But it shows the battle Democrats are up against, when a political party becomes so focused on its own power that it can't even recognize that the purpose of voting is to vote.
I think Stacey has a bright future ahead of her, despite her bitter loss to a man who embodies voter suppression. After watching her during the past election and last night, she strikes me as having true grit and purpose without rancor.
God, if all leaders were like her, we would indeed have the political harmony so many profess they want (as they continue their partisan talk and action).
303
@ChristineMcM
Your fawning over Abrams is puzzling in light of the fact she has not accomplished very much in her political career. Sadly, I thinks it is the color of her skin that is captivating her far left base.........certainly not anything she has done.
20
@Charles alexander @ChristineMcM fawning is totally reflective of leftists (not liberals) tendency to deify their politicians. Look at the cult of Beto before he lost and became just another over privileged white male. It's like a medieval religion.
8
@Charles alexander and CNNNNC: your comments are knee-jerk attacks on a woman who has accomplished much, at least as much as is allowed in the repressive red state of Georgia. For starters, she attended Yale Law School, and served as minority leader of the Georgia House of Representatives for 7 years--not chump change. Your use of the word "fawning" to attack my support of this articulate woman is ad hominem-I heard what I heard, I'm a writer myself, and I know the difference between a good, heartfelt speech and a bad one. NPR fact-checked her speech; nothing was amiss in her facts and figures (unlike the president). Abrams would have won the governorship if it weren't for the blatant;y race-based voter suppression policies of Brian Kemp who refused to give up his Secretary of State position which monitors the vote. He kept a large number of voter files in his desk, refusing to release them and allow their votes simply because he "could." The vote difference was minimal, and had every African American been able to cast their ballot as our constitution allows, she would have won.
Both of you seem to have problems with African Americans, implying my support for Stacey Abrams is based on race. As for the dig about the "cult of Beto" resembling a medieval religion, lest you forget, the blind support of Trump's base is far more cult-like (and dishonest, given his past) than any support from Democrats for their rising stars.
90
Let’s be clear: voter suppression is a leftist myth, akin the the “gender wage gap”. Neither actually exists, but the left passionately believes they do because leftists MUST believe they exist; those beliefs are part of unassailable leftist dogma, based on a received ideology, not fact.
Let’s be clear: no one who cares enough to spend about ten minutes doing the things we should expect a citizen to do – registering to vote; showing up at the polls with ID – will ever have her ballot “suppressed”.
Let’s be clear: “charges of voter suppression and ballot rigging” are nothing more then leftist fairy tales.
The problem presented is that leftists, to pander to the laziest and least motivated “eligible voter”, adopt policies which constitute open invitations to fraud. And as events in KY show, it doesn’t have to be “rampant” or “widespread”. ONE improper ballot is too many.
And if the Dems really wanted “a middle class where a salary truly equals economic security”, the very first item on their agenda would be sending illegals home and closing the border to unskilled immigrants. Instant labor shortage = instant higher wages. (Wages have increased more under DT than they ever did under BHO; and it was BHO, not DT, who “caged children”.)
We KNOW what works: lower taxes, better immigration enforcement, fewer regulations. They have a PROVEN record of success, because freedom works every time it’s tried.
Socialism? How are things in Caracas?
2
@Brenda
You must be living in an alternate reality to believe voter suppression doesn't exist in America.
But then again, you're probably not living in a majority-Black community where voter suppression is the norm.
Another thing.
This is a problem that affects ALL AMERICANS.
Not just "leftist" ones.
4
The Stacey Abrams phenomenon is the most carefully staged Political Coup of all time. Hollywood casting, ghost writing scripts, crafted background info that cannot be collaborated. On and on. She's been in the GA House of Reps for 10 years....I've barely even heard of her........until the DNC, national political machine, decided she won the audition........run for governor. AND....she's got the Yale Law School connection.....(ie....power elite!)
NOW....as for "ballot fairness"......yeah right.
Make every vote count? translation........make ballot stuffing legal.
JIll Stein just proved to most of us, the ones with our eyes open......the DNC is indeed actually, in reallity, really is........stuffing the ballot box!! Voter ID in Wisconsin. No vote fraud found.........NO Voter ID in Michigan.......oh....Detroit? DNC precincts? Oh, thats just a mistake, probably just an old person that didnt understand the process of counting votes accurately, why heavens, we're democrats, we'd never do anything like that.
Chicago? vote early vote often..........LOL.
4
@Wherever Hugo With her years in the FA legislature, why didn't she "fix" voting then?
1
@Wherever Hugo
Maybe the reason why you "barely even heard of her" is because "Wherever" you are, she isn't there.
Just for the record.
It's not uncommon for in-state politicians to not be a household name in every state in the Union.
Most Americans probably never heard of Jill Stein before she ran in the elections ...and then disappeared again.
@N. Smith When did you first hear aobut Stacy? I live in Atlanta, Ga.
I tuned in once I knew the 89 minutes delivered by a prevaricating blowhard had mercifully concluded. When he manages to read from a TelePrompTer, his adoring fans gleefully announce that it is hour zero and he is suddenly presidential, despite nearly 73 years of evidence to the contrary. Spare me.
Stacey Abrams is a tonic to all of that. She is erudite, earnest, has a compelling life story, and spoke factually to many issues that are foremost in many voters' minds. She is a leader in the effort to make sure that all eligible voters are able to vote. Can anyone legitimately criticize that goal? Mitch decries it as a power grab because he is afraid that if the people ever knocked out the influence of dark money, his career and much that he holds dear would be tossed to the curb.
I don't live in GA but I would be proud to vote for her. I think she is a fantastic addition to the national scene. I wish her all the best because her actions will benefit all Americans.
15
@NJLatelifemom . Come on, down! ya hear?
In California, voter suppression is rare. What we have is driver's license/voter "mistakes". I won't call it fraud. Several thousand people were cleared for voting last year (We don't know whether they did) because of registration confusion. Only US citizens should be allowed to vote, and you can't prove citizenship with proof of residency. A utility bill in your name doesn't prove anything. The entire business of registration needs to be cleaned up, nationwide.
6
Apparently, being a Republican, you don't engage with news. People don't just wander in to a polling place and vote and there is a record of who did. If any non-eligible non-citizens voted, there would be a record of it.
After reading some of these comments it's very evident just how unaware so many people are of what actually transpired in that Gubernatorial race between Brian Kemp and Stacy Abrams in Georgia.
It was far more than about just winning or losing a race, it was about how the election went down.
It was also about a conflict of interest, since one of the candidates was also the Secretary of the State of Georgia, whose office was responsible for registering voters -- which it reportedly did not do.
What's most evident in these comments is not only a fair share of racism, but sexism as well.
Which makes it all the easier to understand why so many Americans would end up voting for Donald Trump.
Just for the record.
Calling for Ballot Fairness for all Americans is an American thing to do.
Whereas the "Southern Strategy" is not.
Wake up, America.
15
The headline reads "ballot fairness" which implies what is on the document. She appealed to voting rights - which is much more broad and specific. Why not use the correct language? She did an awesome job, clearly distinguishing the humane democratic policies with the inhumane policies of the current president.
6
Outstanding and so very eloquent!
6
Trump's speech was every bit the self-serving pack of lies one might expect. Unfortunately, we're stuck - so long as he's in office, there's no one else to give the SotU. Democrats have no such excuse. Abrams' speech was a barrage of meaningless platitudes and self-pity. I think it would take about three minutes to put together a list of 50 prominent Democrats who would do a better job.
