President Obama’s Debt Deal Press Conference Today

Filed in National by on July 11, 2011

President Obama is scheduled to give a press conference at 11AM today to talk about the debt talks, and presumably make his case to “independent” voters. Feel free to use this thread to discuss or live blog.

WDEL usually carries the President’s events live, but since I haven’t been able to listen this AM am not sure if they are going to break for this.

The White House will provide a live stream of this.

C-Span will also live stream it.

If any of the networks are covering this or if there are other options to live stream this event, I’m hoping the other editors will add those to the list here.

Tags: , , ,

About the Author ()

"You don't make progress by standing on the sidelines, whimpering and complaining. You make progress by implementing ideas." -Shirley Chisholm

Comments (6)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Jason330 says:

    The maddening thing is that President Obama keeps acting like the Bush debt created by stupid tax cuts and idiotic wars is some big crisis.

  2. Dana Garrett says:

    I still don’t get why Obama’s opening gambit wasn’t 50% cuts and 50% revenue increases. That said I think Obama is correct that a longer-term solution to the debt ceiling problem is the way to go. It would provide greater confidence for investors in the US economy. It also would remove the problem during the election year. I suspect that the Republicans are only now advocating for a short term solution, calculating that it would hurt Obama more in 2012. They would then develop the narrative that Obama cannot provide stability to the government causing investors to lose.confidence in the economy.

  3. puck says:

    I am completely baffled and exhausted by trying to figure out what Obama is up to. I think that may be what he was actually trying to accomplish with the press conference.

    Obama on December 7 2010: “Well, look, I’ve got a whole bunch of lines in the sand. …”

  4. cassandra_m says:

    I don’t think that we know what the opening gambit was, but the Deficit Commission was proposing a 2:1 or 3:1 (depending upon how you count interest) cuts:new revenues framework. Earlier this year, Republicans told everyone they could live with an 85:15 framework and they’ve walked away from that. The Biden deal stands at 83:17 I understand.

    Shortly after the Rs took over the House and everyone was wringing their hands, I suggested that the best thing that Obama could do would be to throw them the anvil and make them deal with the tough stuff. Today was about throwing them the anvil while still maintaining his Great Conciliator cred. The Rs have all of the risk now. The call for deals and the White House gets close and then the Rs walk away. Even Obama noted that the Rs only jobs plan was to reduce the deficit. Then they decide to walk away from a bigger reduction offer than the one they proposed.

    Investors haven’t been too concerned about the debt problem until maybe today. All of the indexes look to be down as of now and I’ve seen a couple of newsletters advising people to sell stocks today.

  5. Dana Garrett says:

    “Today was about throwing them the anvil while still maintaining his Great Conciliator cred.”

    Yes, I think he pulled that off well. His triangulation of Boehner–that tough caucus he has to work w/–was also nicely played.

    As far as the Deficit Commission is concerned, I’m not sure why their ratio of cuts to revenue increases should be part of an OPENING gambit. That we are now talking about an 85/15 to 100% (cuts)ratio indicates to me how much Obama has flubbed the negotiation process. After all, he could still appear as the great conciliator if he had settled for, say, a 60/40 ratio.

  6. cassandra_m says:

    The media is really screwing this up, but there is no 100% deal on the table. Eric Cantor walked away from the last deal which was the 83:17 one. Cantor told everyone that he couldn’t agree to tax increases then, and now this is Boehner’s line to. The larger deal proposed to (and initially agreed to by Boehner) was an effort to get more votes by tackling more bete noirs. Boehner could not make that deal in his caucus.