Is there some strategic move I'm missing with the debate scheduling?

[Hosnon]

It's simply inconceivable that the Administration didn't know that the GOP debate was the same night. And the Administration immediately acquiesced once Boehner objected.

Am I missing something? What net positive is gained by intentionally double-booking with the intention of relenting?

[arcane1]

1. That's my question too

It's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, but it's curious nonetheless.

[Hosnon]

3. I agree in not thinking it's a big deal. But... why? nt.

[femmocrat]

2. It makes the repukes look like they value party politics over jobs???

JMO

I think putting such an important speech opposite a football game is probably a dumb move, though.

[drm604]

4. That's what I really don't get.

There seems to be no good reason for that.

[Hosnon]

8. I dunno. A primary debate among one of two major parties in the U.S. is not peanuts.

And they had numerous other options.

This just seems sloppy (unless there's some advantage I'm missing).

[Maven]

30. No it just makes Obama look inept and weak.

[Hippo_Tron]

32. I thought that too, but we aren't hearing that from the White House

Why isn't the President holding a press conference to blast the GOP for prioritizing their debate over a jobs speech? If that's their message, they're sure as hell not getting it out

[sweetapogee]

38. a better question to ask...

...is why didn't the President schedule his jobs speech from the oval office and speak directly to the American people? After all, the American people are the ones suffering due to the lack of employment, not congress. The speech could then be scheduled at the time of his choosing instead of before a joint session of Congress with all it's logistical considerations.

Perhaps there is a good reason, if so someone please educate me.

[lob1]

5. Like you, I have no idea what the WH is doing.

It's all very upsetting.

[applegrove]

6. Perhaps they wanted to see how afraid the GOP really is of Obama going head to head

with the whakos? Naw. That is lame.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

7. All I know is that on Thursday - I'll be watching the start of the NFL season.

[godai]

12. and pre-game concert.n/t

[Hosnon]

17. Perhaps that's why they did this. nt.

[Magister Ludi]

9. Nothing is gained. Obama wanted a Joint Session. Boehner refused to approve it.

It had to be moved to another day due to Repuke obstinence. What's surprising about that? They come out looking like irrational children yet again.

[Hosnon]

11. I don't think the GOP looks childish because of this.

That debate has probably been scheduled for a long time.

It's a version of the "accept the first invitation you receive" rule. The GOP booked America that night and it's odd that the Administration would schedule a conflicting event without good reason.

[Magister Ludi]

14. I see, you side with GOP. That is your right.

[Hosnon]

16. Please don't even try to do that.

7 years and thousands of posts. You're at 17 and joined today.

[Magister Ludi]

19. A pile of lies does not equal one single truth

Look at who you are defending.

[Hosnon]

21. I try my best not to be partisan when reason requires.

It's difficult and I often (if not usually) fail.

Welcome to DU.

[kelly1mm]

28. Actually, the news tomorrow will be that Obama bowed to Bohener.

Here is my hometown newspaper headline and lots of others as it is a AP piece:

"Obama bows to Boehner; jobs speech will be Sept. 8"

WASHINGTON— In a retreat after an hours-long test of wills Wednesday, President Barack Obama agreed to deliver an address on jobs and the economy to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 8, yielding to House Speaker John Boehner, who had balked at Obama's request for a Sept. 7 speech.


Yeah, keep telling yourself that it is not embarrassing.

[Clear Blue Sky]

10. Administration tried to play chicken. And lost... nt

[FrenchieCat]

13. Means that Pres. Obama will rebut the dumbasses right the next day...

which makes more sense, IMO.

[dionysus]

40. didn't you hear frenchie? moving the speech has doomed his reelection chances!

;)

[Hosnon]

15. Ok - this is the best I can think (since folks have pointed out that the NFL begins Thursday):

The speech will probably break into the game - a time when the amount of Americans watching t.v. will be much higher than usual.