5
All these posters calling Dems "socialists!" Do you know what the word means? No Democrat has advocated public ownership of all private enterprise. But we already live in a capitalist society tempered by social/public services that we agree to jointly fund, own, and regulate.
Do you want to get rid of the VA, Medicare/Medicaid, public education, libraries, the military, police, fire departments, prisons, roads, public universities, publicly funded medical research, food, water, and construction safety inspections, air traffic controllers, public hospitals, sewer systems, traffic lights? All socialist.
Health care for all Americans not tied to employment, which we now have for people over 65, is simply an extension of our current services. It does not mean the end of capitalism.
A guaranteed minimum income is simply a much more efficient way to address homelessness, food insufficiency, and welfare reform.
Caps on drug prices, a quality education system independent of property taxes, paid parental leave, higher minimum wages, and serious efforts to address pollution and climate change are not “radical” or “socialist” or “un-American.”
All these ideas are cheaper, benefit us all, and in most cases have been used before and been proven to work. Don’t be brainwashed by corporate propaganda designed only for private profit.
12
@Norburt: The right wing's definition of "socialist" is anyone who wants those social/public services to favor individuals where it might interfere with corporate profits.
Bernie if you run and that causes Trump to be reelected the American people will never forgive you.
5
@Ben
On the contrary, you have it backwards. If Sanders doesn't run, the millions of those disaffected democrats that voted for him in the primary will stay home in 2020 IF a corporate/establishment candidate is chosen and that is what will guarantee another four years of Trump.
@Ben
t
The DNC's sabotaging of Bernie and his ideas is what got Trump elected. If the DNC does not embrace Bernie and/or his ideas this time I will never forgive them.
@Steve Tillinghast
Here we go again. It wasn't "sabotage".
Bernie didn't get the VOTES.
Period.
I listened very closely to Ms. Abrams fully aware her address content was thoroughly vetted through the DNC. Democrats need to be careful. In President Trumps wall campaign he is sucking the Democratic party into the immigration debate it can not afford.
Much of the democratic party is funded by the same interests as the GOP. Both parties have looked the other way while employers have been taking advantage of cheap inexpensive labor. This corruption has entered our country into a 21st century gilded age.
Democrats are not the beacons of law enforcement or looking out for American workers. They are oblivious to the struggle of local tax payers subsidizing business profits. They also do not mention the the social anxiety of (Federal) document fraud, uninsured - unlicensed motorist, and middle class neighborhood overcrowding.
How is it they claim to be the champions of the middle class while also undermining their interests?
6
Stacey Abrams is one more voice that inspires hope that the United States of America can reclaim those values that really can “Make America Great Again”!
6
I have so much admiration for Stacey Abrams. But unfortunately I missed most of her stirring oratory last night because my brain had already gone in shut down mode during DJT’s spurious anti-immigrant/anti-abortion diatribe.
Abrams/Gillum 2020!
3
Stacey Abrams did not lose her race. It was stolen. In plain sight. It was stolen because of serious problems with how voter registration is handled, and how votes are counted in many Republican led states.
Republicans do not care what Americans want. They believe they are entitled to "rule" by divine right.
Democrats believe in core American values, especially democracy and doing what is best for the country, not what is best for a narrow bigoted political faction
8
Voter suppression definitely exists in the United States. As such, we do need a national debate on the pros and cons of different systems so that every legal citizen gets a chance to vote. Voting hours, locations, and biometric balloting should be addressed.
Each system has its strengths and weaknesses, so it is not as black & white as many media outlets suggest. Nevertheless, IMO states like Georgia definitely limits minority voting.
12
I turned off Trump's speech midway. I watched Stacey's on my DVR this morning.
I thought she did a fine job. I liked hearing about her family's background and she covered the important Democratic bases with clarity and passion.
Let's face it, if she had been fiery (she is very capable of fiery rhetoric), she would have been roundly criticized.
I think she has a future and I look forward to seeing where she goes.
21
Dear Stacey Abrams,
Thank you! Please do not ever give up. Please do not listen to the naysayers. You delivered your speech perfectly. Thank you for all of your hard work. You know how much we need you. I hope you know how much I need you to be successful.
I know that you are the future of our country and I cannot wait to see what great things you will do.
22
Not able to look at or listen to Trump, I just watched Stacey Abrams' official response. The typical, tepid, play-it-safe pabulum. The missed opportunity here to call out this administration for its destruction of our society and for the Republican support of an incompetent, mentally ill sociopath masquerading as president, who spends his time tweeting, watching television and stuffing his face with fast food is immeasurable. Abrams' speech was the first nail in the Democrats' 2020 coffin.
11
@Christopher Ross To some extent you have a point, BUT a Black woman railing against the wrongs of this administration is a way to rally the Trump base....unfortunately.
4
@Robert Haufrecht I agree. Then they should have chosen someone else.
3
@Robert Haufrecht
So what?
Let them foam at the mouth. Caving in to them is how we got into the mess we're in.
3
Doesn’t “Response” mean your to respond to what the other person (POTUS) said?
She gave a good speech but it had not connection to the president’s speach.
12
Just another Ivy league tax lawyer blowhard who lost an election, can't balance her own checkbook, used campaign funds to pay her personal IRS debt. Now she wants to strip me of my health insurance, take 10 trillion form the American taxpayers to put me in the same place her father is. When she finished with that she made sure remind us you are a racist if you oppose illegal immigration.
14
@Mkm
Perhaps you missed Brian Kemp's massive voter file purge and voter registration roadblocks for blacks and minorities the last few years.
Brian Kemp won the Confederate and white supremacist governorship of Georgia.
https://www.engadget.com/2018/11/09/how-brian-kemp-hacked-georgias-election/
But hey, why not make fun of a black woman who rose from poverty.
Disgusting.
27
@Socrates Considering her experience in the Georgia legislature, how could she not have been aware of the changes to the laws regarding voter registration and, instead, treat the Ga Secretary of States' office as capriciously and recklessly conspiring to prevent people from voting based in race? How did she NOT make noise about that when it was being debated and planned? Maybe record number of votes in the last race shows something interesting? - more voters, not fewer.
It is so cheap and easy to pull out the same old complaints - it makes me wonder if there is a standard speech form that is handed to each Democrat candidate in Georgia. We in GA are becoming deaf to these complaints.
@Margo
FYI: Talk about double standards....
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/10/brian-kemp-georgia-election-integrity.html
Voter suppression is a fiction used by the DNC to further divide this nation. There are a multitude of ways to vote; heck even dead people sometime vote.
Time to move on to something of substance instead of the usual rancor and divisiveness that has permeated the democratic party during my lifetime.
12
@Nature Voter
Voters should never have to stand in line for six or eight hours ON A WORKING DAY to vote. Voters should never have to travel for miles to a location not served by public transportation to vote. Voters should never run the risk that an electronic voting machine will change their choice. Voters should never be kicked off the rolls by dodgy algorithm-driven computerized voter purges designed by Republican state officials to drive down minority participation -- as they have acknowledged. These things happen and happen often, and if the right to vote is not THE "substance" of democracy then what is?
8
@Nature Voter You say that voter suppression, which has been proven in many instances to be true, is a falsehood. How do you feel about reports of 'illegals' voting, which has also been shown to be a falsehood? Republican administrations at state and local levels have a history of continuing to repress voter registration and turnout, especially in areas where there are minority voters whose votes might sway an election from their candidate to a democratic one. Recent exposes from Texas, which were loudly ballyhooed by the republican party there, alleging thousands of illegal voters in recent elections, were shown to be totally wrong. So have the screeds of Mr. Kobach, the Inspector Javert of allegations of illegals voting. If elections are to be real statements of voters' preferences, then all eligible voters should be allowed to vote. Simple, isn't it?
