Transcription
Well, President Trump delivered the first State of the Union address in his second term last night. He highlighted his economic agenda, delivered some partisan jabs, and included plenty of made for TV moments.
Around 1 hour and 48 minutes, it's the longest State of the Union in more than 60 years. CBN's chief senior political analyst, David Brody, has the story. Mr. Speaker, the President of the United States.
In this midterm election year, President Trump knows the state of the economy will determine control of Congress and his agenda. So, it was no surprise that he began by touting his economic record.
A short time ago, we were a dead country. Now, we are the hottest country anywhere in the world. The hottest. The cost of chicken, butter, fruit, hotels, automobiles, rent is lower today than when I took office by a lot.
While the jury is still out on how Americans feel about their wallet, Trump poured on the optimism.
Our country is winning again. In fact, we're winning so much that we really don't know what to do about it.
The president also announced economic news of a different kind, a crackdown on fraud. There's been no more stunning example than Minnesota, where members of the Somali community have pillaged an estimated 19 billion dollars. So tonight, although started four months ago, I am officially announcing the war on fraud to be led by our great vice president J. D. Vance.
As for memorable moments, there were plenty. The USA's gold medal men's hockey team was in the chamber and received a patriotic standing ovation. Although things turned uglier when the president brought up immigration. The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.
Republicans applauded for a couple of minutes while Democrats remained seated and heckled Trump. You should be ashamed of yourself not standing up. You should be ashamed of yourself. It's very simple. All voters must show voter ID. All voters must show proof of citizenship in order to vote.
When Trump called for a ban on sex transitioning operations for minors, liberal Democrats raised their voices in objection. These people are crazy. I'm telling you, they're crazy. 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.
The president lowered the temperature by invoking the resurgence of faith in America as he acknowledged his guest Erica Kirk, the wife of slain Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. In Charlie's memory, we must all come together to reaffirm that America is one nation under God, and we must totally reject political violence of any kind. We love religion and we love bringing it back.
One of the evening's highlights came when the president awarded two Congressional Medals of Honor. One went to 100-year-old Royce Williams, a World War II Navy hero. Even with moments like that, the Democrats takeaway was something completely different. Newly elected Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger gave the Democrat response. He lied. He scapegoed and he distracted. And he offered no real solutions to our nation's pressing challenges. So many of which he is actively making worse.
Well, David Burley joins us now. So, uh, David, what what do you think about the the speech? Do you give him any points for staying on message?
Yes. Uh, as a matter of fact, especially Gordon, I thought he would look right at the Supreme Court justices in that front row, as Bob Uker once said. I think I'm dating myself with the Bob Uker reference. Uh, but those Supreme Court justices literally in the front row. And I thought he would go uh offrompter and look straight at them and ridicule them somehow some way. He didn't do that. He was very measured. So, I think that was one example. But I think overall he was on the 80% prompter retention rate, uh, if you will. Uh having said that, there were some moments that we just pointed out there, especially on immigration, and I think that was the obviously the the big uh moment in the entire speech, at least from a policy and political standpoint.
Well, he definitely highlighted the divisions between the two parties on immigration uh on on what to do with people here, also on um transgender and and and that kind of things for for minors. Uh do you think that scored any points?
Yeah, for sure. But for Donald Trump uh and for ever since he glided down that escalator, this has always been lowhanging fruit. I mean, this is something that uh in essence was one of the big reasons that he became president in the first place on the immigration issue. The real issue, Gordon, obviously is the economy or as James Carville used to say, it's the economy, stupid. And I thought he did a great job to lead with that. Obviously, he had to lead with the economy, but it wasn't just that, Gordon. I mean, he literally went from the economy and then pretty much spent, I would say, 85 90% of his entire speech on domestic issues rather than foreign policy issues rather than Monroe Doctrine or Iran or Israel, all important is uh issues. But for Donald Trump, it's all about the PR aspect of it. In other words, you have to sell it to the American public that you're on top of domestic issues. And of course, the White House will say, "Well, of course he's on top of domestic issues." But people have to feel that he's really working for them and not get bogged down in some of maybe what might be ancillary foreign policy issues when people aren't feeling uh certain paychecks come in uh the way they want them to. So I thought he did a very good job of that last night.
