Stacey Abrams Breaks State of the Union Curse

[DonViejo]

February 6, 2019 at 7:24 am EST By Taegan Goddard

Atlanta Journal Constitution: “She told supporters she was ‘terrified’ of squandering the chance to rebut Donald Trump’s address, like so many from both parties had done before, with a miscue that ruins the opportunity… What followed was a 10-minute speech Tuesday that combined tales of her upbringing in Mississippi, the merits of bipartisanship in Georgia and biting criticism of Trump and Republican policies.”

“And she steered clear of the gaffes or awkwardness that tripped up so many of her predecessors — like Marco Rubio’s gulping of water, or Joe Kennedy’s too-glistening lips — and kept the focus instead on her competing political vision.”

“That meant her critics seized on the substance of her message rather than the optics around it.”

The Atlantic: “In a brief speech lauded by Democrats, Abrams succeeded in elevating an event that is often awkward and anticlimactic by nature.”

###

https://politicalwire.com/2019/02/06/stacey-abrams-breaks-state-of-the-union-curse/

[Auggie]

1. I thought Abrams was wonderful

Upbeat, friendly, authentic, smart. Her approach was perfect following the nearly 90 minutes of Trump's fear-mongering, threats, chest-thumping and lies.

[onetexan]

2. Agree, over all i thought Ms. Abrams speech was perfectly worded and perfectly toned

and her delivery and demeanor was excellent. We couldn't have asked for a better rebuttal spokesperson.

[RightiswrongTn]

19. I concur..she was great.

Assholes know she is a force to be reckoned with. She absolutely won Ga. Very positive campaign. Extremely articulate. Go Stacey..you damn sure got me as a fan!!

[demmiblue]

3. K&R

I knew she would nail it!

[marble falls]

4. She certainly did a better job than Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Shumer did at cheetos last little ..

outing.

[Soxfan58]

5. Impressive Lady

[unblock]

6. the premise of this article highlights the infuriating double standard that benefits donnie

the media pounces on any "gaffe" by critics of donnie, usually to the point of drowning out the entire critical message in order to dwell on the gaffe.

and i get it, avoiding gaffes and getting dinged for making gaffes is part of politics.

the problem is that donnie is a living, breathing, walking, talking, non-stop gaffe on steroids. his presidential campaign was built on his claim that obama wasn't a natural-born citizen, which was, by any objective measure, a horrendous gaffe. but instead, it got taken seriously and granted extensive coverage based on nothing.

all the way up to his insistence on an actual, physical "wall" of concrete and steel along the entire border with mexico. the "wall" only has real meaning as a metaphor for stronger border security, and donnie talking about it like an actual, physical wall covering the entire stretch should have been treated as a huge and embarrassing gaffe, but no, the media merely said, "well, technically it won't but we know what you mean to say". he always gets the benefit of the "doubt", but critics never do.

that's not to say the media hasn't gradually started to be more critical of donnie, and fact-checking him (though often avoiding calling him a liar, and in any event, still giving plenty of air time for his lies).

but importantly, they *never* say he made a "gaffe" and pounce on him like they do with anyone else who makes even the slightest misstep.


donnie basically has free license to make all kinds of gaffes without being hurt by it, while the media demands that anyone who criticized him be perfect.

[marylandblue]

17. He has learned the Art of the Gaffe, which is

never admit fault, never back down, always double down and lather, rinse repeat. An ordinary person would be embarrassed by getting caught, but Trump has no sense of shame, so it is easy for him to do. Very difficult for normal people, so it's asymmetric warfare.

[unblock]

20. one could excuse the media and others when just getting to know donnie, but

now that his penchant for inventing facts and insulting everyone (except putin) and lying and exaggerating and so on is very widely known, it's long past time to start treating him as anyone else would treat someone who behaved like this.

ordinary people find challenging such behavior difficult because we want to give the person the benefit of the doubt that they're not a liar, that they're not a sociopath, that they're don't have serious psychological problems.

but we know donnie well enough that the media shouldn't be pretending that he's at all normal.