1
@Nature Voter
Typical GOP projection.
Just another example of the Dems apparent death wish. Anything to negate a recent victory. Makes meer shudder to think who they're going to come up with to run against Trump
12
Abrams was not persuasive -nothing bold or imaginative, too shrill.
And a corny PBS fundraiser backrop.
Voter suppression? That is her biggest beef? Isn’r African American voting higher in southern states than in the north?
12
@Jorge
She was not for a moment "shrill". Whether you liked the content or not, her delivery was measured and deliberate. "Shrill" is the code word used by people who can't stand to hear a woman's authoritative voice. This is 2019 and you should probably get used to hearing women in power speak.
6
Abrams should be the governor of Georgia. Her opponent stole the election - now maybe he'll get a chance to call her Senator Abrams. Or President Abrams.
14
For those commenting on any speech not being a 'response' the SOTU, remember that these speeches were recorded prior to the SOTU. (as has always been the case - recall quite a few Republican 'responses'; they seem equally disjointed) It's not as though the camera now pans to another room where the responder has been waiting patiently for an opportunity to speak. The speech writers for the response must anticipate what content will be in the SOTU. Most presidents have been cordial enough to provide advance notice of what they were going to talk about, allowing for a better response. Trump never plans ahead, so the very concept of forward notice is ludicrous, making any response seem unrelated. An example of how Mr. Trump 'plans' would be like this:
Responding to the SOTU from every president before would involve "Guess a number between 1 and 100." (whether you it right or wrong, at least the rules of guessing were consistent) Trump comes along, and you'd guess (leaning against previous tradition) say 27 (not an unreasonable number; you could say 40 or 52 or 86), but the day comes and Mr. Trump says "I've decided to use a coin toss, and you chose a number. Look at how smart I am and how stupid you are" when the reality was that he was simply not planning ahead and being random. Some will say he's just shaking things up (usually to score some fictitious points with his base), except for something as solemn as SOTU, such pettiness merely looks deliberately insulting.
6
Ladies and Gentlemen, the NEXT Democratic Vice President Of The United States. So help me God.
5
@Phyliss Dalmatian
This a bit overblown, isn't it? A smart lady in pursuit of a larger goal, but is this a leader we all aspire for? DNC, please come down to the earth....
5
We shall see, Sir. Overblown is better than cynical and hopeless.
Just saying.
1
An ok speech. Unfortunately should did not articulate any specific reason for people to come our and vote for the Dems. If this doesn't change, get ready for another 4 years of the trump show and the resultant destruction.
11
What people ignored is the background here.
McConnell should have been called to stand in shame.
Imagine - allowing more genuine citizens to vote is a power grab.
By the party he still won’t call the Democratic one in a government based on democratic republican legislation - that is to say, Legislating is a full-time job, so we must cease being an Athenian democracy (where all citizens could vote, but we note most people weren’t ‘citizens’) but allow all to elect representatives the republican part. High time Democrats started referring to the opposition as ‘Publicans’ or ‘Pubcan party’)
But back to the point. The Democrats are making a ‘power grab’ by allowing everyone legally entitled to vote to actually vote and fighting against states that prevent this.
Democrats are daring to overcome Dixiecrat predecessors, who switched to the ‘Party of Lincoln’ en masse, when the Federal Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act passed, slid through by a guilt-ridden LBJ on ground lubricated by tears shed over JFK’s assassination.
3
What we did get from Trump was a less than memorable speech, unfortunately the rebuttal was only marginally better. One pundit said she spent too much time re-litigating her own election loss. I did see some of that, and believe she should have spent more time calling Trump out on his twisting facts into a cruller again and what alternate visions are superior. Stacey Abrams is surely a symbol for some people and appears to be a very nice person, but what was needed to re-inject some reality into the environment was someone with Bernie Sanders type skills who could refute point by point the inconsistencies in the SOTU address that just finished, and quickly deliver a knockout with specifics on a better vision. To put it in boxing terms, anyone unbiased would call this one a no decision.
5
@Kevin
The response had to be recorded before Trump gave his address.
1
“She began her speech with a message about faith and family”
These are words that the POTUS and GOP could never relate to or fathom…..faith, family, fairness and foundation of moral leadership for all regardless of race, color, religion and political views.
Well said Stacey…..Amen.
6
I could not put myself through the torture (waterboarding anyone?) of watching and hearing Trump speak at length. From all I read it sounded like it was awful. Interesting to read about his lunch with news anchors when he yet again demeaned Sen. John McCain who happens to be dead. Can't get over the fact that he disinvited you from his funeral before he died can you Donald. As a result of not watching our low life president I didn't see Ms Abrams rebuttal unfortunately. From what I have just read it seems like she hit all the right notes and it would have been music to my ears. I hope voters across this great land were listening.
4
Excellent response to Trump's demagoguery, and her emphasis on hope and trust in the American people, far removed from his odious misrule...based on fear, hate and division. Just look at Trump's false comparison of socialism to Venezuela's dictatorship, and not looking at the evils of capitalism when devoid of sensible regulation and basic ethics, and allowing free rein to our worst impulses, selfishness and avarice, in disregard to the need for solidarity.
2
The electoral college suppressed votes.
1
I'm not quite sure what this strange speech was, but one thing it surely wasn't was a rebuttal. For a straightforward, unvarnished, issue-oriented rebuttal, which strips away the lies, exaggerations, misrepresentations, and false narratives spewed by trump, watch Bernie Sanders' speech (below).
Bernie is the only one out there telling it like it is. Regrettably, not many people heard what he had to say last night. And in keeping with past practices, there doesn't appear to be a word about his speech in the Times this morning. Shameful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAmMIeZawC4
7
@jr
OK, I take it back. Sanders' speech is mentioned as a footnote at the end of this article. Sorry, not enough. Watch the speech, and compare it to Abrams'. Sanders was criticized for insisting on speaking after Abrams. He should have spoken instead of her.
3
Trump's speech was too full of lies. Abrams's speech was to full of platitudes.
13
It looked like a PBS fund raising break- “our volunteers are waiting behind me, please call now and we will get back to the three tenors in Rome.”
15
@PeterC
I knew I’d seen that camera work somewhere!
1
What a contrast: a bloviating buffoon and serial liar who didn't believe a word of what was written for him on the teleprompter, followed by an articulate African-American woman who wrote her own speech about the state of our union, still hopeful that we can overcome the problems facing this country even though she was a victim of the voter suppression laws that derailed her run for governor of Georgia.
27
I’m not sure why Miss Abrahms was even up there last night. I would have thought the Dems would have had their contrasting view of socialist America on display with maybe Bernie or Kamela. But Stacey? Didn’t she burn the American flag?
7
@Sven Gall The Military is America's largest socialist
institution.
It is seriously understood among thinking people that
the Capital Market Economy/Welfare State (i.e.
balanced nations) are the most successful for their
citizens.
1
Didn’t he advocate for lower health insurance costs & drug prices? Sounds socialist....hypocrite.
@Sven Gall Um, no, she didn't burn the American flag. She stood by some folks who burned the old Georgia flag that prominently displayed the Confederate battle flag symbol.
4
This woman is a student loan deadbeat who gave more of a campaign speech than a rebuttal. Why was she picked for this anyway? A nobody giving a nothing burger speech.
16
She didn’t have a rich daddy to pay for college? Shocking. As of 2018, 2 million plus people have student loan debt greater than $100,000, with 415,000 over $200,000.
7
Make no mistake: the Republicans love suppressing votes because the majority of votes they suppress would be for Democratic candidates. Thus, such a plea will fall on deaf ears. What needs to happen is that ALL Democrats needs to show their commitment to democracy by voting in candidates who will support an end to excluding voters from the polls. I would love to see Republicans who are committed to democracy vote the same way, but that is past praying for.
It is ironic indeed that the party that purports to be the party of the common man (the GOP, don't get me started, makes that claim) works so hard to keep the common man from the polls.
11
Maybe you could demonstrate where votes were suppressed...
2
@Margo
All you need to do is read the papers and figure it out for yourself. Look at any number of states with Republican-led legislatures and you can easily see the vote suppressing actions that have been taken.
But that would require some work on your part.
1
@bleurose I've been watching and reading. By law, in Georgia, if you don't vote for a period of time your registration is dropped and a notice sent to the address you registered with. Any problem with that? Those who could not follow instructions and fill out the absentee ballot correctly (shouldn't you KNOW the date of birth you used when you registered? Your name must match, too, and a signature check - so challenging!) and had their ballots returned, well too bad. Voter registration is automatic when getting a driver's license - and the voter should use that name, address and date of birth. What else should be used? If a voter registers as "Robert" but tries to vote using "Bubba" that should not be allowed. Yes, the public schools in Georgia are deficient in many ways, but we should insist on correctness at the polls.
I hope she can make a dent in New York. New York leads the country in voter suppression and candidate obstacles.
4
@Mkm I seem to remember reading that your state just took a big step to try and do something about that, actually. No doubt there's a lot that could be improved there still, but it's certainly not enough to ignore the fact that lots of states are doing just as bad, or worse.
@Mkm
Outside of broken machines, and having only one day to vote -- just how else would you characterize New York as leading the country in voter suppression and candidate obstacles? -- especially since you're probably not Black and living down South where voter suppression is the norm.
Sorry. Get real.
1
Since I believe a Democrat must beat Trump in 2020, I hate to be critical here. But, if you study the group behind her as she speaks you can see a problem. There are 20 people visible, 13 of them are women, 7 are men, and of those 7 men, only two are white. I'm sure I'm not the only one who saw this message. Not good, not good. Men still make up a significant part of the electorate and will be needed to beat Trump (in fact, they are the true battleground to make this so). Democratic Party, don't abandon us.
12
@Jimmy: Uh, Jimmy, I think you might want to examine this. Women have been voting for men since they got the right to vote. And some of these men haven't done such a great job in the office. I'm a Democrat and a man, and I'm not going to have any problem voting for a woman, particularly a woman willing to address income inequality, healthcare, infrastructure, sensible immigration policy, etc. I am very impressed with the 'women in white' in Congress. They give me hope for what a truly multicultural government will be like in the future.
5
@Jimmy
Maybe the answer to that is to stop all stage craft. It comes across in the State of the Union as phony. And in the rebuttal as well. It takes away from the speech itself. Abrams answer was right on, by ignoring what Trump had to say and focusing on Voter Suppression. She did not need a backdrop for that.
On the other hand, Trump needs all the distractions he can get.
4
@Jimmy--Better get used to it, Jimmy. Black and brown women and men are finally having their chance to stand up and be recognized. If White men are afraid of that, they can try to keep Trump in office and good luck to them. But, that won't stop what's happening. It's about time everybody else got a chance and the Democrats are showing that they are the party that will give them that chance.
2
I like Ms. Abrams, but the “voter suppression” shtick just doesn’t ring true. My state has weeks of early voting, absentee voting by mail, and a multitude of polling places open on Election Day. The only way to make voting any easier is to register people by party at birth (based on demographics), and at every election count a party-line vote on their behalf.
Illegal immigrants are a much larger problem in my state, and we are not even allowed legally to know how many are students in our public schools, or using our hospitals. The community resources they use come at the expense of many Democrat voters. Help us out, Democrats! The border wall may be a manufactured crisis, but illegal immigration is not.
23
KLM, you haven't been paying attention if you believe that "'voter suppression'" is a "shtick". Each state has its own voting laws and regulations. Ms. Abrams' state of Georgia has been particularly problematic. Votes that needed to be verified were wiped before they could be accessed, and polling places have been closed and moved to make voting more difficult.
You're fortunate to live in a state where nothing is accessible, but not everybody does.
4
@KLM Continue building the wall with the money you have, continue later. Trample gun runners to Central
and South America.
2
@KLM "I like Ms. Abrams, but the “voter suppression” shtick just doesn’t ring true. " Rings very true for me in Wisconsin - lots of obstacles to registration and voting. Among other difficulties, 'If you have moved to a new address then you will need to update your voter record by submitting a new voter registration'. New voter registration requires either: A Wisconsin DOT-issued driver license, a Wisconsin DOT-issued identification card, a Military ID card issued by the U.S. Uniformed Services or a U.S. passport book or card. The free Wisconsin DOT-Issued ID card requires a birth certificate or a passport. The DOT Office that offers that card is on the outskirts of town - no bus service to the office. ID's required on election day. Daunting and confusing to many people, especially the elderly.
2
Watched the first couple of minutes of this speech. I turned it off when it became obvious it was not a response to the State of the Union but rather an opportunity for Ms Abrams to self-promote.
She began with, and continued on for the first few minutes with anecdotes about her youth, her family, her career and other meaningless factoids about herself.
I don’t have time for another cheap sales pitch from yet another self aggrandizing, arrogant, narcissistic, power seeking, Ivy League lawyer/career politician.
Click.
20
Only Stacey and her enablers believe the US that she described last night.
Every American is in a better place than they were 3 years ago.
She knows that.
You know that.
18
@Joe Paper
Huh? What about people who lost their Medicaid?
7
@Joe Paper
Not me.
9
@Joe Paper
There were 2.3 million Americans in prison 3 years ago and now. That is 25% of the world's prisoners with 5% of humanity. And while only 13.3% of Americans are black like Ben Carson, 40% of the prisoners are black. Because blacks are persecuted for acting like white people do without any criminal justice consequences.
Of the 40, 000 Americans who die from gunshot every year about 2/3rds are suicides. And 80% are white men who tend to use handguns. Veterans are disproportionately among the suicides. That number is up from 37,000 three years ago. How many Americans died in the Las Vegas mass shooting?
The white American majority is aging and shrinking with a below replacement level birthrate. While the white life expectancy is decreasing due to alcoholism, drug addiction, depression and suicide. That has gotten worse over the last 3 years.
More Americans die from drug overdose now than 3 years ago. About the same number as die in automobile accidents and gunshots combined.
The federal deficit and debt is up from 3 years ago.
How is the weed aka pot in Pottstown, Pa.?
1
Optimistic well spoken direct
Keep up the great work
An antidote to the 1984 experience trump and his fascist minions are trying to impose on us.
44
I’m really disappointed Democrats were so respectful to the president during his partly fictional State of the Union, refraining from calling him a liar, as a Tea Party member did when Barack Obama was delivering one of his speeches. At one point, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was so frustrated by Trump’s false claims, she actually started to protest to the Vice President!
9
I know it’s hard to refrain. But she was honoring Democratic institutions- unlike Trump. And that’s important to see.
