Live Blogging the State of the Union

Hi all,

It’s been awhile, so I may be a bit rusty, but it’s time for another live blogging of the president’s State of the Union address.  As always, I’ll be watching this on CNN.   I hope you can join in using the comments sections.  Remember, part of the fun here is giving some history on the State of the Union, but it is also a chance to poke some holes in the media coverage as well.



  1. Not sure how much I’ll be able to comment as I’m also live-tweeting and will try to blog shortly after the festivities end, but I’m enjoying your comments – Julia

  2. Semi-serious question, did Richard Neustadt have strong opinions about SOTU speeches at all?

  3. Longwalk,

    I never really talked to him specifically about the SOTU – in general, he thoughts presidential speeches were a limited vehicle for enhancing presidential power, with their impact largely a function of contextual factors. At best, presidents could try to ride events to try to use the speech as a teaching vehicle, but he didn’t think they were very useful as tools of persuasion. In short, Obama’s not going to be changing any minds tonight.

  4. Julia,

    I’m giving up on the tweeterverse tonight – multitasking is not my specialty!

  5. Not really following this 3-parts-to-middle-class-economics structure, but I never can with these long speeches anyway. How about Joey B.’s pocket square though?

  6. No shout out for criminal justice reform? No acknowledgment of anything Ferguson-related?

  7. My favorite was his “I won both part.”
    His recurring ‘single-mom’ line: part of the rhetoric or something he actually wants to work on?

  8. Sorry. This speech was clearly an outline of the 2016 Dem’s platform and nothing else.

    This SOTUS had nothing to do with legislation during Obama’s term. Rather it is an outline for the Dem’s platform in 2016.

  9. Arnold,

    I’ve heard this argument before, and it might be true. But it strikes me as unlikely that Obama is willing to spend his remaining two years carrying water for his party’s 2016 presidential candidates, unless he also views this as a way to cement his legacy? But one would think he would be better off getting things done for the next two years, rather than hoping his successor will carry on his policies (assuming he has a successor in 2016).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *