The State of the Union, 2026 Edition
USA! USA! USA!
As has been my custom in recent years, I skipped the speech in favor of family time. Once again, it proved a wise decision.
Alex Leary and Aaron Zitner, WSJ (“Trump Hails an Economic Turnaround Many Voters Don’t See“):
President Trump told a national audience on Tuesday that he had unleashed a new age of economic prosperity. One thing he didn’t say: I feel your pain.
At the core of Trump’s State of the Union address was a calculation that he can persuade Americans that the economy is in better shape than many think it is. In touting “a turnaround for the ages,” the president opted against sending a message to voters that he understands the anxiety that polling shows is widely felt, including among swing voters the GOP needs to preserve its congressional majorities in this fall’s midterm elections.
“Our nation is back: bigger, better, richer and stronger than ever before,” Trump declared at the start of his speech, which clocked in at a record one hour and 48 minutes.
[…]
On Tuesday, Trump made the economy a central focus of his speech, even as he touched on other subjects. He blamed his predecessor for high inflation and other problems and outlined affordability proposals. He said he would move to impose limits on investors buying large numbers of homes and give Americans without access to a retirement savings plan at work the opportunity to invest in the retirement plan for federal workers. He defended his aggressive use of tariffs, which have strained longtime GOP orthodoxy and given air to Democratic arguments he is driving higher prices on consumers.
In between remarks about the economy, Trump launched pointed attacks against Democrats over immigration and crime, setting off tense exchanges with lawmakers in the House chamber. He emphasized themes of patriotism and American exceptionalism, heralding the 250th birthday of the nation and celebrating the U.S. men’s gold-medal hockey team.
[…]
Trump pointed to the robust stock market and 401(k) retirement accounts, as well as falling mortgage interest rates. He touted last year’s tax cuts, which are producing larger refunds this year, as well as provisions such as “no tax on tips” and deals to lower prescription-drug costs.
He announced a plan to shield consumers from electricity rate increases caused by AI data centers. He pressed Congress to pass legislation codifying the healthcare framework he released earlier this year, which calls for redirecting federal subsidies from insurers to consumers. That plan has lukewarm support among Republicans facing elections.
[…]
Some of the proposals showed Trump adopting a populist stance in which he is willing to intervene in markets and place restrictions on corporations, continuing his partial break from the traditional Republican pro-business outlook that long guided the GOP. He cast himself as the champion of voters disillusioned by political leaders.
“From trade to healthcare, from energy to immigration, everything was stolen and rigged in order to drain the wealth out of the productive, hardworking people who make our country great, who make our country run,” Trump said.
One of Trump’s challenges is that his natural impulses as a salesman conflict with what many strategists see as a political imperative to show that he understands the economic anxiety many feel. Last week in a speech in Georgia, Trump said, “I’ve won affordability,” citing lower gas prices and moderating inflation.
Katie Rogers, NYT (“Trump Puts On a Show, Casting Democrats as the Villains“):
It was spectacle as survival strategy.
In his State of the Union address, President Trump didn’t bother to introduce a raft of new policies — unusual in a midterm election year with control of Congress on the line. He did not seem concerned with making the case that he gets it when it comes to the issue Americans are most worried about. “Affordability,” he said, was part of a “dirty, rotten lie” perpetuated by the Democrats.
Instead, with the slashing style of a natural campaigner and the instincts of a onetime reality television producer, he spent the better part of two hours baiting the ranks of incensed Democrats in the chamber and endeavoring to define them to the electorate as “sick,” unpatriotic and utterly out of step with the values of most Americans.
“These people are crazy, I’m telling ya, they’re crazy,” Mr. Trump said at one point, while relaying the story of a young person who had been forced to undergo a gender transition. “Boy oh boy, we’re lucky we have a country with people like this — Democrats are destroying our country, but we’ve stopped it just in the nick of time.”
Going into the speech, Mr. Trump knew that he needed to use it to maneuver out of a politically treacherous moment for himself and his party. A majority of Americans oppose how Mr. Trump is pursuing his anti-immigration agenda, and more than 70 percent of them think his priorities are in the wrong place. His approval rating has plummeted to 41 percent.
His solution was to wrap himself in the imagery of American heroism with staged asides throughout the speech while throwing the blame for every problem, from the security of elections to the state of the economy, back on his opponents.
In a number of cases, Democrats gave Mr. Trump the confrontations he sought.