Why do all politicians think they are speaking for "the American people" when half of Americans do not agree with anything they are saying.
8
@PJ
yes, and in particular Mitch McConnell loves to cite "the American people" (in his water tumbling over rocks southern drawl) ...and it was he who demanded of his caucus, after the American people elected Barack Obama by a strong majority, in an unquestionable landslide...that they, the GOP, would block any policy or legislative initiative pushed by Obama (who to repeat myself, was just elected in a landslide by "the American people")
23
The worst state for voter suppression was New York until recent reforms did away with most of the old Tammany Hall restrictions. But the issue is not one that resonates with most Americans who have never had a problem registering to vote. It's an identity politics issue and as such a political loser. I like Ms Abrams and I think she has a pleasant manner but why showcase a politician that lost an election? The Democrats really have to get their act together if they expect to win back the White House. Two hints: higher taxes and threats to eliminate private health insurance are not going to be winning issues with Americans.
Also, Americans like to hear from winners not whiners.
13
@Asher-----------------I'm an American and I was delighted to see Stacey Abrams' stalwart, truth-telling speech given with steady eyes and pure contempt of the people who shot her down. She didn't budge an inch.
"Whining" you said? That's typical Republican twisting talk, I'm sorry to say.
22
@Asher, you mean the higher taxes that many of are paying this year because of the Republican’s disasterous “tax reform” bill?
1
@Asher
It's not just ease of registering to vote, which, sorry to say, IS a problem in many states. It's also gerrymandering, stealing votes, failing to count votes, closing polling places, moving them out of town, and restricting voting hours to the most inconvenient times. It's promoting deliberately false information about the date, time, and place to vote; restricting the ability of candidates to run and to debate; and spreading lies about them. There is no end to the nefarious ways Republicans find to corrupt the voting process.
And, yes, the vast majority of Americans CARE. They think elections should be fair and constitutional.
Contrast the meandering, empty Trump speech with the focused agenda and approach of Stacey Abrams and it is clear why we need democratic leadership in this country.
McConnell claims that voting is a 'power grab'. Well yes it is when republicans use gerrymandering and denial of that right to sway elections.
52
I thought Ms. Abrams did a great job and was well chosen for the task. Having one of Trump's usual punching bags, like Schumer, or FOX's freshly minted boogie women, AOC, would have been easier for the right to dismiss than a fresher face (to those who didn't follow the GA election), speaking about issues important to a wide variety of people.
27
Having to prove you are a citizen and who you say you are is common sense.
If vulnerable people do not have ID then help them get one. They will never exist in mainstream society otherwise and that should be the real goal.
19
@CNNNNC
..because voter fraud is an issue? It is not, anymore than crime and drugs pouring over our borders is an issue, anymore than the Wall as a solution to border security is an issue.
Tell the truth, please. Give something like fact-based evidence, please.
3
@Larry Levy If the children of the prior owner of my house live two counties over, but come back to my precinct to vote, they can be voting on issues that affect my county and my local taxes. They should vote in the county where they live. So, like it or not, that is considered voter fraud under law. It happens and it isn't all people sneaking in to vote x times or impersonating a voter.
Stacey Abrams represents the best of the political world -- articulate, detail-smart, forward thinking, caring and willing to work toward solutions to actual problems. She has illustrated this through her public work and through her private activities with community-serving non-profits. Most of all, she demonstrated this through her work with Republican colleagues at all levels of Georgia government. We will miss her at the State capitol.
62
@mpound
I don't think that the comment above implied that this was related to her background, but consider it as a contrast with Trump, who is inarticulate.
If you spend much time listening t politicians, I also think that being truly articulate, and well able to communicate important ideas clearly, is rare.
33
@mpound
I use the word "articulate" or "inarticulate" to describe what many (all) people say--not everyone can speak in a manner that provides a clear understanding of what they mean. I can't imagine what you are thinking when you attack this word.
22
@mpound why make an issue where there isn't one. She is articulate. It is a complement. There are many current politicians, including the current president, who aren't articulate.
11
I will say that I continue to be disappointed with the rebuttals. We hear Trump's rantings and bogus statements, and they are not clearly refuted by the opposition. Most people don't read the Times' fact-checking. It's in our best interests to call out each and every one of his blatant lies and each piece of distorted information to the viewers, who may already be shaking their heads in disbelief.
What is our role in a rebuttal if not to make explicit how Trump is gaslighting us? When we look back on this disgraceful episode in our history, if we survive, speeches like those of Ms. Abrams, though heartfelt and genuine, are not going to stand out as examples of moral courage.
We are under siege by a madman and we need our representatives to spell this out specifically. We don't have to deliver such a speech in an angry and menacing manner.
All we have to do is present the facts.
35
@TM
Bernie Sanders went nearly point-by-point and fact-checked, with numbers. I realize that his style can be a bit jarring because next to most politicians, he seems unpolished. But unlike Trump, his numbers are correct, whether you agree with his ideas on how to solve the problems or not.
27
@TM: Democrats can't succeed simply by contradicting Trump. I agree completely that the truth needs to be told and that Trump's falsehoods should be called out. But most Americans, certainly Americans who care about the truth, are well aware that Trump will say whatever he wants, regardless of the truth. To win against Trump's--and the Republican's--deception, Democrats need to present not just a contradiction but an alternative. Democrats need to show a vision that is both truer and better than what the administration offers. I believe that most Americans will recognize that when they see it, and I believe that a majority will welcome it.
11
@TM-----------------------Ms. Abrams did present the facts. So did Bernie. I think it's essential that we have variety of those who speak of our dreadfully wounded country. The fact that their different styles is, from my view, excellent. The differences between Abrams and Bernie make us stronger, the way, for instance, concrete is stronger than cement (concrete being an mixture of ingredients of different types of strength. It's a good example of E Pluribus Unum.)
5
Fact check: "We fought Jim Crow with the civil rights act". Not true. The democratic party voted for the Jim Crow segregation laws and fought against the civil rights act. The democrats and their pundits slander the President everyday with lies and accusations of racism, then turn around and blame him for the division. Why didn't the NYT fact-check Ms Abrams?
18
@Glenda Webb Ms Abrams did not claim Dems were responsible for ending Jim Crow. She was speaking broadly about the on going struggle for civil rights which most acknowledge has yet to be delivered to not just non whites, but to women and LBGT persons. The GOP is engaged in a campaign to disenfranchise millions in an attempt to hold states where demographics are against them. That her own election was killed by just such efforts was one reason she was chosen to speak. The way she handled that, the work she keeps doing to have voting rights protected, her grace and and her sunny, upbeat resolution are the living contrast to what the Dems are for, rather than what the GOP has become...a very long way from what it was under Lincoln.
35
@Glenda Webb
The Civil Rights Act was pushed by Lyndon Johnson, Democrat. The Southern Democrats as a party no longer exists. The democrats grew over time while republicans seems to want to go back in time. trump has not proven to be a strong supporter of the rights of all Americans. He deserves to be called out every time he speaks. I choose to believe in all of us. trump chooses to see only his base. He is a terrible president.
41
@Glenda Webb for god sakes enough with the revisionist history. We say the right is racist because they were chanting “Jews will not replace us” and waving nazi flags just a year ago. David duke loves Donald trump. You’re example is 50 years old, mine is current.
32
This sounds like a mistake to me. Basically she's talking about her own election. I think she missed a chance to state a broader, clearer agenda.
14
Nice speech by Ms Abrams but wrong venue. It wasn’t a response to Trump’s SOTU as much it was a campaign speech for Ms Abrams.
