March 5, 2025 • 38 mins
Recorded March 5, 2025
In this thrilling episode of Reasonable Arguments, Jennifer and Jamie dive deep into President Trump's recent speech to Congress, revealing the shocking political divide seen in the reactions from both sides. They uncover vital themes like economic policies, social and cultural issues, immigration, foreign policy, and the responses from Congress, spotlighting the significant impact of these topics on public trust and bipartisan cooperation. Jamie on BBC - https://youtu.be/sidk1Jg_mRI?si=DIn8vhm_veuJtz7d
#Shorts #YouTubeShorts #Viral #Trending #New #Explore #MustWatch #WatchNow #ForYou #TrendingNow #InstaReels #ViralVideo #DailyShorts #Entertainment #FYP #ShortsFeed #YouTubeShortsCreator #ShortVideoContent #ViralShorts #TrendingOnYouTube #NewShorts #ExploreShorts #MustWatchShorts #WatchNowShorts #ForYouPageShorts #TrendingShortsNow #trump #donaldtrump #elonmusk #news #foxnews #cnn #cbs #Trumpspeech #politicaldivide #economicpolicies #socialpolicies #immigration #foreignpolicy #congressionalreactions #bipartisanrespect #public trust #cultural wars
TIMELINE 00:00 The Political Divide: A Clear Divide in Applause 02:26 Bipartisan Decency: The Shift in Political Reactions 06:32 Economic Policies: Trump's Promises and Their Implications 12:46 Social and Cultural Policies: The Conservative Agenda 17:09 Immigration and Border Security: Trump's Tough Stance 24:05 Foreign Policy: Navigating Global Tensions 28:41 Congressional Reactions: Protests and Political Fallout 38:23 Outro Video Updated 021325.mp4
CONTACT US Blog - https://substack.com/@reasonablearguments Website - https://reasonablearguments.com/ ________________________________________________________________________ OUR CHANNELS YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@Reasonableargumentspodcast
FACEBOOK Jamie - https://www.facebook.com/repjam Jennifer - https://www.facebook.com/jenniferbashsrq Reasonable Arguments - https://www.facebook.com/reasonableargument/
INSTAGRAM Jamie – https://www.instagram.com/repjam/ Jennifer - https://www.instagram.com/jennifer_srq/ Reasonable Arguments - https://www.instagram.com/reasonable_arguments/
TIKTOK Jamie - https://www.tiktok.com/@repjam Jennifer - https://www.tiktok.com/@jenniferbashsrq Reasonable Arguments - https://www.tiktok.com/@reasonablearguments
X Jamie – https://x.com/repjam Jennifer - https://x.com/jennifer_srq Reasonable Arguments - https://x.com/reasonableargue _________________________________________________________________________ HOW CAN YOU SUPPORT US? Please Subscribe and Share!! It means more than you will ever know. _________________________________________________________________________ CHECK OUT OUR BOOKS Jamie’s – American Speeches That Changed History - https://amzn.to/3CGtkYS Jennifer’s – Sarasota Summer Adventures - https://sarasotasummeradventures.com/
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:56):
Welcome back to Reasonable Arguments where we break down the politics without the fluff,the spin or the nonsense.
Last night, President Trump addressed Congress in a speech that love it or hate it madeone thing abundantly clear.
The political divide in this country is alive and well.
And if you needed proof, just look at who clapped and who sat on their hands.
Democrats only clapped when Trump mentioned that Biden administration had sent $380billion to Ukraine.
(01:20):
But for a 13-year-old boy with brain cancer who was inducted into the Secret Service?
Silence.
For the families of Jocelyn Ngare and Lakenrylee young women brutally murdered?
Silence.
For Mark Fogle, an American detained in Russia and his 95-year-old mother?
Silence.
It's almost as if bipartisan decency is dead.
(01:42):
Now, to be fair, this isn't the first time we've seen selective applause in politics, butwhat's different is the level of blatant pettiness.
Compare this to Biden's 2024 State of the Union speech just one year ago, Republicansstood and clapped whenever there was a win for America.
Whether they liked Biden or not, even when Biden said you can't love your country onlywhen you win.
(02:04):
Everyone in the room stood and clapped.
So what changed?
Why is it that last night's basic moments of human decency were seen as partisandivisions?
And that's what we're breaking down today.
We're going to go through the biggest moments from Trump's speech, his economic promises,social policies, immigration plans, and foreign policy.
And as always, I'll be grilling Jamie with three different perspectives, the Democratview, the Republican stance, and the centralist take.
(02:32):
So let's get started.
With the most obvious elephant, or should we say donkey, in the room, why did Democratsonly stand for Ukraine funding?
and not for the moments it should have been universally respected.
Well, I don't know that they stood for Ukraine funding.
They came in with, and it's really kind of weird because they came in with a lack ofleadership, a lack of cohesiveness, even with their clothing.
(02:54):
we saw in that 2024 speech, I think as we were getting prepared for this, all the womenwere white, this year some were pink, some were black, some didn't care.
And so there was like this lack of unified messaging.
And the sitting on the hands certainly didn't jive with what I thought was a pretty goodclosing speech by or response by Senator Slocken from Michigan.
(03:19):
but she was talking about, bipartisan leadership, a unified country.
And certainly the display of Democrats for the two hours prior made her speech ringcompletely hollow.
how do Republicans view the contrast in reactions and what does it say about the currentstate of the bipartisan respect?
Well, Democrats are upset that they hold majorities in neither the US Senate or US House,and of course that they lost the presidency in a big way.
(03:44):
They could take some solace in the fact that they didn't lose more US Senate seats andmore US House seats, but certainly Donald Trump winning all the swing states showed that
he does have a mandate.
He is doing what he suggested he would do, and Democrats don't like it.
and they don't like being in charge, they don't like being called out on their hypocrisy,they don't like being called out on the crazy, loony, liberal, extreme things that they
(04:10):
have been perpetuating to the rest of the world as normal American ideals.
how do moments like this affect the public trust in politicians and the idea of workingtogether for the American public?
I guess it begs the question, how many people trust politicians to begin with?
I've always said that, somebody says, I'm not a politician, I'm running for office likeTrump did.
(04:31):
Well, when you run for office, you're automatically a politician and there's some level ofdistrust that people have with you.
Some of it is when somebody runs, they're a little naive.
They're like, hey, I can do this, I can do that.
They join, let's say a county commissioner.
I want to do X, Y, and Z.
I want to have the garbage picked up on time.
you then join a board where you have to convince two other people to agree with you to getanything done.
(04:54):
That's assuming that your county commission is five people.
so people see the promises made and then they see it take a long time to have promiseskept in most instances.
And that builds a level of distrust, but it's kind of the way our system is.
I think that I was aiming more towards the American people seeing how the Democrats acted.
(05:16):
how does that affect them or anybody as the American people outside of that seeing our owncountry so divided?
Everybody's talking about World War III between Russia and Ukraine.
I said, it gonna happen on our own soil?
It's kind of like one of those things people from both sides have talked about, quote,civil war.
(05:37):
And my question always been like, who are you gonna shoot at?
let's say it comes to blows, right?
It comes to guns.
And are we choosing by gender?
How do you determine?
The first civil war was fought by states.
was geographic and it was very,
There were lines in the sand literally.
Here, you we're talking about more of a culture war and what people believe in.
(06:01):
And more and more people are voting with their feet, so to speak.
If you're a conservative in California and you don't have to stay in California, you'releaving because you're sick and tired of it.
And yet there's liberals in Florida who are tired of being in a conservative bastion offreedom and they decide to go live under the heavy hand of government in California.
the next part we're going to talk about is the economic policies and governmentefficiency.
(06:24):
the key takeaways from last night Trump's economic initiatives are 25 % tariffs on Canadaand Mexico to protect U.S.
industries, tax cuts on tips over time and social security benefits for seniors, and taxdeductible car loan interest, but only for American-made vehicles, which is great.
Government efficiency and budget, obviously the creation of Doge, led by Elon and thecommitment to balancing the budget, a goal not met in over 20 years.
(06:50):
Do Democrats see these tax breaks and tariffs as sustainable or do they believe they couldlead to economic instability?
Well, clearly don't, Democrats clearly don't understand them or they don't understand theplight of the average American person, right?
And because all they've talked about since the end of the speech, roughly 12 hours, 18hours, whatever it's been, is how Donald Trump only stands for billionaires.
(07:14):
And clearly he's standing for the American people when he says, we're going to stop incometax on tips over time and social security.
And then you throw in, if you buy your car that's made in America, you're going to get atax break on that too.
that's not a tax for billionaires.
That's a tax for regular American people.
so, quite frankly, Democrats had a tone deaf moment last night where they didn't reallyunderstand.
(07:40):
They were petulant.
They decided that they were going to make this statement of being silent.
And I really think it probably, to the extent that people pay attention, I think itimpacted them in a poor light.
So do you think that the no taxes on tips and overtime is a great thing.
The tax deductible car loans, But are people gonna argue that, inflation is not comingdown?
(08:03):
the grocery bills are still high.
Is that gonna offset that?
Will that be a positive?
Well, you started the question talking about tariffs and I think it's very important tounderstand that these are reciprocal tariffs not punitive tariffs.
And so it's not, this for that or we're punishing you.
It is you all have been taking advantage of us for decades.
(08:26):
And Donald Trump has said that is going to stop.
If you're going to put tariffs on our products and make it harder for Americans to dobusiness in your country.
we are going to make it harder for you to do business in our country at the same tax rate,at the exact same tax rate.
So I think it's very important to understand that these are reciprocal tariffs and notpunitive.
(08:47):
I don't think no, because I don't think.
went back to the beginning of the question because you threw a lot at me at the beginning.
Yeah, I'm sorry.
And I think that I don't understand that part of it because I understand the tariffs, butI think we're talking more about the tax cuts, where are the tax cuts that he is
implementing going to offset or going to be a positive if the inflation is not comingdown.
(09:10):
So ignore the tariffs.
Yeah, of course tax cuts are always positive because they give more people to more moneyto American people, right?
And so Americans just like businesses can only do so many things with that money.
They can invest it, they can spend it or they can do things like, hey, I'm going to takethat money and improve my home or improve the type of car I drive or I might send my kids
(09:32):
to a private school next year So
that money goes back into the economy in a major way and it goes back in a way that theAmerican citizen chooses, not some unnamed, unelected bureaucrat in Washington, D.C.
How do Republicans justify tax cuts while promising a balanced budget?
And where do they plan to cut spending?
That's a great question because we do have to grapple with this $36 plus trillion worth ofdebt.
(10:00):
Now, Donald Trump has come up with some ideas that he thinks are the golden ticket, forinstance, of charging wealthy immigrants $5 million apiece.
And he said, oh, I'm going to have a million people for $5 trillion.
Well, that puts a big chunk.
even if it's a million people over his first four years, taking $5 trillion off the debtwould be a huge step, taking 15 % of our debt and lowering it in a four-year period.
(10:31):
You have to remember that this is debt that's been accumulating since, I think, the 70s.
So we're not gonna fix it in one year, we're not gonna fix it in four, but we have to takemajor steps towards it.
And so that's been a criticism, quite frankly, over Republicans that has happened everytime they want to talk tax cuts.
(10:51):
It's like, okay, you want to balance the budget, but you want to cut taxes.
it's not an easy thing, but I think what you're seeing with Doge is that there's plenty ofplaces to cut to try to make up for both the tax cuts and to balance the budget.
well then that leads into the next question.
how does involving someone like Elon in government oversight sit with Americans who wantgovernment efficiency but are skeptical of private sector influence?
(11:14):
there's always private sector influence.
This has been a unprecedented private sector influence, if you want to call it that, byone major person, right?
And I don't know that we've ever had this before.
We probably have had it before, but not this public, to be honest with you.
And, certainly presidents have relied on high-net-worth individuals.
(11:35):
throughout their presidencies for advice and everything else.
But having someone in charge pointing out these hypocrisies, pointing out these extremeliberal policies that have been ingrained in places like USAID that are now seen as normal
is bizarre.
And I think Americans see that as bizarre.
(11:55):
And whether they like or dislike Elon Musk, I think they...
At the end of the day, they respect the job that he's doing and they respect the fact thathe is exposing.
I don't want to go as far as to say fraudulent activity, but it tap dances very close tofraud.
The next section we're going to talk about is social and cultural policies.
The key takeaways from last night were education and social policies, removing criticalrace theory from public schools, banning transgender individuals from women's sports,
(12:23):
making sex changes on minors a criminal offense, and declaring English the official U.S.
language.
how will Democrats push back on these policies and what challenges could they face incourts or in public?
Well, they pushed back the same way the Democratic response pushed back.
the Senator from Michigan, just 24 hours earlier, she voted herself to allow boys tocompete in women's sports or men to compete in college sports.
(12:50):
you know, so the hypocrisy of Democrats.
saying one thing out of one side of their mouth and yet doing another on the floor of theUS Senate, I think Americans are starting to see through that and they're starting to see
through it in a big way.
I've talked to some Democrats who have been very involved and some have said, I'm startingnot to recognize this Democratic party for which I've worked for.
(13:13):
decades and I don't know that I recognize it and I'd like to save it.
They still want to believe that they can save it.
I don't know that they can save it in the way that it operated under the likes of JFK oreven Bill Clinton.
a friend on Facebook today who said that the Democratic Party left him.
He didn't leave the Democrat Party.
that that's the case for a lot of people.
(13:35):
growing up in the South, where I grew up, where there were no Republicans, and everybodyregistered Democrat, and now almost everyone is Republican because the Democratic Party
started leaving them in the 80s and certainly did so under Bill Clinton with his expansionof healthcare.
I would say some level of banking policy, it still is a, know, Democrats have gone downthe slippery slope with, they stop the slide?
(14:02):
And, I question whether they can or not.
How do the social policies fit into the broader conservative platform for 2025 and beyond?
I think Americans are at a point where they're ready to stop fighting the cultural warsand replace it with common sense.
And for instance, we're not going to have pornography teaching same-sex relationships inkindergarten.
(14:27):
actually, a friend of mine just posted on Facebook before we came on here that she heardthat they are putting condom machines, this is in Michigan, in bathrooms at preschools and
grade schools.
For what reason?
Like it goes beyond, it just makes no common sense.
The only reason why you would is if adults are raping children.
That's the only reason.
And if you're trying to defend any other reason, I'd like to know what it is.
(14:52):
Because that's the only thing I can come up with why you would do that.
I mean, it is abhorrent.
And Democrats, like I said, they're on a slippery slope of going into obscurity becausethey lack common sense.
And I'll tell you, it won't start in Congress.
Congress may stay close and Democrats may even take over the US House in 2026, dependingon the economy.
(15:12):
But you're going to start seeing major changes in state legislative bodies that are goingto stop this mess because a lot of this stuff starts there, especially education policy.
this boys in girls sport starts at the state legislative level.
And so in places like Michigan and Illinois and New York, you're gonna start seeingchanges in those state legislative bodies.
(15:34):
And then by 2030, you'll see a change in redistricting for the US House.
And if that in fact takes place, Democrats are likely to be in the minority in the USHouse throughout the 2030.
How do independent voters feel about these policies and do they view them as necessaryprotections or government overreach?
It depends on the independent voter, right?
(15:55):
think you probably have, and it depends on the issue.
And that's what makes independence kind of fun to poll the more interesting thing aboutindependence and polling is that today the number one issue among independents can be
education.
And three months from now, you can pull those exact same independents and it could bepublic safety.
And then those independents may be lean left.