[marylandblue]

24. It's really not so easy, you can't treat him normally.and you can't respond in kind

His methods count on people continuing to act normally so he can take advantage.of them. Habits or normal behavior are very difficult to break. Only Pelosi has figured it out. It was "not normal" of her to force a shutdown over 0.1% of the federal budget. Nobody had ever done it before and Trump was counting on her acting normally. Pelosi called his bluff, did the unexpected and refused to even entertain the idea that she had any other options.

It's the key to defeating Trump. Warren gave in on the Native American issue. What she should have done from the beginning is never answer the charge but said "and you used to pretend you were Swedish." The media will do the rest. If people get upset, double down, complain on behalf of German-Americans.

I know it's disgusting. She is too dignified for that. But you have to do that to win.

Fight like a pit bull. Pit bulls are good fighters mainly
because once they bite down they don't let go and they don't care if you smack them in the head while they are biting.

[unblock]

32. but there's a double standard.

the media is more than capable of holding democrats to the highest standards of ethics, propriety, even the appearance of impropriety is a major no-no for democrats, gaffes that might offend anyone, etc.

they circle like vultures pondering if that democrat's career is over at the slightest hint of a scandal, but donnie is free to insult millions routinely, hire cronies and crooks, grift and otherwise abuse the powers of office, etc.

yes, these stories are getting coverage, but in the case of a democrat, *they would be ignoring everything else*. democrats careers end on stuff like this because the media prevents them from accomplishing *anything* because the scandal quickly becomes the *only* thing they talk about.

with donnie, they discuss the scandals and the lies and so on, but then they talk about his ideas for the wall with all seriousness.

no one asks him how they can take him seriously when he lies constantly, or when he keeps changing his mind about what the wall is, or when he keep breaking deals or why should anyone deal with him when he could be out of office or in prison soon. that's the tone they'd be taking if a democrat had tried a fraction of the crap donnie's done.

[marylandblue]

43. malignant narcissists are masters of manipulation, Trump specializes in media manipulation

He has a whole bunch of obvious and not-so-obvious tactics he deploys to control them. He says outrageous things to attract attention, then adds on more things. They can't resist, it makes their head spin. Anyone can do it, but most of us would be too ashamed.

If Ralph Northam claimed the Virginia Speaker of the House also wore blackface, claimed the picture was both him and not him in the same sentence, that it was just in harmless fun, the NAACP backs him up and Justin Fairfax wore white face but Northam forgives him, the media would go bonkers to trying to fact check all that. If, when challenged, he the claims he never said any of it, he was misinterpreted and he was considering suing Maryland to take back the Potomac River, the media would have 3 new stories to cover and forget the old stories. If, at the same time, he leaked his own story of a Governor's mansion in chaos to his favorite reporter, then attacked another reporter for repeating what the first reporter said, then announced a highway project that will bring 100,000 new jobs. The media would then rightly question his sanity and discuss removing him from office.

Notice that I've completely changed the subject, and manufactured a bunch of new scandals that eclipse the original real scandal. Of course, soon the media will get wise, so he could up the ante. Since Marylanders are dangerous, He will have the Virginia State Troopers close the bridges to Maryland unless Maryland gives up the Potomac. Then double down on the stories you denied saying last week, retweet a racist meme, deny that it's racist, and claim you are the greatest governor in the history of the United States. How many scandals are we up to now, and which is the real one?

Yes, it is possible for journalists to counter this, but it isn't easy. It requires work and focus, but people are lazy and reporters have deadlines to meet. And you have to be willing to become a target yourself. I haven't seen any television reporters do it, and only a few print reporters. But print reporters don't have big followings, so their reporting just gets added to the noise machine.

[NurseJackie]

7. Even worse...

Even worse than Rubio's was Bobby Jindal's “Good evening, and Happy Mardi Gras!” speech.

[Honeycombe8]

10. I agree! That one speech killed his career as a leader in their party. nt

[BumRushDaShow]

12. The only thing I remember from that one

was the tie!

[NurseJackie]

13. The candy-cane tie was distracting... not a great start. And then...

The candy-cane tie was distracting... not a great start. And then it went downhill from there. (Actually, I had completely forgotten about the tie!)

[BumRushDaShow]

18. He was trying to be a flag

(but with a too wide neon red & white tie and a blue shirt) and it was a big FAIL!