The Democrats need to call out this President on his lies and bad policies and tell the American people how they will govern differently.
The end.
Save the moralizing and the preaching for Sunday services.
18
I sincerely hope Abrams is on the Democratic ticket in 2020.
8
So do all Republicans.
2
In a speech that nobody watched.
9
Ms Abrams failed to discuss how to handle the registration of non-citizens on the voter rolls. Pennsylvania recently reported identifying 11,000 of them.
https://www.apnews.com/274da009cc251c0e9bcad6e6b6da350a
She's apparently not interested in clean voting, she mostly interested in stacking the deck for the Democrats.
12
Rest assured that Stacy Abrams cares that the voting system is 100% fair and accurate.
16
@Amy: A recent article in the Philadelphia Inquirer highlights this problem:
"Along with Kushner and Spicer, The Washington Post has now identified five Trump family members or top administration appointees who were registered in two states during the fall election. The others are chief White House strategist Stephen Bannon; Tiffany Trump, the president's youngest daughter; and Treasury Secretary nominee Steven Mnuchin, as first reported by CNN."
(https://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/presidential/Not-just-Jared-Kushner-but-Sean-Spicer-registered-to-vote-in-two-states.html)
Republicans have stacked the deck against themselves. Stacey Abrams is just point that out.
4
@Amy And didn't Texas report 95,000 just by checking MV records?
To ignore climate change is to deny climate change.
6
What is this woman doing giving this address? She not an elected official she not involved in our government at all.
What are the parameters in choosing who does this?
Travesty.....
14
I can't wait to vote for Stacey to be Georgia's senator instead of the current Trump lackey and Mr. champion Outsourcer- David Perdue. She could be a powerful force in the US Senate.
56
I am impressed by the response of Stacy Abrams but there is a clear cut difference between legal and illegal immigrants. Under no circumstances illegal immigrants should be encouraged.
I felt President Trump was very much defensive about the border wall. Hope he doesn’t indulge anything hastily about it. I pray that the Government shutdown shouldn’t take place after 15th of February. Hope there will be some bipartisan agreement in this regard.
3
Why is a “response” speech even a thing? The minority party should do their talking in the House and Senate.
Let’s leave the State is the Union Speech for what it should be, an hour, each year, for every president to grandstand, It’s the least we can do.
3
@HistoryRhymes This president grandstands every day. The theater of Trump and friends is not anything 'it should be'. He is a brash emboldened ringmaster with a cell phone. As a fourth generation American, from a middle American family, who has traveled most of the country, I have seen the range of who we consider American. We have our fear mongers, preachers and grifters and dreamers. Our colonial past swings on a pendulum in the form of the capitalist god. The American dream is chipped away by greed and bias. We had J Edgar Hoover, Joe McCarthy amongst multitudes of others, and now we have Trump.
8
@HistoryRhymes Well maybe because it has become very political and our current President lies as he breathes. There were major falsehoods in his speech. They should not be allowed to stand.
Sady, the manipulations from both sides in throwing red meat out their bases was in no way uplifting but became simply a long winded political rally. Trump struggled through a partisan speech peppered with a few half-hearted efforts to reach out to Dems. The Dems (Stacey Abrams) answered in kind. As a 50 something year old American, I am tired of the two sides and the unending political gamesmanship. I simply do not like our political system and the cost to country and spirit for "progress".
2
Stacey Abrams burned the flag of Georgia, behavior that hardly makes her worthy of representing the great state of Georgia in the US Senate--or making the Democrats' response to the State of the Union address last night.
Further, Stacey Abrams fiscally irresponsible, as described in an opinion piece by none other than Michele Goldberg of the NYT. According to Ms. Goldberg, Stacey Abrams is more than $200,000 in personal debt, including $54,000 to the IRS. And Ms. Abrams gave $50,000 to her (failed) campaign instead of paying down her IRS or student loan debt. You must be kidding!
Ms. Goldberg's opinion piece tried to portray Ms. Abrams as working-class, whereas in fact she has a law degree from Yale, worked as a tax attorney, and co-founded a financial services firm.
Even now, 19 or 20 years after getting her law degree, Ms. Abrams still has an outstanding student loan balance of six figures and a five-figure balance due the IRS. Perhaps she needs to go back to Yale (or even a local community college) for a refresher course on personal finances.
How could anyone believe Ms. Abrams could possibly be a suitable candidate for the Senate? This is not a matter of party or race or gender; it is about someone's blatant and longstanding inability to manage her personal finances responsibly, and to show respect for the state she hopes to represent. This is a very bad sign for someone the Democrats would like to run for Senator.
8
@Ro Ma
Have you met our current president? If trump can be in the Oval Office, Ms. Abrams can be in the Georgia Senate. What has trump done other than lie?
15
@Ro Ma
How much of that debt is due to covering health care for her father?
13
@Ro Ma If only Trump would stop refusing to discuss his own financial situation, what do you think we might find? Pot, meet kettle.
13
Abrams' powerful and eloquent rebuke of Trump not only exposed the falseness of his narrative but positioned her to defeat Perdue in the 2020 senatorial election.
26
Abrams lost, as did Sanders. If these two represent the party, the democrats and this country are in trouble. Kamala Harris is the only one that has potential and should have been the lead speaker.
3
@Cromwell Abrams barely lost in a red state. Her opponent controlled the election apparatus to his benefit. She showed class and strength of character unlike her opponent. She is very much correct about the suppression of the vote by Republicans. McConnell referring to making easier to vote as a power grab makes clear the Republican plan. But it is a power grab by the people, citizens of this country as it should be. Democrats keep winning majorities that the Republicans try to undo. Wisconsin, Michigan, North Carolina....
3
Likely the best response to a SOTU in 20 or more years, delivered with passion and eloquence. It is unfortunate however that the men Abrams called out from Trump to McConnell to Kemp to Northam either won't listen to her speech or won't recognize themselves in it. And their supporters won't either.
50
@Peter I don't think she needed to name everybody; what she was doing was laying out a broad vision. If you start naming too many names, especially in a speech to the whole nation like this, you get bogged down in details that most of the electorate doesn't need. Whoever runs against McConnell or the others can take up the details in those states.
In some ways wiley old Schumer “used” Stacey Abrams—
To fulfill the rather thankless job of the Democratic response, under the guise of giving her national attention for his Senate strategy for Georgia—
When he knows her forte and work and heart are in local and state politics.
In fact why didn’t old Schumer give the Democratic response, peering down through his half-glasses, instead of Twitter-fighting with Trump in the hours before?
8
While I liked what Abrams said and feel she was robbed of the election win and would make an excellent Senator, did it strike anyone else a little ironic that this comes from a person whose own Party still has Superdelegates? Where the vote of one Superdelegate equals 10,000 votes of ordinary Americans? Or, whose own DNC former Chair had to resign because it was discovered she and the DNC had rigged the 2016 primaries? It's bad enough having to fight the Republicans for the ability to vote so it's particularly frustrating when the Democrats pull this kind of stuff. And let's not forget the illegal purging of voters from the election rolls in NYC.
But let's talk about the mother of all voter suppression, the Electoral College. Twice now, the candidate with the most votes lost the presidential election. Democrats need to start to address this 18th century abomination to democracy that was a nod to white slave holders. How we have the chutzpah to lecture other nations about democracy when the candidate with three million LESS votes sits in the Oval Office is bizarre.
