I didn't find it a highly objectionable speech. There were tints of White Supremacists with a willingness to redefine the USA's history. I also think there was a far harsher tone to his speech that the global community is not used to at all. That harshness was noted in his focus on China. No one can deny China has been an international thief of intellectual property.
He believes sovereign control will solve all problems. Protecting the intellectual property of American inventors is an act of sovereignty. Focusing on sovereignty is not a bad place for him to be, except, his policies victimize those seeking asylum.
He stated the bad actor in regard to Venezuela is Cuba. That is not the case. Russia is occupying Venezuela as a permanent military base in the Western Hemisphere.
He did not mention the Border Wall directly and didn't mention Russia or the Climate Crisis at all. He also didn't address the plight of journalists in highlighting their cruel imprisonment and deaths.
I think Americans need to be hesitant in their approach to accepting the speech as real and doctrine of the USA.