It truly was as distracting as the water sipping Rubio!

[LiberalFighter]

26. Where is what's his name now?

[BumRushDaShow]

29. I thought he had bubbled back up out of the LA swamps before the election

on Faux Snooze but apparently it was pretty forgettable.

[2naSalit]

8. I've been watching these for decades

and Ms. Abrams' speech was by far the best that I can recall. She is definitely one of our rising super stars and I hope she rises far. We need a whole bunch of politicians like her and many of the other really interesting and rising Democratic stars that we are seeing of late.

Seeing what I did of the women in our Congress last night gives me hope that we can pull out of this horrible nightmare.

[KPN]

21. Cool. Didn't watch, but I definitely will

especially after reading your post 2na.

[Gothmog]

9. That was the best SOTU response that I have ever seen

[KPN]

22. +++++++++

Good to know. Avoided tv last night but will definitely check it out.

[Cha]

37. Stacey Abrams: "The shutdown was a stunt engineered by the President of the United States, one that

Link to tweet

[Honeycombe8]

11. I love her. She is memorable.

I don't remember much about the speech, except her upbringing. But SHE was memorable. She's just so darn likable, while appearing professional and qualified at the same time. I love her!

And, on a superficial note (but as a woman, I couldn't help but notice)...she can rock a professional look. She looked PERFECT....perfect hair, perfect jewelry, perfect outfit in the perfect color, perfect makeup. Wow!

Yeah, she nailed it.

[BumRushDaShow]

16. "I don't remember much about the speech, except her upbringing."

I think the anecdotes about her life were definitely purposeful so that you would remember them. I.e., her underscoring of the fact that she came from a "WORKING CLASS" family.

My sisters and cousins were all "text-blogging" ( ) the SOTU and Dem Response last night and I noted to them that what she gave was basically a sermon (complete with a parable reference to tale of the "Good Samaritan" ), but also included this (from the transcript) -

Growing up, my family went back and forth between lower middle class and working class.

One significant thing I have noticed for the past decade or so, is the transformation of the term "working class" into the term "middle class". And I think part of that was due to what she says about "class". I.e., the placing of "working class" BELOW "lower middle class", which was the traditional hierarchy of the past. Of course no one wants to be dubbed "lower" for anything related to economics, so calling "working class" folks "middle class" (apparently the Democratic strategy) would take the stigma out of it and allow for just 3 "classes" - "Wealthy", "Middle Class", and "Poor". Meaning a simplification of the old system of "Upper Class", "Upper Middle Class", "Middle Class", "Lower Middle Class", "Working Class", "Lower Class", "Poor".

And I think other than the dog-whistling stuff that has recently poisoned and altered the term "working class", this transformation of the term into "middle class" has actually triggered some of this stuff about "politicians/parties" not identifying with the "working class".

This is just own my light bulb observation and realization last night!

[Honeycombe8]

30. Interesting. I had not realized that. I still refer to the working class as the working class.

I think of it as those in the service industries, like waitresses, customer service reps at the lowest level, and others who get paid minimum wage, if that. Although I don't know the correct designation of them, really. It's just in my mind. Lower middle class maybe has a two-income home of two working class people, but combined they get close to the avg income of about $55,000 in the country. Middle class is just the ordinary working American group. Upper middle class...I'm not sure, since I don't belong to that, and I think it has to do with where you live. If you make $200,000 in NY, you are not necessarily upper middle class, but where I live, you'd definitely be upper middle class or even wealthy.

In any case, she's at least been to a grocery store! And knows what it's like for ordinary people to work hard for low wages. That's important, I think.

[BumRushDaShow]

33. If you go back and look at Biden's old speeches

you see that "transformation" there. "Working people" and "middle class".

I recall some Poppy Bush cavalier utterance that essentially designated "middle class" as $200,000 or so and above which had been met with dropped jaws. A recent article came out about what the terminology actually means in the current era (which doesn't just include income).

And yes - I think her point was to say - "Hey, I've been there done that"!