50
Because it’s the only way to offer representation for less populated states...it’s the essence of a democracy in that you will have a voice “Maine”
You want to change our electoral system because you don’t like the outcome.
Win the states you neglected and the Whitehorse is yours
4
@FXQ the super delegates now exist in name only. They have been stripped of their former power by the DNC.
10
@FXQ You're not up to date on some of the facts on superdelegates.
2
Better speech than Trump's.
109
@Eleanor
That bar to leap over is lying on the ground, in at least two senses of the word.
5
Abrams got it mostly right when she called this so-called crisis at the border and Trump's shutdown over it a "stunt".
What she got wrong is that she left out how it's a manufactured crisis, completely untethered to reality.
Statistic after statistic show that we're living in an age of historically low rates of all kinds of crime, violent and otherwise, yet if we listen to Trump (or Fox News), we're living in an age when we should be afraid to step outside our doors.
53
Let's face it. If you're a black woman giving the Democratic rebuttal to the President, no matter what you say, how you say it or what you wear; people are going to criticize you. That's the truth, and I'm saying it here. Ms. Abrams did a superb job of telling the American people who she is, seamlessly linking her politics to her identity and upbringing, so far removed from Trump. Though she never alluded to the racism that inevitably marred her parents' lives, those of us capable of reading between the lines and knowledgeable of American (southern) history can glean the origin of her politics of empathy and justice. The stones thrown against her by some of the (most probably) white male commentators here who anoint themselves spokespeople for all of America fall away harmlessly as they collide against an authentic voice that arises from a diverse, inclusive community of compassion. Yes, we embrace LGBT and yes we treat asylum seekers with compassion. Yes, we value unions and workers' rights. Herein lies the crux of the difference. She nailed it with a voice of truth that rendered her naysayers as powerless as the mewling of kittens caught up in a great tempest.
322
@Literary Critic
Nonsense.
Who didn't notice that she was colored like Barack Obama and from the same gender and color as Michelle Obama?
So what?
What I noticed is that she lost the election for Governor of Georgia. What I noticed is that she is a citizen having given up her state legislative seat. What I noticed was the poor lighting and distracting people in the background. What I noticed was that she had 7 minutes while Trump had 82. What I noticed is that she did not make any gaffes. What I noticed is that the Republican Party won 57%, 59% and 58% of the white vote in the Presidential elections of 2008, 2012 and 2016.
My ancestors were enslaved in Georgia and they were owned by and bred with my white ancestors. Until William T. Sherman came by after burning Atlanta. My grandparents fled Jim Crow Atlanta for Chicago in 1930.
6
@Literary Critic
I’m white. I’m an elderly woman. And as she spoke, tears came to my eyes. Then they kept coming. The longer she talked, they were streaming down my face.
She is the Genuine Article! I kept wishing she were the president. I love this woman! I loved everything she said. She moved me so deeply. Maybe it’s because of the nightmare that we’re living through. Or maybe I would have been moved like this in any time or place.
But Wow! I love that she’s black! To a civil rights person from the 60’s - and maybe from birth - she’s my cup of tea.
Give me Stacy Abrams any day of the week!
4
@Literary Critic
"... no matter what you say, ... people are going to criticize you. That's the truth, .... Ms. Abrams did a superb job ..."
.
Disagree.
It was bloodless.
.
Stacy Abrams is an excellent public speaker, but the speech written for her last evening was worse than inadequate.
.
Don't know what is wrong with the Democrats, but time, after time, after time, they come up with these limpid, turgid, presentations.
.
This is the kind of pathetic speech-writing effort you would expect from Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelosi: two notoriously poor public speakers who have the curious skill of sounding insincere even when telling the truth: Effective politicians in the political process, but both awful at connecting with voters.
.
It wasn't, fundamentally, a problem of substantive content.
.
Here's a hint: a speech that sounds like it is being read from a script is never a good speech. A speech should never, ever, sound like a little girl reading aloud the essay that got an A from her grade 4 English teacher.
.
Barack Obama knows how to do it. Bill Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Angela Merkel, Nicola Sturgeon, Micheal Moore. They all know how.
.
When President Obama speaks, the words come out smoothly, and naturally, with force, and power. He has beautiful delivery, modulation, cadence, and timing.
.
It connects with listeners in their guts.
.
I've seen Stacey Abrams do it before.
She knows how to do it.
She has outstanding talent.
.
It was wasted here.
I like her but I got distracted by her mention of faith at the beginning. Can we please leave god and religion out of politics and government? There is no reason to say, "And may god bless America" at the end of every speech.
123
@anna magnani
" got distracted by her mention of faith at beginning. " So she shouldn't mention God or religion?
That's asking a lot of a woman who is the offspring of 2 Methodist ministers.
26
@anna magnani
I agree with you, but to omit at least some reference to "God" leaves a Democrat open to the usual right-wing smears.
14
@anna magnani Amen to that!
2
She is a wonderful, well meaning woman. Everyone agrees with her goals but whose toes are going to be stepped on, whose rice bowls are to be broken, who is going to be told "no" in order for those goals to be achieved?
2
Time to send 19th century Jim Crow Republistan to the political outhouse in 2020.
Let’s register and vote in record numbers for democracy and send the Republican kakistocracy to the showers.
255
@Socrates
A shower will only clean their surfaces. The real dirt lies inside their heads.
3
Ms. Abrams' heavy emphasis on protecting the working class and classic American values would be a wise strategy for Democrats to adopt as a centerpiece. Highlighting things like free-flowing immigration, more federal involvement in schools, expanding the ACA rather than acknowledging its deep flaws, Roe, and LGBTQ rights, all are much weaker positions. Ms. Abrams is a compelling person who spoke eloquently about her upbringing in this speech, but in the Georgia election, she came across as too far left and couldn't win against a flawed candidate; emphasizing voter suppression sounded like denial and sour grapes. Moving to the center on working class concerns is a good idea, but at the same time, if the economy remains strong, the economy will take care of a lot of such concerns. So even that may not be a winning strategy so long as the economy remains robust.
17
@Dave Oedel
Ms. Abrams said. “In Georgia and around the country, people are striving for a middle class where a salary truly equals economic security, But instead, families’ hopes are being crushed by Republican leadership that ignores real life or just doesn’t understand it. Under the current administration, far too many hard-working Americans are falling behind, living paycheck to paycheck, most without labor unions to protect them from even worse harm.”
I think Ms. Abrams is right.
It takes more than an uptick in GDP is not going to solve the problems she identifies. Trump's corporate tax cut has been wasted on stock buybacks, The growth of the economy since 2009 has flowed to the wealthy, not to the workers. That's why we need to change the federal laws and policies that discourage the formation of unions.
That is only one of many changes we need to ensure that an improvement in the economy translates into improvement in the lives of workers. We have had 40 years of ineffective, Republican regulatory policies that have created a New Gilded Age. Relying on "a strong economy" has not worked for the last 40 years and it won't work next year.
56
Stacey Abrams lost the election in Georgia not because she didn’t run an absolutely terrific campaign. She lost because of the naked, outright voter suppression in Georgia practiced by her opponent, the guy who was in charge of the elections in Georgia. He robbed her of way more votes than the amount she lost by.
31
@Dave Oedel Not sour grapes. Her opponent was the Georgia Secretary of State who used his position to freeze voter registrations of voters who likely would have favored Abrams. It’s a huge issue, one that you might not recognize if you’ve never been a poor minority.
27
Excellent policy speech but it seemed more like what she would have said if she were running for office. It was barely if at all a response to the President,
17
She helped us understand the official Democrat rebuttal to Trump’s SOTU was all about Stacey Abrams.