Do you think it was enough to change the public's opinion? He's he's really been taking it on the chin in terms of his his rating uh and and do people think he's doing a good job on the economy? Just is he is he a good president? Uh those things are are are are really going to impact the midterm elections. So, do you think he changed it enough to to make a difference come November?
Well, there was a CNN poll that came out right after the debate. It wasn't one of these online polls. It was uh the meth methodology, excuse me, was pretty good. And 64% of people surveyed after the speech believe that his policies will help them in the future. Before the speech, it was 54%. So it went up 10% after the speech. That's obviously good news uh for the president and the and the administration. But look, Gordon, I think ultimately the State of the Union may have been last night, but the real State of the Union will have a much better sense come Q3, quarter 3 in July of this year when that big beautiful bill and some of the IRS tax returns come in and we'll see whether or not the economy is starting to turn around. That's the key state of the union because that will determine the midterms more than a speech last night.
What did you think of Spannenburgger's response? Did do you think that scored any points?
Well, look, I mean, let's uh just let the cat out of the bag, and I think we've done that for a while now, but spoiler alert, she uh she campaigned as a center-left candidate, and she's governed as a far-left candidate. Uh so, you know, you take a lot of what she had to say with a grain of salt. Now, having said that, what I was looking for in her rebuttal was was she going to invoke the name Mikey Cheryl? Mikey Cheryl, the governor of New Jersey, also a centerleft or at least position herself as center left. and she did talk about Mikey Cheryl and herself, two center-left candidates, at least that's what they're going to call themselves. So that said to me that the Democrats are actually going to have a midterm message that is going to try and and push that agenda, that center-left agenda. At least on paper. In practice, we've seen in Virginia that hasn't been the case. But I think that's what Democrats are going to try to do. And not only that, Gordon, but in her uh rebuttal, in Spanberger's rebuttal, she talked about uh going into Iowa and making a difference in Georgia and in Texas and places like that. Once again, it was more of a center-left message than a far-left message. Whether or not Democrats can pull off uh that in the midterms remains to be seen.
Well, uh you you've mentioned the hyperfocus on the economy and and on American citizens. I was really surprised there was nothing about foreign policy. So there, you know, nothing about Venezuela and nothing about Ukraine. I guess that's probably not surprising, but the big one is we have this huge armada. It's one of the largest deployments in American history off the coast of Iran. I was expecting something on that. Uh why why nothing?
Well, I think it's the calm before the storm. And I I I think this is uh knowing President Trump the way I've known him the last 15 years or so when he starts to go quiet on an issue, get ready for the roar, the peace through strength. I think we're seeing the peace in the words uh and it's buried in the speech. There wasn't much of anything there. But to me that suggests that he's getting closer to pulling the trigger, if you will, in Iran. I think that's the takeaway that I had.
What's your forecast? You I keep every time I interview, I ask you to look in a crystal ball. So, what's your forecast going into November? Is post November a completely different Congress? Uh, is are we going to be looking at a lot of investigations, the potential for Trump to get impeached again, or are the Republicans going to hold to a narrow majority?
Well, if Democrats get in charge, there's no doubt they're going to try and impeach President Trump. And I'll be honest with you, Gordon, I'm not trying to get out of the question. I know I should have a stand. I don't want to be Switzerland here, Gordon. Uh but the truth of the matter is it's late February. We just don't know. There are so many uh variables between now and November. Having said that, I think at this point, if I were uh someone who had to kind of tell you what I think at this point, which is by the way what you're asking, I believe uh is I believe that the Republicans will continue to take control of the Senate. I think the House is much diceier. I would s I would think that the Democrats would probably take the House based on historical um precedent, if you will, and also some of the terrain that's out there, but there's so many wild cards and I've got to tell you, if we can have a conversation in July and see how those numbers are economically, I think I'll have a better sense of it then.
All right. I can guarantee we'll have a conversation in July. This is an election year and and you're our analyst. So, thanks for the insight and we look forward to more. David, thanks for being with us. Thanks Lord.