will be Democrats.

He, after all, is the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Border Security and Immigration, and thus best informed on the issues. He's also a longtime member of the Democrats' leadership in the Senate, and a reasoned, yet passionate speaker. It would have been a better choice. He doesn't have the kind of targets on his back that Pelosi and Schumer do, as the more visible members of the leadership. More people would thus listen to him.

I usually stop what I'm doing to listen when I see him on TV.

In this case, I like the Pelosi/Schumer choice. It lets the public know who is there to counter Trump-who is in charge of the opposition to his crazy ideas.

And I'm sure they will be able to think on their feet and give the right response with the amount of authority that is needed, being a co-equal branch of the government.

She counts her meld and knows how to bid.

Maybe Trump will mention "Nancy" in his speech?, but
there is a flew bug going around ... he probably hasn't
slept well.

And he does have to fly to Mexico.

What a great time to put up a wall so he can't get back in!

I thought oops, I was just being sarcastic

and you let me off the hook.

Thanks ... but you got me!

mainly because of the rancor they bring out from the opposition. Durban is knowledgeable with an authoritative speaking style.

the russian is making his move tonight.

...to communicate to a larger audience. Just my opinion.

delivered with "passion."

Look at who sits in the White House. Lies with passion.

ignored. Pelosi will do fine. Schumer i’m not so sure. Sometimes he has a way of coming across too erudite, nuanced and refined where the average audience member may respond better to direct, straight-forward, graphic language. I would prefer if they portray Benedict Donald as petulant and play up the “hostage” element, i.e., for the long term welfare of our nation, we can never submit to hostage taking, even when it is by the small p president. And then back this up with the facts arguing against spending our $ on a meaningless “wall”.

On the other hand, the illegitimate WH occupant may well just make it very easy for them with his own performance or, better yet, burn down his house on his own.

Just as folks call on speakers to show more *passion," listeners need to take some responsibility and learn how to listen to information that profoundly affects them without feeling the need to be entertained and "inspired."

we can’t control that. We can only hope and understand that.

psychologically, less than 10% of your actual words matter when giving a presentation.

body language, tone of voice, appearance, and attractiveness matter. Presentation matters like 90% of it.

That's not made up, that's science. Studies have been done on this. Lawyers are trained on this when giving opening/closing statements/argument.

What you say is way, way less important than how you say it.

Shouldn't be that way, but it's the way it is for the vast majority of human beings.

So, tell us, who do you think would have gotten "that larger audience," and why didn't they do that?

of belief that good liberal principles and reason can prevail yourself, and I'm sorry.

But remember that liberals have ALWAYS been, overall, more strongly motivated by reasoned argument than passion, actually often finding passion suspect. That's why Trump, and Sanders to a lesser degree, though able to draw some who respond to passion to become strong followers, did not have the same effect on most liberals. Even 9 out of 10 Sanders primary voters turned happily to Hillary as their second choice because it was about the issues for them, not the charisma.

Until we make candidates campaign with bags on their heads, that we aren't all potential trumpsters is actually something very good about us and what will save our nation.

It will not be hard.

rather do a prebuttal, essentially saying we have already passed bills to re-open the government and fund border security, "border security" has nothing to do with the government being open/closed, give the REAL stats on illegals/terrorists/etc and close it with "it doesn't matter what falsehoods he says tonight, we aren't funding a wall".

Go ahead a pre-empt the nonsense.

Nick Jack Pappas (@Pappiness) Tweeted:
Preview of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer's full response to Trump's address this evening: https://t.co/wKubi5Xmd3

Link to tweet

I remember during one of Obama’s addresses that there were three or more republican responses. To me, that just reeks of weakness and lack of unity within the party.

I like Durbin, but I LOVE Nancy. Schumer is just there to carry her lunch.

I would personally like to see them think outside of the box but Pelosi and Schumer will do well.

Wanna know how to knock Trump off the front page on this one? Have Colin Kaepernick give the response.

Chuck can take the night off. Will leave it at that.

I am not a huge fan of either when I want to listen to someone speak however the two of them make the representation of the party and the decisions made by the party seem to fall of their shoulders. No besmirching of someone who wants to run in 2020, a full representation without someone saying something that is a little off by accident or implication. We have some excellent speakers and excellent representatives who are really busy right now drawing the noose tighter and tighter. They are free to do so and continue without the distraction that you know will be flying out of Fox by the bucket fulls.

Kinda naive thought but it sit well with me so, we will see. All in all, it probably makes not one tiny difference who is doing the talking but it does seem like a good strategy at this particular moment to me.

We'll probably have to wait for SNL for that one.