(16:17):
on education, but lean right on public safety.
you could talk to the exact same focus group on those issues.
And so that's why people misunderstand independence and the actual issues that lead intoan election and how to reach independence and speak to them, kind of with the issues that
matter to them at that time.
The next section is immigration and border security.
(16:39):
the key takeaways from last night Trump touted historically low illegal border crossings.
He announced largest deportation operation in US history.
And he introduced a plan to sell $5 million gold cards to wealthy foreigners as a path tocitizenship.
How might Democrats counter the deportation policy while still addressing border securityconcerns?
(17:03):
So there's at least one pet peeve of mine in here and it's when Democrats or CNN says,Donald Trump isn't deporting as many illegals as Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
Well, of course they're not because they were collecting a hundred thousand people at theborder every month and sending them across.
Trump had 9,000 last month, 9,000.
(17:24):
It dropped immediately.
And so...
There aren't as many attempts.
So you start looking at the number of people at the border who were deported versus peoplewho were inside the United States being deported, that's a number I would like to see.
I don't have that number in front of me.
I have not heard anybody report it.
But the press is being disingenuous when they suggest that somehow Obama or Biden havedeported more people when Donald Trump has put this effort in place to keep people from
(17:52):
coming to our country.
And that has to be recognized as a, as a huge success for president Donald Trump.
Now the gold card we spoke about a little bit, and I think the devil will be in thedetails there because, and we're going to do a series on, the illegal immigration
movement.
we have four CEOs of national think tanks who are going to come on the podcast and we'regoing to discuss all these issues in depth.
(18:15):
So I don't want to.
spend a whole lot of time here because there's an expert on the Gold Card who's going tojoin us.
And I look forward to that conversation.
And I don't want to say anything here that's going to make me look bad in front of anexpert.
But I do think that one issue that we will have with Gold Card in the details is that forevery immigrant who comes here legally, as a general rule, 13 to 14 family members follow.
(18:38):
And so the question becomes, if we allow one person in at five million, what are wecharging the other 13 or 14?
Are they all five million?
Or do the other 13 or 14 get to come in for free?
And so then it's not one million people for $5 trillion.
It's 14 million people.
I thought it was based on whether or not you're building a business.
(18:59):
kind that's another detail that's not really in there.
if you're going to be able to afford $5 million, you're probably going to bring yourbusiness to the United States and conduct that business here.
what I'm suggesting is Donald Trump has used this, I'll have 1 million people at $5million that will create 5 trillion that we can put towards the national debt.
And data will show that for every legal immigrant who comes, 13 family members
(19:19):
follow.
And so it's not 1 million people for $5 million or for 5 trillion.
It's 14 million people for $5 trillion unless we are charging every family member one,two, three, four or $5 million for them to come as well.
And so that's why I say the devil's into the details because we really haven't talkedabout the practical implication of what a legal immigrant means when they come here.
(19:45):
isn't this kind of like the NIH where, the 1 % genius could come over and go to school
Look at you using the acronyms.
I'm so proud of you, babe.
Holy mackerel.
This is something I never, I never thought I'd see.
This is something I never thought I'd see.
The NIA.
Not in the middle of a podcast.
(20:06):
doing great, baby.
Is this the unfiltered part?
I couldn't help myself.
god.
I'm gonna go back to my scripted questions.
Yeah, right.
We've always tried to attract the biggest, the best and the brightest, but that's an issuethat we start having when we have, and like I said, I don't want to get into it too much,
(20:34):
but that's what you have when you start taking the best and brightest from undevelopedcountries.
There's an argument that,
while we may help those few people who aren't the best and brightest and bring them hereand take advantage of their skills and brain power, we are not leaving that brain power to
solve problems in their own countries.
And so there is an argument that we are doing a disservice to the world by bringing thebest and brightest here.
(20:59):
What would a successful large-scale deportation operation look like and is it feasible?
I've always argued, going back to the campaign that we're unlikely to deport 20 millionpeople in the first year, even though Joe Biden let that many in over his four years.
I think that's at least the number that he probably has let in.
But we are, talking about a massive effort.
(21:22):
We've seen what how hard it's been to deport the number that we have.
finding, arresting, putting on a plane and deporting, and then getting countries to acceptthem, right?
Because they don't want these criminals back.
They don't want these gang members back.
And they offloaded them to us.
They thought they were gone forever.
And our problem, they would spend the rest of their lives in our jails.
And that's part of it.
They don't want to pay the money to jail their criminals.
(21:44):
So they sent them to us to commit crimes here and for us to jail.
And Donald Trump says, no, you're going to get these people back.
and especially the criminals.
So I question the practical application of large deportation.
I question how much Americans will accept large deportations when it starts impacting, forinstance, their child's best friend who's in school.
(22:07):
And nobody really knows that their parents are illegal.
And now the best friend is sent back to Colombia or whatever.
originating country.
And so I think there will be a line.
I don't know what that number is.
Certainly Americans are almost 100 % on board with deporting criminals.
And so I think that's where Trump has started, and we'll see where it goes from there.
(22:29):
The next question has to do with the gold card, so you decide whether or not you want toanswer it now, but does the idea of selling citizenship to the wealthy align with American
values or does it create a two-tiered immigration system?
Yeah, that's, it certainly sounds like it creates a two-tiered immigration system.
The question is whether that's bad or not, or whether we as Americans are in suchfinancial dire straits that we need to take an extreme measure like that.
(22:55):
And I think there are people who, when we're going two trillion in debt per year, and onetrillion of that is just servicing the debt.
we have to stop that.
we have to somehow call back that $2 trillion in whether it's taxes or spending.
That's basically the two ways to do it, right?
Or you create a great economy that generates more taxes, right?
(23:18):
On the tax rates that we have today, you either get more people working, you get paid moreor whatever the case may be.
And so, I...
I think I will wait on the rest of that answer for when we have our four part series.
The next section is foreign policy and national defense.
The key takeaways were Trump discussed Ukraine peace talks and referenced a letter fromZelensky indicating readiness to negotiate, labeled the Middle East as a rough
(23:44):
neighborhood, promising to restore order, and proposed expanding American spaceexploration, including planting a US flag on Mars.
from the democratic
perspective, what risks come with pushing Ukraine toward peace talks, especially if Russiais still aggressive?
Donald Trump has to get folks to the table to negotiate, the one thing that is clear thatpeople are not speaking about is when Zelensky said, and even during my BBC interview, I
(24:10):
went back and looked at it remember they switched topics on me and kind of caught me alittle flat-footed.
But that whole interview ended with the interviewer asking me, does the president realizethat
this strength that Zelensky is talking about has to be part of the deal.
And so there was a little bit of foreshadowing of what happened in the Oval Office wasduring my BBC interview.
(24:34):
We should put that link back in the comments.
But because it was really kind of telling that the BBC was all over that.
But there's no question that Zelensky, when he said the word strength, he meant Americanboots on the ground.
And Americans do not want boots on the ground on the Ukraine-Russian border.
(24:54):
And what Zelensky wants is American boots on the ground.
So then if Russia then breaks the ceasefire, he's shooting at Americans and now we haveWorld War Three.
And so it's not about protection.
It's about creating an escalation of the war.
And if we put boots on the ground, like Trump rejected rightfully in the Oval Office withthe Ukrainian president in...
(25:16):
face to face is that immediately the second we agreed to this word strength with theUkrainian president, China and North Korea would see that as aggression towards Russia.
And so now just agreeing to this word strength would have put dominoes in place.
I'm not going to say they would have fallen, but they definitely would have been in place.
(25:38):
to create an environment for World War III.
And that's what upset President Trump in the Oval Office.
And that's why he kept telling President Zelensky, you are toying with World War IIIbecause Donald Trump knew what Zelensky meant by the word strength.
Zelensky knew what he meant by the word strength.
And yet for 48 hours after that, 72 hours after that, every Democrat said, no, Zelenskydidn't mean boots on the ground.
