President Obama's job creation, in one chart. But Motor Head already knows this.

VMS

Victim of high standards and low personal skills.
Apr 26, 2006
10,309
2,650
586
#1
Link

President Obama’s job creation problem — in one chart (with caveats)
By Chris Cillizza, Updated: Thursday, August 2, 11:33 AM

In less than 24 hours, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will release its July jobs report, which, if early indicators are to be trusted, won’t be the sort of turnaround that President Obama and his political team are hoping for in advance of the fall campaign.

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney is sure to seize on a status quo (or worse) report as yet more evidence that Obama’s economic policies have made things worse not better over the last four years.

But how do Obama’s first three-plus years as chief steward of the U.S. economy — as measured in job gains and the unemployment rate — stack up against the men who have previously held the office?

Not so well, according to a terrific infographic put together by the folks at Political Math. (You can read more about that blog here.)

Yes, Obama took office in the midst of a economic crisis of worldwide proportions. And, yes, the ongoing struggles of European economies have further complicated the Obama Administration’s attempts to dig the country out of this economic hole. And, yes (again), he has yet to complete his first term, making these comparisons (slightly) unfair. And yes (again, again), data can be bent to serve partisan political purposes — on both sides — and Obama and his team would argue that given what they inherited from George W. Bush, he has done as well as could be expected.

Still, in political campaigns, the simplest argument almost always wins. And one look at the chart above makes clear that Obama’s success (or lack thereof) on job creation is decidedly anomalous when compared to those who have held the White House before him.

And that’s President Obama’s problem — in a single chart — as he tries to make the argument to voters that he deserves a second term.

© The Washington Post Company

JFK banged Marilyn Monroe repeatedly, dealt with the Cuban Missile Crisis (badly, but he dealt with it), had his brain turned into pudding, and still created 2.4 million more jobs in 34 months than President Obama did in 40 months. Which wouldn't be bad if the numbers were 100 million jobs vs. 97.6 million jobs, but they're 2.5 million jobs vs. 100,000 jobs. (See the blog from which the chart was taken and read the comments section to get a better understanding of how the numbers were generated.)

And yes, I got the link from Motor Head's girl.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,284
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#2
This isn't fair. President Obama hasn’t had a full term yet and he came into office in the middle of a recession. He came in the middle of a recession that was worse in terms of job loss than anything any other president in history has had to deal with. He probably split those job losses about half-and-half with George W Bush, so it’s not as bad as it could have been for him.
 

CousinDave

Registered User
Dec 11, 2007
25,297
198
393
Ohio
#4
This isn't fair. President Obama hasn’t had a full term yet and he came into office in the middle of a recession. He came in the middle of a recession that was worse in terms of job loss than anything any other president in history has had to deal with. He probably split those job losses about half-and-half with George W Bush, so it’s not as bad as it could have been for him.

Unemployment has been higher every day since Barry has been POTUS than it was when W was POTUS
 

Bluestreak

This space intentionally left blank.
Sep 27, 2007
4,557
276
398
Mawl-din, MA
#5
Unemployment has been higher every day since Barry has been POTUS than it was when W was POTUS
Most of the problem is that George W started the shitball rolling, and the current POTUS just can't wrangle cats well enough to get things back to where it should be.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#11
With his new tax plan that cuts millionaires' taxes on the backs of the middle class. How can that go wrong!
Maybe because he's actually accomplished something in his life. The fact that Barry is gone will be good for at least 1.5% less unemployment. That's before Romney even does a single thing. He could get up there and sleep all day and create more jobs than Obama. Businesses have absolutely NO confidence in the current regime. That's a major factor in the job market right now.
 

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
Jun 22, 2004
76,801
49,525
788
#12
Is this report damning enough to turn the polls around? Romney is getting trounced right now. Current polling suggests a pretty decisive Obama victory at 332 - 206.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#13
Is this report damning enough to turn the polls around? Romney is getting trounced right now. Current polling suggests a pretty decisive Obama victory at 332 - 206.
Care to tell us where you got these numbers? The best numbers I can find right now are 247-191 with 100 toss ups. Even the New York Times, which seems to have given every single toss up to Obama (surprise surprise) has it at 297-240.

No president has EVER been re-elected with the economy in the shape it's in now. Ever.

Straight percentage polling by Rasmussen has Romney up by 5 percentage points. Suggesting these other polls are heavily oversampling blue states. Another shocker.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#14
270towin.com has a pretty cool interactive map that leaves the toss up states blank. Here's how I think it will go down in November.