Her deportment after failing to get enough votes in the governor election, showed that she was all about Stacey Abrams.
If she is a rising star, there is a lot of rising to be done yet before stepping into a national stage.
I think Oprah and Obama backed her in the last election because of her colour.
Is that the politics of division?
22
@K. Lazlo Hud
If you listened to understand, no matter which party you belong to, you would have heard a very intelligent, articulate speaker. She understands the middle and lower income voters and is fighting for higher wages and equality. When everyone is being paid a fair wage, have health care and a equal chance for a good education the Nation thrives. America has dropped it's standing on a lot of fronts, where we use to be in the top five on almost all. The rich can not and in many case does not even try to bring the rating up, example: big tax cuts to the rich, business and personal. Many companies did not invest this money into the business that would help the employees instead they bought their stock back and the stock price went higher. This move ensured the executives a nice bonus and made the STOCK HOLDERS HAPPY. Not all employees can afford to buy a lot of stock because their pay check are so low, they make it check to check.
Closing the government down gave all Americans a chance to see how many Americans live pay check to pay check, not because they do not save, there is not enough to save at the end of the month. If you don't see the problem, then you are among the well paid and do not want to.
115
Don’t disagree but don’t you get tired of the partisan shtick? If I recall correctly she was rebutting Trump. In other words trying to focus the blame. If you noticed in Trump’s speech he blamed both Republican and Democrat administrations for the problems of today.
The beauty of Trump, if it is possible to use those two words in a sentence is he is non-partisan. He’s a doer, not a poseur.
Did you notice McConnell in full sulk? Trump’s SOTU was an earful for that very bad man.
4
@K. Lazlo Hud If Trump is "non-partisan," it's because he represents industry and the super-wealthy more than a particular party. As for being a "doer"--do you remember the shutdown? The talks with North Korea? In between "executive time," his obsession with watching TV, and his $64 million trips to Mar a Lago paid for by taxpayers he may be "doing" things but he's accomplished nothing beyond stacking the courts and increasing the gap between the One Percenters and everyone else.
4
Stacey Abrams is the right person, with the right leadership skills, real intelligence, and working background to lead all of America.
Stacey Abrams for President.
75
@Michael - and your conclusion is based on.... what? It's a nice thought, but I watched a sincere woman give a decent speech. That does not correlate with success in the political polar vortex that is Washington DC.
1
Democracy is not only under attack through voter suppression tactics. We must also deal with gerrymandering, big money, and the fact that our votes are counted in a black box. Computer experts from top universities have proven that electronic voting machines can be easily hacked or manipulated by insiders without leaving a trace.
#DemocracyRequiresTransparentVoteCounting
Commenter Eric from NYC wrote “France uses only paper ballots that each voter puts into a translucent box. My fondest memories are of going with my father after the polls closed to witness the counting of ballots. It is always open to everyone. The people counting are private citizens randomly selected on that very day. I remember these evenings as the most democratic moments of my life, when French people who didn't necessarily know each other came together to witness democracy in action.”
German Court Rules E-Voting Unconstitutional https://tinyurl.com/za778ju
“Political scientist Joachim Wiesner and son, physicist Ulrich Wiesner complained that push button voting was not transparent because the voter could not see what actually happened to his vote inside the computer and was required to place ‘blind faith’ in the technology. In addition, the two plaintiffs argued that the results were open to manipulation.”
Europe Rejects Digital Voting Machines https://tinyurl.com/yczjwo64
“The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.” – Joseph Stalin
180
@RLS just to be clear, many states - like my Vermont- use tabulators to count votes on paper ballots. These are a godsend, I can tell you as a town clerk who oversees elections. Not only do they produce fast results, they are very accurate. The paper ballots are later eyeballed for any errors and, of course, names of write-in candidates. We store them until the next election, too. I just don’t want anyone to confuse this electronic process with e-voting. Counting by hand may seem quaint, but it was prone to mistakes and often dizzying.
23
Sarah,
Yes, counting ballots by computer produces fast results, BUT there is no way to know if the count is accurate. As I mentioned in my previous comment electronic voting machines can be easily hacked or manipulated by insiders WITHOUT LEAVING A TRACE.
Election integrity expert Jonathan Simon says that ballots give us a false assurance as they almost never see the light of day. They're off limits to the public, candidates, and in most cases election administrators. Our ballots, the memory cards, and software code are "corporate property."
Audits and recounts have been rigged, stopped, and made cost prohibitive. Jill Stein requested recounts in three suspect swing states after the 2016 presidential election. Lawyers for Trump and the Republican Secretaries of State went to court to shut them down. The judges were wrong to stop them.
After the 2004 presidential race, a judge ordered the counties in Ohio to keep the ballots. Two thirds of the counties destroyed them or claimed they were “missing.” After a Wisconsin Supreme Court race in 2011, the ballot bags arrived ripped open for that recount.
Jonathan Simon: Recounts Are Only as Good as They Are Allowed to Be https://tinyurl.com/ya56g5dg
Follow Simon’s interviews at http://codered2014.com/
“Democratic elections require a transparent vote-counting process. If we don’t have transparency, we don’t have democratic elections.” — Victoria Collier, Harper’s Magazine: How to Rig an Election https://tinyurl.com/y9xx63f6
17
In Columbia county in New York State, in addition to the mandated accounting of the ballot by optical scanners, every ballot is also hand read. That’s because 100% manual counting of the ballot is the gold standard.
19
Her speech reads much better than the delivery, I am sorry to say, altho I only heard parts of it. It can sometimes be very hard to translate the ability to communicate on a smaller stage onto a much larger one. I hope she plays it back and has helpful advice. She also should not have worn that dreary red dress....I know how that must sound, but optics are a large part of todays media governed world. She blended too much into her background, when she should have opted for a stand out colour. Her words would have had much more impact.
10
@S Norris
I disagree. Her delivery was earnest and candid, if a wee bit stiff. But why should that matter? I love it that she chose a muted red to wear. Why for heaven's sake would the color of her clothes give more or less impact to her words?
It was such a pleasure to hear an articulate, reasoning person lay forth a vision to challenge the dismal reality of the current Administration's chaotic despotism.
I can see her as President one day.
173
wait.
Stacey Abrams "words would have had much more impact" if she had worn a different color of dress?
You can't be serious.
It was refreshing to hear truthful words, calmly spoken, characterizing many of the very real issues that affect so many Americans today.
It was a forgotten joy to be able to relax and listen to a brilliant woman's own words, delivered without smirks, ego inflation, chest-puffery, self-congratulations, or the accompanying snorting and wheezing of someone who seems strangely medicated.
It was a return to being able to appreciate words and the stories they tell, to feel a sense of measured optimism, to not hear dark tales of death, destruction, and impending doom.
For those criticizing her as being lightweight or boring or not confrontational enough, there's been quite enough drama every single day for the past two years. I'm on overload with rants, endless hyperbole, and demeaning, bellicose language from the White House, nor do I need more fist-pumping, line-drawing, finger-pointing castigation from the omniscient left.
She sounded like someone we knew and someone who knew us.
That was a good thing.
97
"She also should not have worn that dreary red dress....I know how that must sound,..."
It sounds like what it is, shallow and trivial. Try listening to the entire thing, focusing on the content of what she is saying rather than the "optics". The stakes are kind of high next time. Lack of critical thinking skills are a big part of why we have a 2 bit con man as POTUS.
26