(26:01):
But then Monday, following that Oval Office blowup, we had Zelensky agree with
Great Britain and France to put boots on the ground 30 days after a ceasefire.
And so there's no question at this point.
There is no question.
If anybody says that Zelensky did not mean boots on the ground when he was using strengthin front of the president and vice president, they're either being disingenuous or they're
(26:26):
bold-faced lying to the American people.
How does Trump, yeah, and I can't even tell you like the obstacle course he went around toget to me, so I have to kind of let him be here.
how does Trump's foreign policy compare to traditional Republican stances on interventionand defense?
the devil will be in the details and we'll see.
mean, right now, Republicans have always believed in peace through strength.
(26:47):
And Democrats have always believed in using that strength to create wars.
mean, every war has been created under Democrat and none under Republicans.
I think that's what President Trump is trying to emulate is peace through strength.
And so on the broad terms of foreign policy, I think he's much like Ronald Reagan.
Is the push for space exploration a bold vision or a distraction from pressing domesticconcerns?
(27:12):
when Kennedy said, let's go to the moon by the end of this century, it was a bold vision.
So I'm going to say that going to Mars is a bold vision.
And the question becomes, how much does it cost and how much are we as Americans willingto pay for that bold vision in light of other problems?
(27:34):
Now, we also know the American people are still digesting all of this ridiculous moneythat was spent by USAID Remember, we're going in debt to finance this war.
We're the only country going in debt to finance the war in Ukraine.
No other country is going in debt for the war in Ukraine.
(27:55):
it's...
unconscionable that we are doing this to our grandchildren.
I like the idea of public private partnerships and figuring out a way to have, Elon Muskflip most of the bill or some of the bill.
versus, taxpayers paying the whole thing.
But we'll see how those programs come forth.
And the last takeaway that we have is congressional reactions and political fallout.
(28:17):
the Democrats protested parts of the speech with some lawmakers walking out and thepolitical divide was clear with visible frustration on both sides.
What did Democrats hope to achieve with their protest and could it backfire?
Well, I think the protests were pathetic and quite frankly, I would give credit to theDemocrats who sat through the entire speech.
And I don't give them credit for not standing for the things we mentioned.
(28:40):
The pro-American bipartisan things that the president spoke about should have beenapplauded and should have had a standing ovation just like every Congress before us.
Those who walked out, I think, embarrassed themselves for a TikTok moment.
And certainly the fellow who did not even let the president get started with his speechbefore he started waving his cane was doing that for social media, not to make any real
(29:05):
point.
And they should be embarrassed.
They should be embarrassed by their conduct.
They aren't embarrassed, but they should be.
But I do give credit for those who sat through the whole thing because Donald Trump gavethem what you can only call a good old fashioned ass whipping And that's the truth.
(29:26):
he went down the list of atrocities and miscalculations and misspending of money of thelast four years done by those Democrats in that room.
And they sat there and took it and they should have taken it because they're the ones whodid this to the American people.
And the ones who either didn't attend or left are cowards.
(29:49):
And they are not willing to face up to the atrocities they are perpetuating on theAmerican people.
And you have to question what they stand for at all, because right now there's no messagefrom the Democratic party.
The one message that was halfway decent was in the Democratic response.
but that clearly did not align with the optics of the night
I had a conversation on Facebook when I posted last night if you can't even stand for,America's positives.
(30:17):
the families that had the...
Yes.
And I got a response back talking about the funding of pediatric cancer being paused.
they immediately came at Trump for putting that pause in place.
And I just laid out, do you think that if the spending had not happened for the last fouryears that we would have the money for the pediatric research?
(30:42):
And of course the tone kind of changed a little bit, but it's so funny how people soeasily place blame 44 days in to say it's Trump's fault there's no funding available for.
hasn't cured bird flu, so he hasn't fixed the price of eggs.
mean, give me a break.
(31:04):
Like he said, there's going to be a transition period with tariffs if these countries donot decide to have free trade with the United States.
And ultimately, I think some of these countries will come back and say, you know what?
We make more by trading with the United States than we do in our taxes So we're going tohave free trade with the United States, which is I think is ultimately what most people
(31:24):
would like to see But if you're going to tax us when our grandchildren are going in debtto take care of the rest of the world I don't see how anybody can
can justify us not having reciprocal tariffs
how does the GOP capitalize on these moments to present itself as the party of commonsense?
Well, I think one is when your opponents act so ridiculous over ridiculous things, itmakes you look like you have more common sense regardless.
(31:51):
but the truth of the matter is this president has come in with an abundance of commonsense.
we're not going to allow bureaucrats to continue to dictate foreign policy, domesticpolicy, agriculture policy.
We're not gonna let unelected bureaucrats dictate that.
This is going to come from the President of the United States.
And I know that Democrats who listen to this are like, but Elon Musk.
(32:14):
Elon Musk is acting on behalf and is in constant communication with the President of theUnited States.
These bureaucrats have maybe never even met a President of the United States.
And we all know that.
They're mid-level bureaucrats who are controlling water policy, soil policy,
communications policy, and we go down the list and you have mid-level bureaucrats who aredictating policy to the rest of us and they have no authority to do so outside of
(32:41):
presidential authority and this president said to stop and some of them have even said,no, I'm not going to stop.
I'm going to continue doing exactly what I'm doing and I'm more important than thepresident of the United States.
your last question for the day, are these displays of protest effective or do they justreinforce the perception of a dysfunctional government?
we've had protests and we're talking about the protests by the members of Congress.
(33:05):
They demeaned themselves through their protests.
the guy who yelled, you're a liar to Obama, the Republican who yelled that to Barack Obamaduring his, I think, 2009 or 2010 speech, demeaned himself.
it was not conduct becoming a member of Congress.
and you're a member of Congress, you should have a level of decorum when the President ofthe United States, regardless of who it is, decides to do that.
(33:31):
When Marjorie Taylor Greene shouted at Joe Biden during his speech, it was wrong.
And so what we need to have happen is both sides need to call out when someone from ourside
is being ridiculous.
Even if what they are saying is correct, even if I agree with them, we need to call outtheir behavior for being conduct unbecoming a member of Congress.
(33:54):
while I'll call out my side, and that's one reason why we call it Reasonable Arguments,Democrats refuse to do so when their side acts inappropriate.
They never do.
And so therein lies part of the problem.
then it takes people like me, if you want to say, hey, listen, hey Republicans, MattGaetz, you got a little bit out of control, right?
Marjorie Taylor Greene, reel it in.
(34:17):
It silences voices like mine when Democrats decide to be silent when their side decides toact a fool.
And we saw a group of people act a fool last night.
And it's inappropriate.
Nancy Pelosi should call it out and she won't.
Keene Jeffries should call it out and he won't.
(34:37):
so it leads me to a point where, why do I have to call it out when it's my side?
Democrats expect that from me because we have this blog called Reasonable Arguments.
I've been on many Democrat podcasts where I've had these conversations.
And they're like, wow, it's so refreshing to hear a Republican call out Republicans.
When are you going to do it when your side does it?
And they refuse.
(34:58):
And so there's no blogs, no podcasts called Reasonable Arguments on the Democrat side.
You only get Reasonable Arguments right here by subscribing and liking.
you're absolutely right, because we talked about that last night when, Nancy Pelosi rippedup Trump's speech, which you said is a federal offense.
(35:18):
just so everybody knows, when we do these episodes, because of my lack of knowledge, I doresearch.
And one of the things that we researched today was pulling up Biden's speeches, the firstone when he was elected, which
was during COVID, the room was not that crowded.
But the one that every other seat, everybody was masked.
(35:39):
But I looked these up specifically because I wanted to see how Republicans acted.
And so we did look at his last one that he did in 2024.
anytime an American positive
should be celebrated by standing and clapping, the Republican side did do that.
Now, when it was stuff where, yes.
