The State of the Union keeps exposing Democrats’ biggest problem

The State of the Union will never favor the minority party. By tradition and design, the annual address to a joint session of Congress has morphed into a lengthy free advertisement for the incumbent president. Gone are the days when presidents would give a measure of tough talk, like Gerald Ford did in 1975 when, in the wake of Watergate, as costs of living and mistrust in government were soaring, he confessed that “the state of our union is not good.”

This was Donald Trump’s sixth State of the Union, and after all those spins on his MAGA tilt-a-whirl, it was clear that Democrats still have not figured out how to effectively rebut the president at his annual marquee address. 

In 2025, Texas Rep. Al Green shook his cane at Trump and yelled in protest of the administration’s looming cuts to Medicaid; he was escorted from the House of Representatives by the Sergeant at Arms. Some Democrats walked out midway through the speech in protest. Others raised small placards distributed by the Congressional Progressive Progress that read “Save Medicaid,” “Protect Veterans” and “Musk Steals.” Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib furiously scribbled responses like “That’s a lie” and “No King” on a small whiteboard.

None of the strategies worked. Viewers found it hard to make out exactly what Green was yelling about unless they stayed around for post-speech coverage on cable news. The lawmakers who marched out were shown for only a few seconds as Trump continued to speak. The signs looked performative and anemic and the visual impact was poor. The cumulative image was one of chaos, which reinforced people’s perception of the state of the Democratic Party itself. 

The most memorable — and controversial — moment came in 2020, when then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tore up the official copy of Trump’s speech that he had handed to her. But beyond the basic genius of it and Pelosi’s masterful performance, what made her protest so effective was that it was distilled and digestible for the audience at home. Since Democrats held the House majority, she was seated on the rostrum behind Trump, who was in the frame with her, and next to Vice President Mike Pence, and against a backdrop of the American flag. The message of her action was clear and unmistakable: Trump’s speech was so offensive and full of lies that it wasn’t worth the paper on which it was written. And her move broke through the news cycle, sparking discussion and debate.

This year, with Democrats out of power in Congress, there was no such opportunity. A week ahead of Trump’s speech, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., sent a clear message to his caucus: sit quietly and don’t take Trump’s bait, or skip the speech altogether. While some listened, a few others didn’t get the memo. 

It’s a tough call: whether to show up and bear witness in an attempt to remind Americans that there is an engaged opposition, or to refuse to be present on the principle that attendance conveys legitimacy on a president and administration that traffics in authoritarianism. 

As Trump launched into a grueling, combative address that once again showcased White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller’s impotence as a speechwriter, Green caused another ruckus in the House. He held up a sign that read “BLACK PEOPLE AREN’T APES,” a reference to the president’s recent sharing of a racist video clip depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as beasts in the jungle, and was again removed from the chamber. 

As the president droned on in a record 107-minute speech notable only for its length, racism and staging — at various points, Trump acted as a game show host, handing out medals and revealing much-missed uncles from behind closed doors as prizes to audience members in the gallery — he increasingly began baiting his opposition. “You should be ashamed of yourself for not standing up,” he said at various points. At another, he resorted to his signature name-calling: “These people are crazy. I’m telling you, they’re crazy…Democrats are destroying our country.”

Most Democrats looked on in stony silence, including Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Chris Coons of Delaware and Jon Ossoff of Georgia, a trio of seat mates who resembled a panel of judges set to impose the harshest possible sentence.

Tlaib left her whiteboard at home. She and Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar shouted epithets at the podium as Trump spoke that were hard to make out. But two messages appeared clear. At one point, when the GOP started a chant of “U-S-A,” Tlaib seemed to instead mouth “KKK.” At another, Omar shouted “You have killed Americans” at the president, a reference to the recent killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good by federal immigration agents in her home state.

Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

Dozens of Democratic lawmakers skipped the festivities in favor of counter-events. Senators including Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Tina Smith of Minnesota and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, along with representatives such as Pramila Jayapal of Washington and John Larson of Connecticut, attended what was billed as the “People’s State of the Union” outside the Capitol on the National Mall. Others opted for a discussion on “The State of the Swamp” held at the National Press Club. Neither attracted significant media attention.

Once again, the message sent to the American people was one of disunity. Democrats appeared to be exactly what they are: a fractured party with different approaches to opposing Trump. 

Instead it fell to Abigail Spanberger, Virginia’s newly-inaugurated Democratic governor, to deliver a 12-minute message to the dwindling audience of Americans who managed to find the stamina to watch another speech after being exhausted by Trump.

Choosing Spanberger came with a marked risk. Never the most engaging speaker, the danger was that she would be unable to meet the moment following Trump’s performance, especially when polls show that most rank-and-file Democrats are in search of a brawler rather than the adult in the room. But the potential upside was that her no-nonsense approach would prove a welcome contrast, particularly as the party had announced that the focus of her address would be affordability.

On theme, Spanberger delivered. Her speech was direct and personal, given to an audience in Virginia’s storied House of Burgesses and viewers at home that she addressed in second-person. “They’re making your life harder,” she said of Trump and Republicans. “They’re making your life more expensive. They’re even making it more difficult to see a doctor.” The president, she concluded, was doing “what he always does: he lied, he scapegoated and he distracted, and he offered no solutions to our nation’s challenges.”

While her speech was more workmanlike than inspiring, Spanberger attempted to take a page from Bill Clinton’s playbook and posed a set of easily digestible questions: “Is the president working to make life more affordable for you and your family? Is the president working to keep Americans safe, both at home and abroad? Is the president working for you?” The obvious answer to each was no, and despite the speech lacking Clinton’s famed organization and delivery, it at least helped to frame what was at stake.

But the most memorable takedowns of Trump and his MAGA agenda came from a figure representing Democrats’ recent past and another who could well define its future. Following Spanberger’s speech, House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi delivered a memorable line that linked the nation’s economic challenges to the specter of creeping authoritarianism. “We save the democracy at the kitchen table,” she said on CNN, making clear that the party should make affordability the centerpiece of its agenda heading into November’s midterms. 

In comments on CNN and the Bulwark, former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg agreed, referring to Trump’s speech as “window-dressing” to CNN’s Jake Tapper. In a conversation with the Bulwark’s Tim Miller immediately following Spanberger’s response, Buttigieg pointed out Americans’ anxieties surrounding affordability and homed in on a way to call out the GOP’s hypocrisy. “Conservatives are known for talking more about family,” he said. “Now is a moment for Democrats to say — the biggest thing we can do to be pro-family, pro-your family, is to have policies that will make it easier for you to start a family and afford it. That’s child care for sure, that’s things like paid family leave. It’s also things like making sure we invest in pre-K, invest in schools.”

Instead of attending alternative events that generated little attention, hollering invective at Trump or sitting silent with a glare, Democrats would have made better use of their time by convening a messaging seminar. Every moment they spend not honing creative, resonant ways to talk about the affordability crisis — and successfully linking it to Trump’s autocratic ambitions, as Pelosi did — in a way that can cut through the administration’s lies and spectacle is a moment wasted. Instead, Democrats allowed themselves to be goaded by Trump and used as nothing more than props. 

Spanberger, Pelosi and Buttigieg did what they could under the circumstances. In the absence of true leadership from Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the rest of the party should follow their lead.