Representative Al Green of Texas, who was ejected from the chamber last year for waving his cane at Mr. Trump, was once again removed after he held up a sign proclaiming “BLACK PEOPLE AREN’T APES” — a reference to a racist video Mr. Trump recently shared on social media.
Representative Lauren Underwood of Illinois got up and walked out rather than “take another minute” of the speech. And Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, a frequent target of Mr. Trump’s, was one of a handful who yelled at him.
“You’ve killed Americans!” she shouted as Mr. Trump talked about immigration enforcement.
“You should be ashamed of yourself,” the president shot back.
Karen Tumulty, WaPo (“Trump reframes America, in two acts“):
President Donald Trump on Tuesday night delivered what was effectively not one, but two State of the Union addresses.
In one, he tried to paint a new reality for the majority of Americans who, according to polls, say they are dissatisfied with what he has done in the first year of his second presidency.
[…]
“Our nation is back — bigger, better, richer, and stronger than ever before,” Trump said at the outset of a speech that stretched past one hour and 45 minutes, breaking the record for the longest presidential address to a joint session of Congress that Trump himself set last year. He hailed the first year of his second presidency as “the golden age of America” and “a turnaround for the ages.”
With his showman’s theatricality, Trump then orchestrated a parade of heroes.
[…]
But as Trump pivoted to issues such as immigration, gender and election security, he made hairpin rhetorical turns from gilding his own achievements to vilifying the Democratic side of the House Chamber, where many seats were empty.
“You should be ashamed of yourself,” he chastised, when the opposition party sat silently as he called for them to stand up if they believe the government’s first duty is to “protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.”
Trump called the Democrats “sick people,” and said of them: “I’m telling ya, they’re crazy. Boy, oh boy, we’re lucky we have a country with people like this — Democrats are destroying our country, but we’ve stopped it just in the nick of time.”
[…]
Unsurprisingly, Trump also leveled criticism at the U.S. Supreme Court for what he said was a “very unfortunate ruling” last week that struck down most of the tariffs that have been his preferred instrument of economic and foreign policy. Of the four justices present, three were among the six who ruled that Trump had overstepped his authority. All four sat silently as he rebuked the high court.
Trump tends to defy tradition with his speeches, and he did so again Tuesday — dispensing with the typical list of policy goals, or even a broad outline of what he wishes to accomplish for the American people. The handful of proposals he offered, involving data centers, congressional stock trading rules and curbs on corporations buying private homes, may end up being popular. But they are unlikely to serve as directional guideposts that many Republicans had hoped would become an electoral agenda.
On the looming question of threatened military action against Iran, he continued to make the case for it but provided little clarity on precisely what the objectives would be.
Trump once again dismissed the public’s concern about high prices, which is considered a central issue in this year’s midterm elections. He suggested that “affordability” is no more than a slogan confected by Democrats — or, as he put it, “a word. They just used it. Somebody gave it to them, knowing full well that they caused and created the increased prices that all of our citizens had to endure.”
“They knew their statements were a lie. They knew it,” he continued. “They knew their statements were a dirty, rotten lie. Their policies created the high prices. Our policies are rapidly ending them. We are doing really well.”
Good to know.
Textbook projection (Dems should be ashamed), nauseating dishonesty (gasoline at $2.30 a gallon everywhere), divisive (Dems are crazy, sick, destroying the country). PT Barnum as POTUS, the SOTU as a game show, GOPers as trained seals clapping away. Pass the bourbon…
The 108 Minute Hate.
My 52-ounce, on-sale-for-$4 bottle of OJ is a dirty lie, it’s actually 64 oz and costs $2 at the till but the Dems at Safeway want me to think otherwise.
I’d guess an extremely small fraction (1 in 1000?) watched that SOTU. Literally don’t know anyone who did, and I’m generally about 50/50 on these things. (1) People were warned this would be a 2-hour speech; (2) many, many people think Trump is a bad speaker overall (I find everything about his speech patterns excruciating – the pitch, the cadence, the content, the bullshit, the physical mannerisms); and (3) it was obvious this was just going to be a campaign rally held in the Capitol building. Really not much appeal, even to the politically engaged
This will buy Trump a day before he has to threaten Iran again to distract from blatant corruption of some sort, because instead of media talking about just how bad things are, the story for this 24 hours is “Trump says it’s fine, we won’t prod too deep on that one.” Same nonsense he pulled daily during the campaign, where he would ramble about things he obviously has no clue on, but because being critical is, like, super bad for access, it’s just easier to act like it’s normal politics.
No matter what he rambles about, Trump is still a toddler going to town on the avionics of a plane at 30,000 feet.
