Less than 24 hours after President Donald Trump's address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, everyone who watched it or read about it has an opinion on either the 100-minute speech — the longest-ever by a president to Congress — or the hostile reaction from Democrats.
Historians of the presidency and the Congress who spoke to Newsmax are sharply divided on Trump's message and its delivery as well as the reaction by Democrats.
"I am not given to hyperbole, but the speech revealed a dynamic leader of the free world and our nation," Donald Critchlow, a history professor at Arizona State University, told Newsmax, "It was truly inspiring.
"Trump's Democratic opponents in Congress came across as pathetic in their disruptive protests and in their refusal to applaud average Americans called out by Trump to stand in recognition for their sacrifice, sufferings, and courage."
Critchlow, author of three books on the Republican Party, concluded that "President Trump in his first days in office has been a whirlwind that is leaving the Democrats gasping for breath. Democrats are choking on the dust."
Chapman University professor Luke Nichter, author of the critically acclaimed "1968: The Year That Broke Politics," agreed, saying Trump's address was "arguably the most substantive, hopeful, and forward-looking speech of his political career."
"If you are a Trump supporter, there was much to like — a summary of his second term to date, and calls for new initiatives such as an oil pipeline, tax cuts, no tax on tips, overtime, and Social Security, deductible interest on loans for cars made in the U.S., the designation of cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, a mandatory death sentence for anyone who murders a police officer, a new crime bill to get tough on repeat offenders, and a new 'golden dome' missile defense system," Nichter said.
But Nichter also noted that "[i] If you are not a Trump supporter, like Rep. Al Green [D-Texas], who had to be removed from the House chamber for being disruptive, the best part of the evening was the response by Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin, who provided a glimpse of a possible future for younger moderates in the party."
There are second opinions in most professions and historians and political scientists are no exception.
Henry Olsen, senior fellow at the Center for Ethics and Public Policy, characterized Trump's address as "too political and too self-congratulatory. But he's mainly hitting 70-30 issues [those favored by his supporters] so far. His voters will like what they're hearing. It was also good for him to at least mention fighting inflation a few times."
"It mostly sounded similar to his campaign speech," said Swiss political scientist Louis Perron, author of the book "Beat The Incumbent," "I would have written a more bipartisan address, at least trying to reconcile the country."
Perron recalled how "during the first days back at the White House, Trump showed speed. And I think this is the key for effective delivery marketing. Now, however, it seems to me that he is losing focus.
"The key is inflation and the economy. I would have looked for a stronger message on how the tariffs fit in there. Many people look at what happens with the stock market and are uncomfortable with the tariffs. I have rarely seen Republicans welcome a new tax so enthusiastically."
John Gizzi is chief political columnist and White House correspondent for Newsmax. For more of his reports, Go Here Now.