Pivoting off the table

Pivoting off the table

by digby

I just read the transcript of this morning's press conference and was struck by this:

Republicans gave me this list at the -- at the beginning of this year as a priority, something that they thought they could do. Now I'm ready to do it and so far we haven't gotten the kind of movement that I would have expected.

Perhaps this wasn't literal, but even if it isn't, it's a fairly revealing comment. Do you suppose he gave the Republicans a similar list or did he just trust them to meet him halfway?

Greg Sargent says he drew a couple of lines in the sand, but I'm not sure they are more than simple suggestions. (Something as open to interpretation as "refusing any cost-shifting to seniors" isn't exactly a rallying cry.)

Greg also said this was going to annoy liberals and it certainly annoyed this one:

What we can do is to solve this underlying debt and deficit problem for a long period of time, so that then we can get back to having a conversation about [jobs]. Since we now have solved this problem, that’s no longer what’s hampering economic growth. That’s not feeding businesses uncertainty. Everybody feels that the ground is stable under our feet. are there some strategies that we could pursue that would really focus on some targeted job growth.. .

We can’t even have that conversation if people don’t feel as if we don’t have our fiscal house in order. So let’s act now, let’s get this problem off the table, and then with some firm footing, with a solid fiscal situation, we will then be in a position to make the kind of investments that I think are going to be necessary to win the future.


Forgetting the numerous instances of catapulting the conservative propaganda in that statement (why bother even mentioning it anymore?) he really does appear to believe they can take deficit reduction "off the table" and then "pivot" to jobs. I guess hope springs eternal in the Democratic heart.

Here's a little reminder of how that tends to work out for them, circa 2002:

The debate and vote on the resolution will bring closure on the extended Iraq debate that has crowded out the country’s domestic agenda as Congress concludes. But there is substantial evidence, as we indicated at the outset, that voters are very ready to turn to domestic issues. It is important that Democrats make this turn and provide a compelling reason to vote Democratic and turn down the Republicans.

In this survey, we tested two message frameworks – one offers a transition to the domestic agenda (“We need independent people in Washington who will be a check on what is going on and pay attention to our needs at home”) and one focuses on corporate influence (“Washington should be more responsive to the people and less to big corporate interests”). Both frameworks defeat the Republican alternative that begins with support for the President’s efforts on security.


I'm sure you'll recall how cooperative the Republicans were with that "pivot." They won back the congress. Counting on the GOP allowing the Dems to take something off the table that's working for them is naive. And Republicans have been calling the Democrats "tax 'n spend" liberals as long as I can remember. It is permanently bolted on to the table.

Update: Actually, as I just looked over the transcript, I see that the president did draw a line in the sand: he said he would veto any short term deal.


.