Here is Tom Nichols on the SOTU. Similar type comments.
President Trump’s State of the Union Variety Show
I suspect the length of the SOTU this time was in large part revenge on the news media that told Trump the last time he was on in prime time they would cut away after 15 minutes.
I’m getting really tired of the claim I’ve been seeing among the punditry that Trump is committing the same mistake as Biden by touting economic achievements the public doesn’t feel. Biden wasn’t being dishonest; the economy was doing well during his term, and in fact inflation started dropping after mid-2022. It’s just that the public wasn’t feeling it when facing something as concrete as a grocery bill.
The problem with Trump isn’t a disconnect between the broad facts of the economy and the experience of individual voters, it’s his outright lying about what the facts actually are.
@Kylopod:
This, and in connection with your reply yesterday in another thread. What matters isn’t GDP, the deficit*, or the stock market, but how secure people are economically.
One question to ask is what happens during a recession. In essence, retrenchment. People make less money, their jobs become less secure, expenses are cut against possible job loss, and overall people are worried about not making enough to cover their basic living expenses. Unexpected expenses loom large like the world’s most horrific nightmare. Should you get ill, develop car trouble, house troubles, etc., are frightening.
Now, is it just me, or does this describe middle class life for much of this century? Perhaps minus job insecurity during good times.
Right now there is GDP growth, and the stock market is high and climbing. What good does that do most people, when the gains go to those whoa re already wealthy?
*The deficit is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republiqan Party.
Here is Aaron Rupar’s take:
https://x.com/atrupar/status/2026507084972343503
The only reason to watch this tediously boring performance would be to get a feel for how his health issues are doing.
My cheap ass store brand coffee has almost doubled in price. Paper products are way up. Fish is up, up, up. Fruits and vegetables are rising.
Who in their right mind pays 10.99 for a twelve pack of soft drinks? Does The Felon know how much his Diet Coke costs? Bet he’s never set foot in a grocery store.
He can keep violating that poultry, lying about the high cost of living in Trumplandia, all the way to the midterms.
@Kathy: This is a phenomenon that existed under Obama as well. The recession technically ended in mid-2009. But voters weren’t feeling it for at least another several years, and it contributed to the Dems’ massive losses in 2010. Voters still had negative views of the economy in 2012. Part of why Obama was able to win reelection was that most voters remembered that the collapse began under Bush, and correctly perceived that the situation had improved under Obama. (Romney’s coming off as an out-of-touch rich guy probably also helped.) In early 2024, I examined why I felt Biden was in a worse position, where he took most of the blame for the economic turmoil stemming from the pandemic, rather than being given credit for steering the nation out of the crisis. I stand by that analysis today.
Still, Obama’s 2012 victory wasn’t anything like the landslide reelections of FDR or Reagan, who were also given credit for steering the country out of a recession. It was pretty close and competitive until the very end. Obama was also one of the few presidents to win reelection with less support than what he got the first time. Part of the reason has to be the increasing partisan polarization, but it’s also because voter attitudes on the economy were essentially lukewarm–neither in despair nor super-positive about it.
@Kylopod:
And going back to 1992: the economy had been in recovery for month but people still felt it was bad. Cost Bush I the White House. People’s perception of the economy is often out of phase with the actual economy and, although it became a cliche last year, is based on “vibes” as much as anything else. Republicans developed a talent for convincing people the economy was bad under Dems and good under them.
Which the present moment interesting. Trump is losing his ability to gaslight the American people into thinking the economy is great. His poll numbers are falling. Not just on the economy but on everything. And seeing that wreck of human being clinging to the podium trying to work his way through the next lie, I can’t help but think we’re close to turning a corner here.
@Kylopod:
I agree with this. While it is true that the economy is not as bad as many feel like it is, Biden was honest in what he said about the numbers at the time, and Trump is simply lying.
It is not the same thing at all.
A huge part of Trump’s core problem is that he lied about being able to bring prices down–that was never going to happen, and he has helped stoke that fantasy to his own political detriment.
@Hal 10000:
Yes, there are definite parallels between 1992 and 2010. In both cases, unemployment was a lagging indicator, and kept rising for about a year-and-a-half after the recession was over, which in both cases was costly to the incumbent party.
(And, like Romney, GHWB had a problem of coming off as an out-of-touch rich guy, which was politically fatal when placing him against Bubba.)