[Honeycombe8]

35. +1. nt

[Ginger42]

39. "Working class" "Poor"

I'm not sure exactly when this transition occurred, but when I was a kid it was common for news stories to refer to poor people as poor, or lower class. At some point "working class" became the term used for the lowest economic rung, even though it makes no sense. It's like "fixed income" being generally used for poor people as well. If you have a job that pays ten million a year, you're working, but you're rich. If your income is fixed at ten million a year, you're on a fixed income, but you're rich.

Observation of an old, FWIW.

[BumRushDaShow]

41. Yup.

I think although there was always a stigma attached to being "poor", there was an era where very few average people (whether "poor" or moderate income) EVER got to see - and I say this tongue in cheek to quote the name of a show - the "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous".

I.e., until the advent of TV (and a lesser extent, movies), the very wealthy were essentially hidden from the rest of the public (outside of their "help" ). Since then however, the conspicuous flaunting of wealth began to take off and the desire to be considered anything but "poor" or "lower class" was underway. And even within those "upper classes", you had a battle between those who were "rich" (money and some assets) and those who were "wealthy" (money + assets + generational inheritances).

All part of the ebb and flow of awareness. The Sneetches and their "stars upon thars" (exclusivity).

[SCVDem]

14. I liked the stagecraft!

Stacy at the alter looking rather like a preacher with a small audience as the choir.

Even on TV it looked deserving of respect.

Then came the rebuttal. No swaying, sweating or other distractions speakers are wont to do.

Just the facts ma'am!

Nailed it! Get in here Stacy!

[Historic NY]

15. Now that was the only speech I listened too...

she was brilliant.

[calimary]

27. It was such a contrast! We started with a plodding, constipated,

gaseous, and interminable speech where you could almost see the TelePrompTer yourself. I kept wondering how long he was gonna drag this out. “Oh you’re STILL at it?” “Aren’t you done yet, dude?” “Can you wrap it up already?” “C’mon, wrap it up, dammit.”

Abrams, on the other hand, almost literally sparkled! Smiling, engaging, compelling. She was a tonic! Sharing her own story from which she gained perspective and motivation to work for the greater good. Such an antidote to the bloated bag of bullshit we were presented from trump. She was alive and charming and personal, so relatable. So inspiring and full of hope! She talked TO us rather than what trump did, which felt like farting out the mouth AT us.

Night and day difference!

[uponit7771]

23. Abrams - ORourke 2020 !!!

[Thunderbeast]

25. She's the "real deal"!

Dems are blessed with a deep bench and a re-awakened sense of who they are.

The torch has been passed once again....and the light is bright.

[mr_lebowski]

28. I think the fact that it was 100% pre-prepared played a significant role ...

I think Democrats finally calculated that there really was no need for the 'rebuttal' to actually BE ... a rebuttal in the traditional sense. Abrams' was essentially a "Democratic Version of SOTU", written in advance, and obviously well-practiced.

I think it was great strategy, Abrams came off fantastic (and I totally adore her) ...

I also enjoyed Bernie (a LOT) who had the luxury of coming on later, with the more traditional 'mixing in what the POTUS actually said in the SOTU' to give the impression of true 'rebuttal' (even though I'm sure 90% of his was pre-written as well ... hell, we've heard a lot of that from Bernie well before this...and Trump is nothing if not predictable, so ...). But I loved his non-stop barrage of stats and facts and numbers laying waste to Trump's bullshit.

[Honeycombe8]

31. Yes...she was well prepared. That's important. When she would meet with a foreign dignitary...

no worries that she would not be prepared or cause a problem.

And if I may say...she dresses sharp! I mean, she was rockin' it in every way.

[greyl]

44. Are you aware of one that wasn't? nt

[Greybnk48]

34. She was wonderful! n/t

[Cha]

36. Stacey Abrams talked about actual problems that the nation faces: voter suppression,

Link to tweet

[EffieBlack]

38. LOL. I thought the title of your OP was "Stacey Abrams Breaks State of the Union"

Which would also have been accurate.

[akraven]

40. She was/is fabulous.

Thank you, Ms. Abrams!! I've never heard better, and have been a voter since 1971.... Awed by this wonderful lady, go STACEY!

[Ilsa]

42. Putting all of those people behind her in the shot was a risk.

But they did great as well. No one budged or moved awkwardly during her speech.