(36:02):
gave Joe Biden multiple ovations just one year ago.
If it was absolute neutral territory and about the country, 100 % they did.
If he was attacking Trump or anything like that, then no, of course that didn't happen.
But that's something that I wanted to see for me before coming and doing this podcastbecause I didn't want to come into this blind and be like, okay, well, everybody acted a
(36:27):
fool last night, but did we also do the same thing years ago?
that research has been done.
You can see it on YouTube.
the videos out there with, Biden's speeches.
that is all the questions I have for you So what did we learn today?
well, for one partisan theater is alive and well in Washington.
Trump's speech wasn't just about policies.
(36:47):
It was a showcase of, of the current political climate.
Will Congress actually work together to get anything done or are we just watching anotherepisode of Congressional Survivor where politicians vote each other off the island rather
than doing their damn jobs?
One thing is clear, whether you love Trump or can't stand him, he has an undeniableability to put the contrast between the parties on full display.
(37:09):
Last night wasn't just about policy, it was also about priorities.
And if nothing else, we now have a clearer picture of what those priorities are.
So as always, we wanna hear from you.
Were you surprised by the reactions in Congress last night?
Did you think Trump's policies will hold up or are they just political promises with nofollow through?
So drop us a comment, send us a message and let's keep the conversation going.
(37:32):
We did put a poll out on YouTube, so go to our YouTube channel.
There is a poll on last night's speech and letting us know what your thoughts were.
And don't forget to subscribe, share, leave us a review and we will be back next episodewith more Reasonable Arguments.
Welcome back to Reasonable Arguments where we break down the politics without the fluff,the spin or the nonsense.
Last night, President Trump addressed Congress in a speech that love it or hate it madeone thing abundantly clear.
The political divide in this country is alive and well.
And if you needed proof, just look at who clapped and who sat on their hands.
Democrats only clapped when Trump mentioned that Biden administration had sent $380billion to Ukraine.
(01:20):
But for a 13-year-old boy with brain cancer who was inducted into the Secret Service?
Silence.
For the families of Jocelyn Ngare and Lakenrylee young women brutally murdered?
Silence.
For Mark Fogle, an American detained in Russia and his 95-year-old mother?
Silence.
It's almost as if bipartisan decency is dead.
(01:42):
Now, to be fair, this isn't the first time we've seen selective applause in politics, butwhat's different is the level of blatant pettiness.
Compare this to Biden's 2024 State of the Union speech just one year ago, Republicansstood and clapped whenever there was a win for America.
Whether they liked Biden or not, even when Biden said you can't love your country onlywhen you win.
(02:04):
Everyone in the room stood and clapped.
So what changed?
Why is it that last night's basic moments of human decency were seen as partisandivisions?
And that's what we're breaking down today.
We're going to go through the biggest moments from Trump's speech, his economic promises,social policies, immigration plans, and foreign policy.
And as always, I'll be grilling Jamie with three different perspectives, the Democratview, the Republican stance, and the centralist take.
(02:32):
So let's get started.
With the most obvious elephant, or should we say donkey, in the room, why did Democratsonly stand for Ukraine funding?
and not for the moments it should have been universally respected.
Well, I don't know that they stood for Ukraine funding.
They came in with, and it's really kind of weird because they came in with a lack ofleadership, a lack of cohesiveness, even with their clothing.
(02:54):
we saw in that 2024 speech, I think as we were getting prepared for this, all the womenwere white, this year some were pink, some were black, some didn't care.
And so there was like this lack of unified messaging.
And the sitting on the hands certainly didn't jive with what I thought was a pretty goodclosing speech by or response by Senator Slocken from Michigan.
(03:19):
but she was talking about, bipartisan leadership, a unified country.
And certainly the display of Democrats for the two hours prior made her speech ringcompletely hollow.
how do Republicans view the contrast in reactions and what does it say about the currentstate of the bipartisan respect?
Well, Democrats are upset that they hold majorities in neither the US Senate or US House,and of course that they lost the presidency in a big way.
(03:44):
They could take some solace in the fact that they didn't lose more US Senate seats andmore US House seats, but certainly Donald Trump winning all the swing states showed that
he does have a mandate.
He is doing what he suggested he would do, and Democrats don't like it.
and they don't like being in charge, they don't like being called out on their hypocrisy,they don't like being called out on the crazy, loony, liberal, extreme things that they
(04:10):
have been perpetuating to the rest of the world as normal American ideals.
how do moments like this affect the public trust in politicians and the idea of workingtogether for the American public?
I guess it begs the question, how many people trust politicians to begin with?
I've always said that, somebody says, I'm not a politician, I'm running for office likeTrump did.
(04:31):
Well, when you run for office, you're automatically a politician and there's some level ofdistrust that people have with you.
Some of it is when somebody runs, they're a little naive.
They're like, hey, I can do this, I can do that.
They join, let's say a county commissioner.
I want to do X, Y, and Z.
I want to have the garbage picked up on time.
you then join a board where you have to convince two other people to agree with you to getanything done.
(04:54):
That's assuming that your county commission is five people.
so people see the promises made and then they see it take a long time to have promiseskept in most instances.
And that builds a level of distrust, but it's kind of the way our system is.
I think that I was aiming more towards the American people seeing how the Democrats acted.
(05:16):
how does that affect them or anybody as the American people outside of that seeing our owncountry so divided?
Everybody's talking about World War III between Russia and Ukraine.
I said, it gonna happen on our own soil?
It's kind of like one of those things people from both sides have talked about, quote,civil war.
(05:37):
And my question always been like, who are you gonna shoot at?
let's say it comes to blows, right?
It comes to guns.
And are we choosing by gender?
How do you determine?
The first civil war was fought by states.
was geographic and it was very,
There were lines in the sand literally.
Here, you we're talking about more of a culture war and what people believe in.
(06:01):
And more and more people are voting with their feet, so to speak.
If you're a conservative in California and you don't have to stay in California, you'releaving because you're sick and tired of it.
And yet there's liberals in Florida who are tired of being in a conservative bastion offreedom and they decide to go live under the heavy hand of government in California.
the next part we're going to talk about is the economic policies and governmentefficiency.
(06:24):
the key takeaways from last night Trump's economic initiatives are 25 % tariffs on Canadaand Mexico to protect U.S.
industries, tax cuts on tips over time and social security benefits for seniors, and taxdeductible car loan interest, but only for American-made vehicles, which is great.
Government efficiency and budget, obviously the creation of Doge, led by Elon and thecommitment to balancing the budget, a goal not met in over 20 years.
(06:50):
Do Democrats see these tax breaks and tariffs as sustainable or do they believe they couldlead to economic instability?
Well, clearly don't, Democrats clearly don't understand them or they don't understand theplight of the average American person, right?
And because all they've talked about since the end of the speech, roughly 12 hours, 18hours, whatever it's been, is how Donald Trump only stands for billionaires.
(07:14):
And clearly he's standing for the American people when he says, we're going to stop incometax on tips over time and social security.
And then you throw in, if you buy your car that's made in America, you're going to get atax break on that too.
that's not a tax for billionaires.
That's a tax for regular American people.
so, quite frankly, Democrats had a tone deaf moment last night where they didn't reallyunderstand.
(07:40):
They were petulant.
They decided that they were going to make this statement of being silent.
And I really think it probably, to the extent that people pay attention, I think itimpacted them in a poor light.
So do you think that the no taxes on tips and overtime is a great thing.
The tax deductible car loans, But are people gonna argue that, inflation is not comingdown?
(08:03):
the grocery bills are still high.
Is that gonna offset that?
Will that be a positive?
Well, you started the question talking about tariffs and I think it's very important tounderstand that these are reciprocal tariffs not punitive tariffs.
And so it's not, this for that or we're punishing you.
It is you all have been taking advantage of us for decades.
(08:26):
And Donald Trump has said that is going to stop.