@Kylopod:
I think the problem with the western economies is they’ve become extractive. Pretty much all necessities of modern life become more expensive or switch to a subscription model. Both are means of getting more out of the working class (which includes everyone from minimum wage employees to some highly paid office workers and executives), leaving them little for savings, investment, or other forms of wealth-building like acquiring a home or other real estate.
@Kathy: This is a pretty good take. I might use “rent-seeking” where you are using “extractive”, but the results aren’t that much different.
Lots of wealth is generated without much value add. Or in the terms invented by Adam Smith, the billiionaires have figured out how to capture almost all of the surplus generated by any exchange.
It seems to me that at some point an Ultimatum Game dynamic will kick in. But it’s hard to say where or when. I’m not sure this is the same as the political boycott, it’s more of a direct rejection of a deal that is so very one-sided that you just walk away.
I don’t know though, we don’t always think about that when we are shopping.
Rather you than me, dear Americans.
@JohnSF:
We learned it from you dad!!!
Ok, more seriously, that Katie Rogers article has an enormous blood libel-type lie in it:
From what I can tell he was talking about Sage Blair.
While this story is sad, there was no “forced gender transition”. There wasn’t even a transition. Blair herself asked to use a male name and pronouns and the school tried its best to support her. That’s it.
Between this and the Jessie Singel piece yesterday it looks like the NYT is full in on trans extermination. Like, how did that even get past an editor. It’s a fucking lie.
@Kathy: Jamelle Bouie referred to it as a Klan rally.
Since he was paid to watch it, but I wasn’t, I have only his word on this, but I’ve never known him to be very wrong. (I won’t watch Trump for free)
@Gustopher:
Jimmy Kimmel gave his own assessment of the state of the union:
@Beth:
Draco? Really? I blame JK Rowling for this.
People don’t just pick the name Draco without some kind of outside influence or toxic propaganda.
Let them eat protein!
Americans Who Can’t Afford Beef Have ‘So Many Proteins to Choose From,’ Says US Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith
Soylent Green, anyone?
We need to start moving past Trump. We’re being reactive, not telling a story or centering on a message. 60% of the country basically hates Trump, but in polling the generic party vote is just 4-6 points for Democrats. That is not right, that is evidence that the country largely agrees with us on Trump but doesn’t know what we’re selling as an alternative. If not Coke then what? If not McDonalds then what?
Picture a Democrat giving the next SOTU. What is he or she saying? What is the goal we’ll be aiming for, and what success can we claim in that president’s next SOTU? We have an opportunity in the next two election cycles to bury the GOP for a generation and I’m afraid we’re going to opt instead for our own revenge tour and fun as that would be it’s not what the country wants or at least not what it needs.
We have some very big stuff coming in the next three years, and right now I don’t know the Democratic position on taxation, on the deficit, on health care, on AI, on foreign policy priorities, on ethics in government, on the border, on the concentration of wealth. Take just that last one. Are we for or against taking money from billionaires? Shouldn’t we have an answer for that at least?
It’s fun attacking and deriding Trump, but it’s too easy. It’s not our core job. And it’s not the path to long term success for the party or the country.
Was pleasantly shocked to see the relentlessly normie and inoffensive Sen. Padilla, super serious and sober Gov. Spanberger, and @thedemocrats social media leaning into various forms of, “We interrupt our regularly scheduled affordability programming to briefly remind y’all the president is a pedophile. Just FYI, back to the economy and your Constitutional rights.”
Better late than never.
@becca:
No, seriously, for real tho. Some of these non-sale prices are laugh out loud funny. I was at Pavilions with my bf on Sunday and we laughed at prices on some potato chips. Like, who is spending that much half empty bags of fried processed potatoes? Someone must be buying it tho right? And why the gouging? Potato famine somewhere? So many questions.
@Beth:
Exactly why I won’t stop calling it The New York Slimes, despite Bouie’s best efforts to hold down the fort.
Donald the Dove, Hillary the Hawk pfft lol. In 2010, Sec. of State Clinton learned her office had near total control over passport rules and unilaterally tossed the surgerical requirement for trans to update their passports, instead allowing self-attestation and X gender marks. Perhaps this is why Maureen Dowd, Peter Baker and their patriarchal company set out to destroy her. It was a preview of how she would’ve governed aggressively and unapologetically to advance liberal/feminist goals. (Had the usual suspects — rightwingers, insecure men, and the type of leftists who insisted John Fetterman was better than Conor Lamb — not fallen for the witch hunt bs.)