 

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
Jun 22, 2004
76,801
49,525
788
#15
Care to tell us where you got these numbers? The best numbers I can find right now are 247-191 with 100 toss ups.
I think we're looking at the same numbers from RCP. I just clicked the button that said "No Toss Ups", which to your point gives most of them (except NC) to Obama. The breakdown of the Toss-Ups:

NV: Obama +5.3
CO: Obama +3.0
IA: Obama +1.3
OH: Obama +4.8
VA: Obama +2.8
NC: Romney +0.8
FL: Obama +1.4
NH: Obama I didn't write down the margin.

Romney's got a lot of work to do. Those are pretty big gaps in NV and OH. Romney needs at least one of those to win. If Obama gets them both he wins even if Romney takes all the other battleground states.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#16
Romney obviously has a lot of work to do, but it will come down to Ohio again. I think he takes it.

Actually I'll make a correction here to my map. Obama will also get one of Nebraska's votes. 274-264 Romney.
 

Begbie

Wackbag Generalissimo
Jul 21, 2003
17,994
5,388
838
Wilmington, NC
#17
Care to tell us where you got these numbers? The best numbers I can find right now are 247-191 with 100 toss ups. Even the New York Times, which seems to have given every single toss up to Obama (surprise surprise) has it at 297-240.

No president has EVER been re-elected with the economy in the shape it's in now. Ever.
No worries...I'm sure the Obama campaign will demand Romney release copies of his last 10 cell phone bills so they and the media can break it apart and get all fauxraged over the amount of 4G data he used up.

DonTheTrucker said:
Straight percentage polling by Rasmussen has Romney up by 5 percentage points. Suggesting these other polls are heavily oversampling blue states. Another shocker.
That's a bad sign for any incumbent, 3 months prior to an election. Especially for an incumbent like Barack Obama, who takes the claim as the charismatic democrat who everyone in Hollywood, blacks, and some media adore.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#18
I'm just afraid of seeing what will happen if Romney does win. I think this is the time where they don't go without a fight.
 

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
Jun 22, 2004
76,801
49,525
788
#19
I'm just afraid of seeing what will happen if Romney does win. I think this is the time where they don't go without a fight.
You mean Riots, or Obama trying to block the results through shenanigans?
 

Begbie

Wackbag Generalissimo
Jul 21, 2003
17,994
5,388
838
Wilmington, NC
#21
I think we're looking at the same numbers from RCP. I just clicked the button that said "No Toss Ups", which to your point gives most of them (except NC) to Obama. The breakdown of the Toss-Ups:

NV: Obama +5.3
CO: Obama +3.0
IA: Obama +1.3
OH: Obama +4.8
VA: Obama +2.8
NC: Romney +0.8
FL: Obama +1.4
NH: Obama I didn't write down the margin.

Romney's got a lot of work to do. Those are pretty big gaps in NV and OH. Romney needs at least one of those to win. If Obama gets them both he wins even if Romney takes all the other battleground states.
I can't take any of these maps seriously. Especially when Romney hasn't even named a VP yet. With the state of the economy (today's job numbers for one), and the fact that there is no way Obama is going to get the same amount of turnout in Independents and even some conservatives giving him a shot in 08...I think it's Obama who has the most work to do. Problem is, he's an incumbent who can't run on his record. All he can do is really attack Romney's character and make a bunch of bullshit about how many jobs he created and how he wants to make the rich pay more and middle class pay less. Then again, it's still way too early and Romney hasn't even named VP yet. We've also got debates to look forward to, and the 30 minute Obama infomercial the day before the election.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#22
Obama can't run on his record, but look how effective his attacks are. His minions eat them up without question.
 

Begbie

Wackbag Generalissimo
Jul 21, 2003
17,994
5,388
838
Wilmington, NC
#23
Obama can't run on his record, but look how effective his attacks are. His minions eat them up without question.
Now you can see why Romney is not releasing any more tax records. Either don't release them and catch hell for releasing only two years worth or release them and have scores of dem strategists combing through them and trying to find anything they can manipulate or twist that their zombies will eat up and spread.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#24
Now you can see why Romney is not releasing any more tax records. Either don't release them and catch hell for releasing only two years worth or release them and have scores of dem strategists combing through them and trying to find anything they can manipulate or twist that their zombies will eat up and spread.
Exactly. I also like how Romney told Dirty Harry to put up or shut up about it.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,557
8,726
693
Loveland, CO
#25
Romney will be lucky to make it through the convention intact. We might see Perry or Bachmann decide that the time is ripe for some real leadership and challenge for the nomination.