President Obama to visit Bay Area next month

President Barack Obama will visit the Bay Area next month, a White House official said this morning.

The President is expected to visit Seattle before coming to the Bay Area on Sunday, Sept. 25. He’ll then visit the San Diego area and the Los Angeles area on Monday, Sept. 26, and the Denver area on Tuesday, Sept. 27, before returning to Washington, D.C. Specific events have not yet been announced.

The President was last in the Bay Area in April for one, two, three fundraisers in San Francisco.

UPDATE @ 11:04 A.M.: More details here.

Josh Richman

Josh Richman covers state and national politics for the Bay Area News Group. A New York City native, he earned a bachelor’s degree in journalism from the University of Missouri and reported for the Express-Times of Easton, Pa. for five years before coming to the Oakland Tribune and ANG Newspapers in 1997. He is a frequent guest on KQED Channel 9’s “This Week in Northern California;” a proud father; an Eagle Scout; a somewhat skilled player of low-stakes poker; a rather good cook; a firm believer in the use of semicolons; and an unabashed political junkie who will never, EVER seek elected office.

  • Really? that was all you had to report on this event no information on location of President Obama’s visit or talk – who he will be speaking to – nothing else? It’s implied by the reference to his April visit that it is only a fund raising event?
    But what’s with ‘the One the two the three fundraiser’ reference – Is there something bothering you about the fact theres enough supporting folks out
    there in the city to justify 3 money generating events? Please be more informative and less sardonic, if you want to have a professional reputation as a good reporter -your political preferences will be a bit more respected – or buy-gum, more importantly your reporting status, a tad more trustworthy!
    But thanks for the bitter bit, even so, mr. Richman..

  • Josh Richman

    Whoa, easy, there. The White House hasn’t disclosed yet where and to whom the President will speak, but we’ve found from past experience that readers want to know ASAP when there’s a presidential visit in the offing. I meant no offense by how I phrased the account of April’s fundraising; it’s just that we had three separate reports on this blog about the three events, and I wanted to provide all three links.

    Still, it’s almost refreshing to have someone accuse me of being biased against the President; usually commenters here accuse me of being a sniveling sycophant for him. See this, Elwood? 😉

  • Publius


    Why else would Obama come to Ca? He has the votes in the bag. The only reason he has for coming here is the money. Why take offense to someone reporting the facts?

  • Elwood

    “usually commenters here accuse me of being a sniveling sycophant for him.”

    It’s the exception that proves the rule.

  • Elwood

    O’bummer just comes here to harvest money. He knows he has the dimmiecrat votes in the bag.

    He could perfect the system by just having dimmecrats direct-deposit to his campaign account.

    That way he’d have more time for vacations.

  • John W

    “O’bummer just comes here to harvest money. He knows he has the dimmiecrat votes in the bag.”

    And I suppose the Republicans, knowing the same thing about the votes, come here to check out the scenery.

    Elwood can’t let go of the vacation thing, even though Bush 43 and Reagan did more.

  • Josh Richman

    RE #4: Ah, Elwood, I knew I could count on you.

  • Elwood


    “Rep. Andrè Carson (D-Ind.), the CBC whip, made waves earlier this week when he said at a town hall that many Tea Party-affiliated members of Congress see African-Americans as “second-class citizens” and would be happy to see blacks “hanging from a tree.”


  • Elwood


    No mention of where money would come from of course.


  • John W

    Re #9

    A slight adjustment to your tax rate should cover it.

    I’ve heard we have $2 trillion in deferred infrastructure repair/maintenance/replacement nationwide — stuff that has to be done sooner or later and will cost more to do later. Hypothetically, if we could identify half that amount that we could realistically get to work on in the short run, that would be huge in terms of good jobs. This is a SWAG, but let’s assume one direct job per $500 thousand of project cost. That’s 2 million good private sector jobs, with all the ripple effects — tax revenue and spending by the people in those jobs, a big boost in heavy construction equipment and construction materiel sales and the manufacturing and service jobs associated with that, faster GDP growth, lift in consumer and business confidence, etc. etc. I think it would be difficult to fire up that much activity in a short period of time, but I think the concept makes sense. In my non-expert opinion, the opposite (slamming the brakes on spending) could contract the economy and lead to even bigger, uncontrollable deficits.

    Long-term, we need to face up to the systemic challenges: globalization, a less labor-intensive economy than in the good old manufacturing economy days, slow population growth, and a mis-match between available jobs and the skills of the available workforce. We’ve got troubles that go way beyond whether or not you like Barack, Mitt or Rick. This has been happening for at least the past 10 years, maybe 20.

  • Elwood

    “A slight adjustment to your tax rate should cover it.”

    Typical fuzzy brained liberal thinking.

    The only adjustment I want in my tax rate is downward.

  • John W

    “The only adjustment I want in my tax rate is downward.”

    Yeah. Me too. And I want my allowable tax deductions to go up. And I should get a mortgage deduction on my house too, even though I paid cash, so that I can get the same deal as the folks who loaded up on debt.