Nice line in The Economist’s summary:
lol
@Michael Reynolds: Seems like the upstart/Squad Dems have landed on the messages that Trump was trying to assail last night:
– Affordability
– Corruption
– Community
Throw in Constitutional Rights and No Pedos and you’ve got an easy campaign message. Part of the problem is that the top-level DNC seems to have a severe aversion to simple messages and wants to workshop some shit first. But the Mamdanis of the party dgaf and are just moving ahead.
I hope we’ll see some good primary efforts to shuffle the lab messages out of rotation.
@Michael Reynolds:
It’s probably still effective to hammer Trump on the economy, and possibly ICE (depending on location) going into the midterms.
But from then on it would probably better to switch oppo fire to Vance, and to work out a coherent positive counter to Republican/MAGA approaches to the economy and the overweening political power of personal and corporate wealth in both politics and economics.
The Democrats main problem imho, is likely to be that rational policies to deal with deficits, infrastructure, industrial policy, healthcare etc is likely to involve a rather unpleasant and unpopular, but unavoidable, bottom line: higher taxes.
There is a lesson here from Labour: they tried to dodge that, and hope “normalcy = growth” would get them out of the dilemma.
Unfortunately, it does not seem to be working, or at least not fast enough to avoid continued economic and political entropic decay.
All the more so in the UK, because here it means falling back on Treasury dominance, and their inevitable repsonse: “cheeseprare everything.”
Leading to the enshittification of every state sphere.
What messages and policies might work better in the US: damfino, not being an American.
@JohnSF:
Elf on a shelf.
@Michael Reynolds:
Who is the “we” and “our” in your view?
If the “we” means “Democrats,” then I would note that the surest way to a big win in November is for Trump to be the main topic. You even note a key argument for that in your comment.
If the “we” means the news/commentators, do you suggest that the next three years be about speculation about the future?
If the “we” is this blog, which is predominantly about reacting to the news, then I guess we could write about other stuff.
If the “we” is voters, all they can do is hopefully vote D in a few months.
@JohnSF:
It’s too early for that.
@Michael Reynolds: One other thought:
While I would not recommend a “revenge tour,” I would note that pretending like the country was past Trump and Trumpism in 2021 got us where we are now. I do not recommend pretending that the page has turned.
I very much recommend a pursuit of justice and fixing a lot of what Trump has demonstrated in broken.
@Steven L. Taylor:
As I say: after the midterms. Either to Vance, and/or Rubio, or whoever else seems on the inside track for the nomination.
@JohnSF:
I think the MAGAs would vastly prefer Vance.
@JohnSF:
The R Congresscritters are (for now) afraid of Trump backing primary challenges.
After November, he is just a lame duck, and the incentives change.
He will continue becoming more unpopular. Also stupider and crazier as his dementia is progressing rapidly.
He would be a drag on the downballot ticket in 2028. I think by early 2028 the R’s will be amenable to voting to convict if he is impeached. My guess is J D Vance goes into the 2028 Presidential election as the incumbent.
@CSK:
Yes.
@charontwo:
When pigs fly.
@DK: Tangential, but akin to shrinkflation. It’s hard to find potato chips anymore. The USDA or somebody regulates the use of “potato chip”, limiting it to fried slices of potato. Most bags on the shelf have wording and images that imply potato chips, but don’t actually say “potato chips”. They’re all like Pringles, something formed from some sort of potato paste. A vegetable version of chicken nuggets.
@charontwo:
I tend to agree with Kylopod, but with caveats.
If El Taco grows too unpopular and his base shrinks, and he’s so obviously mentally unfit as to be impossible to hide or explain away or even gaslight, and if donors begin shopping for other politicos to add to their portfolios, maybe they might be inclined to convict.
There are two certainties:
1) If the Democrats take the house, the Republiqans will have ample chances to convict.
2) Susan Collins, should she remain in office past the midterms, will be concerned.
I tend to agree with Michael on this. The less reactionary we are, the better off we are. We need to articulate a vision of the future. If we don’t corporate America will, and we aren’t going to like it.
Frankly, not that we shouldn’t oppose Trump when he comes to our town, either literally or metaphorically. It’s that we should hold and articulate a higher purpose. We should make Trump irrelevant. Do our best to ignore his latest goofiness, like giving the PMF to a goalkeeper.
A message of “we need to make the Epstein crowd accountable for what they’ve done, and build a society where that doesn’t happen and nobody can do anything about it when it does. We need leaders that will try to make the world safer for young people, not leaders that will cover up crimes against young people” For instance. That indicts Trump, but doesn’t make him the centerpiece.