If you're going to put tariffs on our products and make it harder for Americans to dobusiness in your country.
we are going to make it harder for you to do business in our country at the same tax rate,at the exact same tax rate.
So I think it's very important to understand that these are reciprocal tariffs and notpunitive.
(08:47):
I don't think no, because I don't think.
went back to the beginning of the question because you threw a lot at me at the beginning.
Yeah, I'm sorry.
And I think that I don't understand that part of it because I understand the tariffs, butI think we're talking more about the tax cuts, where are the tax cuts that he is
implementing going to offset or going to be a positive if the inflation is not comingdown.
(09:10):
So ignore the tariffs.
Yeah, of course tax cuts are always positive because they give more people to more moneyto American people, right?
And so Americans just like businesses can only do so many things with that money.
They can invest it, they can spend it or they can do things like, hey, I'm going to takethat money and improve my home or improve the type of car I drive or I might send my kids
(09:32):
to a private school next year So
that money goes back into the economy in a major way and it goes back in a way that theAmerican citizen chooses, not some unnamed, unelected bureaucrat in Washington, D.C.
How do Republicans justify tax cuts while promising a balanced budget?
And where do they plan to cut spending?
That's a great question because we do have to grapple with this $36 plus trillion worth ofdebt.
(10:00):
Now, Donald Trump has come up with some ideas that he thinks are the golden ticket, forinstance, of charging wealthy immigrants $5 million apiece.
And he said, oh, I'm going to have a million people for $5 trillion.
Well, that puts a big chunk.
even if it's a million people over his first four years, taking $5 trillion off the debtwould be a huge step, taking 15 % of our debt and lowering it in a four-year period.
(10:31):
You have to remember that this is debt that's been accumulating since, I think, the 70s.
So we're not gonna fix it in one year, we're not gonna fix it in four, but we have to takemajor steps towards it.
And so that's been a criticism, quite frankly, over Republicans that has happened everytime they want to talk tax cuts.
(10:51):
It's like, okay, you want to balance the budget, but you want to cut taxes.
it's not an easy thing, but I think what you're seeing with Doge is that there's plenty ofplaces to cut to try to make up for both the tax cuts and to balance the budget.
well then that leads into the next question.
how does involving someone like Elon in government oversight sit with Americans who wantgovernment efficiency but are skeptical of private sector influence?
(11:14):
there's always private sector influence.
This has been a unprecedented private sector influence, if you want to call it that, byone major person, right?
And I don't know that we've ever had this before.
We probably have had it before, but not this public, to be honest with you.
And, certainly presidents have relied on high-net-worth individuals.
(11:35):
throughout their presidencies for advice and everything else.
But having someone in charge pointing out these hypocrisies, pointing out these extremeliberal policies that have been ingrained in places like USAID that are now seen as normal
is bizarre.
And I think Americans see that as bizarre.
(11:55):
And whether they like or dislike Elon Musk, I think they...
At the end of the day, they respect the job that he's doing and they respect the fact thathe is exposing.
I don't want to go as far as to say fraudulent activity, but it tap dances very close tofraud.
The next section we're going to talk about is social and cultural policies.
The key takeaways from last night were education and social policies, removing criticalrace theory from public schools, banning transgender individuals from women's sports,
(12:23):
making sex changes on minors a criminal offense, and declaring English the official U.S.
language.
how will Democrats push back on these policies and what challenges could they face incourts or in public?
Well, they pushed back the same way the Democratic response pushed back.
the Senator from Michigan, just 24 hours earlier, she voted herself to allow boys tocompete in women's sports or men to compete in college sports.
(12:50):
you know, so the hypocrisy of Democrats.
saying one thing out of one side of their mouth and yet doing another on the floor of theUS Senate, I think Americans are starting to see through that and they're starting to see
through it in a big way.
I've talked to some Democrats who have been very involved and some have said, I'm startingnot to recognize this Democratic party for which I've worked for.
(13:13):
decades and I don't know that I recognize it and I'd like to save it.
They still want to believe that they can save it.
I don't know that they can save it in the way that it operated under the likes of JFK oreven Bill Clinton.
a friend on Facebook today who said that the Democratic Party left him.
He didn't leave the Democrat Party.
that that's the case for a lot of people.
(13:35):
growing up in the South, where I grew up, where there were no Republicans, and everybodyregistered Democrat, and now almost everyone is Republican because the Democratic Party
started leaving them in the 80s and certainly did so under Bill Clinton with his expansionof healthcare.
I would say some level of banking policy, it still is a, know, Democrats have gone downthe slippery slope with, they stop the slide?
(14:02):
And, I question whether they can or not.
How do the social policies fit into the broader conservative platform for 2025 and beyond?
I think Americans are at a point where they're ready to stop fighting the cultural warsand replace it with common sense.
And for instance, we're not going to have pornography teaching same-sex relationships inkindergarten.
(14:27):
actually, a friend of mine just posted on Facebook before we came on here that she heardthat they are putting condom machines, this is in Michigan, in bathrooms at preschools and
grade schools.
For what reason?
Like it goes beyond, it just makes no common sense.
The only reason why you would is if adults are raping children.
That's the only reason.
And if you're trying to defend any other reason, I'd like to know what it is.
(14:52):
Because that's the only thing I can come up with why you would do that.
I mean, it is abhorrent.
And Democrats, like I said, they're on a slippery slope of going into obscurity becausethey lack common sense.
And I'll tell you, it won't start in Congress.
Congress may stay close and Democrats may even take over the US House in 2026, dependingon the economy.
(15:12):
But you're going to start seeing major changes in state legislative bodies that are goingto stop this mess because a lot of this stuff starts there, especially education policy.
this boys in girls sport starts at the state legislative level.
And so in places like Michigan and Illinois and New York, you're gonna start seeingchanges in those state legislative bodies.
(15:34):
And then by 2030, you'll see a change in redistricting for the US House.
And if that in fact takes place, Democrats are likely to be in the minority in the USHouse throughout the 2030.
How do independent voters feel about these policies and do they view them as necessaryprotections or government overreach?
It depends on the independent voter, right?
(15:55):
think you probably have, and it depends on the issue.
And that's what makes independence kind of fun to poll the more interesting thing aboutindependence and polling is that today the number one issue among independents can be
education.
And three months from now, you can pull those exact same independents and it could bepublic safety.
And then those independents may be lean left.
(16:17):
on education, but lean right on public safety.
you could talk to the exact same focus group on those issues.
And so that's why people misunderstand independence and the actual issues that lead intoan election and how to reach independence and speak to them, kind of with the issues that
matter to them at that time.
The next section is immigration and border security.
(16:39):
the key takeaways from last night Trump touted historically low illegal border crossings.
He announced largest deportation operation in US history.
And he introduced a plan to sell $5 million gold cards to wealthy foreigners as a path tocitizenship.
How might Democrats counter the deportation policy while still addressing border securityconcerns?
(17:03):
So there's at least one pet peeve of mine in here and it's when Democrats or CNN says,Donald Trump isn't deporting as many illegals as Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
Well, of course they're not because they were collecting a hundred thousand people at theborder every month and sending them across.
Trump had 9,000 last month, 9,000.
(17:24):
It dropped immediately.
And so...
There aren't as many attempts.
So you start looking at the number of people at the border who were deported versus peoplewho were inside the United States being deported, that's a number I would like to see.
I don't have that number in front of me.
I have not heard anybody report it.
But the press is being disingenuous when they suggest that somehow Obama or Biden havedeported more people when Donald Trump has put this effort in place to keep people from
(17:52):
coming to our country.
And that has to be recognized as a, as a huge success for president Donald Trump.
Now the gold card we spoke about a little bit, and I think the devil will be in thedetails there because, and we're going to do a series on, the illegal immigration
movement.
we have four CEOs of national think tanks who are going to come on the podcast and we'regoing to discuss all these issues in depth.
(18:15):
So I don't want to.
spend a whole lot of time here because there's an expert on the Gold Card who's going tojoin us.
And I look forward to that conversation.
And I don't want to say anything here that's going to make me look bad in front of anexpert.
But I do think that one issue that we will have with Gold Card in the details is that forevery immigrant who comes here legally, as a general rule, 13 to 14 family members follow.
(18:38):
And so the question becomes, if we allow one person in at five million, what are wecharging the other 13 or 14?
Are they all five million?
Or do the other 13 or 14 get to come in for free?
And so then it's not one million people for $5 trillion.
It's 14 million people.
I thought it was based on whether or not you're building a business.
(18:59):
kind that's another detail that's not really in there.
if you're going to be able to afford $5 million, you're probably going to bring yourbusiness to the United States and conduct that business here.
what I'm suggesting is Donald Trump has used this, I'll have 1 million people at $5million that will create 5 trillion that we can put towards the national debt.
And data will show that for every legal immigrant who comes, 13 family members
(19:19):
follow.
And so it's not 1 million people for $5 million or for 5 trillion.
It's 14 million people for $5 trillion unless we are charging every family member one,two, three, four or $5 million for them to come as well.
And so that's why I say the devil's into the details because we really haven't talkedabout the practical implication of what a legal immigrant means when they come here.
(19:45):
isn't this kind of like the NIH where, the 1 % genius could come over and go to school
Look at you using the acronyms.
I'm so proud of you, babe.
Holy mackerel.
This is something I never, I never thought I'd see.
This is something I never thought I'd see.
The NIA.
Not in the middle of a podcast.
(20:06):
doing great, baby.
Is this the unfiltered part?
I couldn't help myself.
god.
I'm gonna go back to my scripted questions.
Yeah, right.
We've always tried to attract the biggest, the best and the brightest, but that's an issuethat we start having when we have, and like I said, I don't want to get into it too much,
(20:34):
but that's what you have when you start taking the best and brightest from undevelopedcountries.
There's an argument that,
while we may help those few people who aren't the best and brightest and bring them hereand take advantage of their skills and brain power, we are not leaving that brain power to
solve problems in their own countries.
And so there is an argument that we are doing a disservice to the world by bringing thebest and brightest here.
(20:59):
What would a successful large-scale deportation operation look like and is it feasible?
I've always argued, going back to the campaign that we're unlikely to deport 20 millionpeople in the first year, even though Joe Biden let that many in over his four years.
I think that's at least the number that he probably has let in.
But we are, talking about a massive effort.
(21:22):
We've seen what how hard it's been to deport the number that we have.
finding, arresting, putting on a plane and deporting, and then getting countries to acceptthem, right?
Because they don't want these criminals back.
They don't want these gang members back.
And they offloaded them to us.
They thought they were gone forever.
And our problem, they would spend the rest of their lives in our jails.
And that's part of it.
They don't want to pay the money to jail their criminals.
(21:44):
So they sent them to us to commit crimes here and for us to jail.
And Donald Trump says, no, you're going to get these people back.
and especially the criminals.
So I question the practical application of large deportation.
I question how much Americans will accept large deportations when it starts impacting, forinstance, their child's best friend who's in school.
(22:07):
And nobody really knows that their parents are illegal.
And now the best friend is sent back to Colombia or whatever.
originating country.
And so I think there will be a line.
I don't know what that number is.
Certainly Americans are almost 100 % on board with deporting criminals.
And so I think that's where Trump has started, and we'll see where it goes from there.
(22:29):
The next question has to do with the gold card, so you decide whether or not you want toanswer it now, but does the idea of selling citizenship to the wealthy align with American
values or does it create a two-tiered immigration system?
Yeah, that's, it certainly sounds like it creates a two-tiered immigration system.
The question is whether that's bad or not, or whether we as Americans are in suchfinancial dire straits that we need to take an extreme measure like that.
(22:55):
And I think there are people who, when we're going two trillion in debt per year, and onetrillion of that is just servicing the debt.
we have to stop that.
we have to somehow call back that $2 trillion in whether it's taxes or spending.
That's basically the two ways to do it, right?
Or you create a great economy that generates more taxes, right?
(23:18):
On the tax rates that we have today, you either get more people working, you get paid moreor whatever the case may be.
And so, I...
I think I will wait on the rest of that answer for when we have our four part series.
The next section is foreign policy and national defense.
The key takeaways were Trump discussed Ukraine peace talks and referenced a letter fromZelensky indicating readiness to negotiate, labeled the Middle East as a rough
(23:44):
neighborhood, promising to restore order, and proposed expanding American spaceexploration, including planting a US flag on Mars.
from the democratic
perspective, what risks come with pushing Ukraine toward peace talks, especially if Russiais still aggressive?
Donald Trump has to get folks to the table to negotiate, the one thing that is clear thatpeople are not speaking about is when Zelensky said, and even during my BBC interview, I
(24:10):
went back and looked at it remember they switched topics on me and kind of caught me alittle flat-footed.
But that whole interview ended with the interviewer asking me, does the president realizethat
this strength that Zelensky is talking about has to be part of the deal.
And so there was a little bit of foreshadowing of what happened in the Oval Office wasduring my BBC interview.
(24:34):
We should put that link back in the comments.
But because it was really kind of telling that the BBC was all over that.
But there's no question that Zelensky, when he said the word strength, he meant Americanboots on the ground.
And Americans do not want boots on the ground on the Ukraine-Russian border.
(24:54):
And what Zelensky wants is American boots on the ground.
So then if Russia then breaks the ceasefire, he's shooting at Americans and now we haveWorld War Three.
And so it's not about protection.
It's about creating an escalation of the war.
And if we put boots on the ground, like Trump rejected rightfully in the Oval Office withthe Ukrainian president in...
(25:16):
face to face is that immediately the second we agreed to this word strength with theUkrainian president, China and North Korea would see that as aggression towards Russia.
And so now just agreeing to this word strength would have put dominoes in place.
I'm not going to say they would have fallen, but they definitely would have been in place.
(25:38):
to create an environment for World War III.
And that's what upset President Trump in the Oval Office.
And that's why he kept telling President Zelensky, you are toying with World War IIIbecause Donald Trump knew what Zelensky meant by the word strength.
Zelensky knew what he meant by the word strength.
And yet for 48 hours after that, 72 hours after that, every Democrat said, no, Zelenskydidn't mean boots on the ground.
(26:01):
But then Monday, following that Oval Office blowup, we had Zelensky agree with
Great Britain and France to put boots on the ground 30 days after a ceasefire.
And so there's no question at this point.
There is no question.
If anybody says that Zelensky did not mean boots on the ground when he was using strengthin front of the president and vice president, they're either being disingenuous or they're
(26:26):
bold-faced lying to the American people.
How does Trump, yeah, and I can't even tell you like the obstacle course he went around toget to me, so I have to kind of let him be here.
how does Trump's foreign policy compare to traditional Republican stances on interventionand defense?
the devil will be in the details and we'll see.
mean, right now, Republicans have always believed in peace through strength.
(26:47):
And Democrats have always believed in using that strength to create wars.
mean, every war has been created under Democrat and none under Republicans.
I think that's what President Trump is trying to emulate is peace through strength.
And so on the broad terms of foreign policy, I think he's much like Ronald Reagan.
Is the push for space exploration a bold vision or a distraction from pressing domesticconcerns?
(27:12):
when Kennedy said, let's go to the moon by the end of this century, it was a bold vision.
So I'm going to say that going to Mars is a bold vision.
And the question becomes, how much does it cost and how much are we as Americans willingto pay for that bold vision in light of other problems?
(27:34):
Now, we also know the American people are still digesting all of this ridiculous moneythat was spent by USAID Remember, we're going in debt to finance this war.
We're the only country going in debt to finance the war in Ukraine.
No other country is going in debt for the war in Ukraine.