Now Obama has a shield against the charge that he interrupted the game for political purposes. He wanted to give the speech earlier, but the GOP said no.

[godai]

18. The game won't be interrupted.

Start time may move to 9pm.

[Hosnon]

20. Hmm - well it'd have a similar, albeit diminished, effect.

More people will be parked in front of the t.v. for the game.

[godai]

22. No, they'll watch ESPN pre-game until game time.

Football fans do not watch Congressional speeches.

[Hosnon]

23. Oh please.

(a) I purposefully used words of degree (e.g., more); and (b) claiming that no football fans watch Congressional speeches is absurd. I myself prove that wrong.

[Logical]

24. No, you are missing nothing. This was a major screw up!

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

25. What a massive fuckup. Did they have any plan for if the GOPers were obstinate?

Which they have been basically 100 percent of the time since his election?

Does Obama even WANT to be reelected? I'm starting to really wonder.

[blkmusclmachine]

26. Have no f'ing clue. Doesn't look like the WH does, either.

n/t

[GeorgeGist]

27. According to those 'in the know' ...

Obama handed Boehner his ass. :sarcasm:

[Beacool]

29. One of two things.

1. Either the WH is completely clueless and wasn't aware of the GOP debate, although it had been planned months ago.

2. The WH was trying to play mind games with the GOP by scheduling Obama's speech on the same night as their debate and therefore attempting to steal their thunder.

Either way, the WH got smacked down.

Childish games they all play while Rome burns.

Pathetic..........

:(

[Hippo_Tron]

33. The second explanation doesn't make any sense, though...

When you do strategy the first thing you have to think is "how will my opponent react to this". When your opponent is a group of people that held the debt ceiling hostage for the first time in history, the answer is pretty clearly that they will not invite you. Therefore unless you want to be not invited, it's not in your interest to schedule during their debate.

[Beacool]

34. Then they are a bunch of incompetents.

Who in the WH thought that it would be a good idea to have Obama's speech compete with the GOP debate?

:eyes:

[Hippo_Tron]

36. This isn't incompetence...

Incompetent is when you run a strategy of compromising to look like the "adult in the room" and think this will get you re-elected, rather than actually pushing things the American people want. It's an inept strategy for sure, but it's a strategy in the sense that the White House has a clear perception of how their opponents will react to it and how such a reaction will lead them to victory.

This, on the other hand, isn't a strategy. This is just plain chaos.

[CakeGrrl]

35. Or, Wrong and Wrong (again!)

Now, everybody's caterwauling about this 'jobs' speech. And bringing more attention to it.

So with more hype:

The GOP goes first.

The President rebuts. He's still going to deliver his speech. Nothing changes that.

And outside of the DU/Professional Left blogger/MSM bubbles, Boehner is tagged as making an unprecedented PUBLIC move perceived as massively disrespectful. HE'S the loser here, not the WH.

[Hippo_Tron]

37. I doubt anyone outside of the MSM/blogger bubbles has even heard about this

Your strategy would make sense if the White House were getting the message out that Boehner is prioritizing his party's debate over an important jobs speech. But they're not getting that message out at all.

[Beacool]

42. I think that's overreaching.

Most people have reached their saturation point and are disgusted with all politicians, including Obama and especially Congress.

What's one more speech? They have been listening to speeches for almost 3 years with little to show for them.

:shrug:

[scentopine]

31. President Boehner had a confict with his schedule and asked his admin to reschedule. No biggie. -nt

[Enrique]

39. sometimes bluffs get called

I've been hearing that it's unprecedented for a Speaker to refuse a request like this. If that's the case, then maybe the WH wasn't counting on Boehner to be the first.

[iamthebandfanman]

41. i could care less when he gives it

just so long as when he does its actual liberal ideas and not more continuation of failed republican trickle down economics.

[Evergreen Emerald]

43. I believe it was purposefully disrespectful to the President

And it was not the first time Boehner has done this to the President of the United States.

I find it insulting and unacceptable behavior.