(27:55):
it's...
unconscionable that we are doing this to our grandchildren.
I like the idea of public private partnerships and figuring out a way to have, Elon Muskflip most of the bill or some of the bill.
versus, taxpayers paying the whole thing.
But we'll see how those programs come forth.
And the last takeaway that we have is congressional reactions and political fallout.
(28:17):
the Democrats protested parts of the speech with some lawmakers walking out and thepolitical divide was clear with visible frustration on both sides.
What did Democrats hope to achieve with their protest and could it backfire?
Well, I think the protests were pathetic and quite frankly, I would give credit to theDemocrats who sat through the entire speech.
And I don't give them credit for not standing for the things we mentioned.
(28:40):
The pro-American bipartisan things that the president spoke about should have beenapplauded and should have had a standing ovation just like every Congress before us.
Those who walked out, I think, embarrassed themselves for a TikTok moment.
And certainly the fellow who did not even let the president get started with his speechbefore he started waving his cane was doing that for social media, not to make any real
(29:05):
point.
And they should be embarrassed.
They should be embarrassed by their conduct.
They aren't embarrassed, but they should be.
But I do give credit for those who sat through the whole thing because Donald Trump gavethem what you can only call a good old fashioned ass whipping And that's the truth.
(29:26):
he went down the list of atrocities and miscalculations and misspending of money of thelast four years done by those Democrats in that room.
And they sat there and took it and they should have taken it because they're the ones whodid this to the American people.
And the ones who either didn't attend or left are cowards.
(29:49):
And they are not willing to face up to the atrocities they are perpetuating on theAmerican people.
And you have to question what they stand for at all, because right now there's no messagefrom the Democratic party.
The one message that was halfway decent was in the Democratic response.
but that clearly did not align with the optics of the night
I had a conversation on Facebook when I posted last night if you can't even stand for,America's positives.
(30:17):
the families that had the...
Yes.
And I got a response back talking about the funding of pediatric cancer being paused.
they immediately came at Trump for putting that pause in place.
And I just laid out, do you think that if the spending had not happened for the last fouryears that we would have the money for the pediatric research?
(30:42):
And of course the tone kind of changed a little bit, but it's so funny how people soeasily place blame 44 days in to say it's Trump's fault there's no funding available for.
hasn't cured bird flu, so he hasn't fixed the price of eggs.
mean, give me a break.
(31:04):
Like he said, there's going to be a transition period with tariffs if these countries donot decide to have free trade with the United States.
And ultimately, I think some of these countries will come back and say, you know what?
We make more by trading with the United States than we do in our taxes So we're going tohave free trade with the United States, which is I think is ultimately what most people
(31:24):
would like to see But if you're going to tax us when our grandchildren are going in debtto take care of the rest of the world I don't see how anybody can
can justify us not having reciprocal tariffs
how does the GOP capitalize on these moments to present itself as the party of commonsense?
Well, I think one is when your opponents act so ridiculous over ridiculous things, itmakes you look like you have more common sense regardless.
(31:51):
but the truth of the matter is this president has come in with an abundance of commonsense.
we're not going to allow bureaucrats to continue to dictate foreign policy, domesticpolicy, agriculture policy.
We're not gonna let unelected bureaucrats dictate that.
This is going to come from the President of the United States.
And I know that Democrats who listen to this are like, but Elon Musk.
(32:14):
Elon Musk is acting on behalf and is in constant communication with the President of theUnited States.
These bureaucrats have maybe never even met a President of the United States.
And we all know that.
They're mid-level bureaucrats who are controlling water policy, soil policy,
communications policy, and we go down the list and you have mid-level bureaucrats who aredictating policy to the rest of us and they have no authority to do so outside of
(32:41):
presidential authority and this president said to stop and some of them have even said,no, I'm not going to stop.
I'm going to continue doing exactly what I'm doing and I'm more important than thepresident of the United States.
your last question for the day, are these displays of protest effective or do they justreinforce the perception of a dysfunctional government?
we've had protests and we're talking about the protests by the members of Congress.
(33:05):
They demeaned themselves through their protests.
the guy who yelled, you're a liar to Obama, the Republican who yelled that to Barack Obamaduring his, I think, 2009 or 2010 speech, demeaned himself.
it was not conduct becoming a member of Congress.
and you're a member of Congress, you should have a level of decorum when the President ofthe United States, regardless of who it is, decides to do that.
(33:31):
When Marjorie Taylor Greene shouted at Joe Biden during his speech, it was wrong.
And so what we need to have happen is both sides need to call out when someone from ourside
is being ridiculous.
Even if what they are saying is correct, even if I agree with them, we need to call outtheir behavior for being conduct unbecoming a member of Congress.
(33:54):
while I'll call out my side, and that's one reason why we call it Reasonable Arguments,Democrats refuse to do so when their side acts inappropriate.
They never do.
And so therein lies part of the problem.
then it takes people like me, if you want to say, hey, listen, hey Republicans, MattGaetz, you got a little bit out of control, right?
Marjorie Taylor Greene, reel it in.
(34:17):
It silences voices like mine when Democrats decide to be silent when their side decides toact a fool.
And we saw a group of people act a fool last night.
And it's inappropriate.
Nancy Pelosi should call it out and she won't.
Keene Jeffries should call it out and he won't.
(34:37):
so it leads me to a point where, why do I have to call it out when it's my side?
Democrats expect that from me because we have this blog called Reasonable Arguments.
I've been on many Democrat podcasts where I've had these conversations.
And they're like, wow, it's so refreshing to hear a Republican call out Republicans.
When are you going to do it when your side does it?
And they refuse.
(34:58):
And so there's no blogs, no podcasts called Reasonable Arguments on the Democrat side.
You only get Reasonable Arguments right here by subscribing and liking.
you're absolutely right, because we talked about that last night when, Nancy Pelosi rippedup Trump's speech, which you said is a federal offense.
(35:18):
just so everybody knows, when we do these episodes, because of my lack of knowledge, I doresearch.
And one of the things that we researched today was pulling up Biden's speeches, the firstone when he was elected, which
was during COVID, the room was not that crowded.
But the one that every other seat, everybody was masked.
(35:39):
But I looked these up specifically because I wanted to see how Republicans acted.
And so we did look at his last one that he did in 2024.
anytime an American positive
should be celebrated by standing and clapping, the Republican side did do that.
Now, when it was stuff where, yes.
(36:02):
gave Joe Biden multiple ovations just one year ago.
If it was absolute neutral territory and about the country, 100 % they did.
If he was attacking Trump or anything like that, then no, of course that didn't happen.
But that's something that I wanted to see for me before coming and doing this podcastbecause I didn't want to come into this blind and be like, okay, well, everybody acted a
(36:27):
fool last night, but did we also do the same thing years ago?
that research has been done.
You can see it on YouTube.
the videos out there with, Biden's speeches.
that is all the questions I have for you So what did we learn today?
well, for one partisan theater is alive and well in Washington.
Trump's speech wasn't just about policies.
(36:47):
It was a showcase of, of the current political climate.
Will Congress actually work together to get anything done or are we just watching anotherepisode of Congressional Survivor where politicians vote each other off the island rather
than doing their damn jobs?
One thing is clear, whether you love Trump or can't stand him, he has an undeniableability to put the contrast between the parties on full display.
(37:09):
Last night wasn't just about policy, it was also about priorities.
And if nothing else, we now have a clearer picture of what those priorities are.
So as always, we wanna hear from you.
Were you surprised by the reactions in Congress last night?
Did you think Trump's policies will hold up or are they just political promises with nofollow through?
So drop us a comment, send us a message and let's keep the conversation going.
(37:32):
We did put a poll out on YouTube, so go to our YouTube channel.
There is a poll on last night's speech and letting us know what your thoughts were.
And don't forget to subscribe, share, leave us a review and we will be back next episodewith more Reasonable Arguments.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com