Fact.. No President has ever been re-elected with unemployment rate above 7.5% (Congress, thought)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Apparently one of your liberal friends cuts and pastes an article and you take it at face value. Sad.. You didnt even bother to ask whether the unemployment rate cited in his article was the 'real' unemployment rate or not. A nice proxy indeed for the blind hero worship exercised by Obama Husseins followers.
Obama has created more private sector jobs in his first two years than W did during his entire presidency. Obama also has had 30 straight months of positive job creation, and that's with the GOP trash trying to sabotage the nation at all costs.
You would have to be mentally ill to support the GOP in this day and age after the nightmare they did to the nation.
The real unemployment rate is 23% TODAY. The real unemployment rate is cited in that liberal ny rag article you have cut and paste . The unemployment rate was 7.5 % back then if you measure it with the same metrics that Obamas 8.2 % is measured with. As I was saying before uneducated Obama voters, or at the least intellectually dishonest. Additionally the unemployment rate was lower for Roosevelt than it was when he took office. The same cant be said for Obama. For some reason you forgot to mention that
Oh, you were talking about the super-duper secret unemployment rate that is only revealed to "people in the know" ... like you...
I seriously wonder how you even type that with even a shred of self-respect!
I am not surprised at all that you went with the logical fallacy of a juvenile ad hominem attack on the New York Times. I guess you're too clueless to understand that Nate Silver does not work for the Times -- they simply carry his statistical analysis column. If you weren't too cowardly to do so, you might have clicked on the link to see that Silver has sourced his data with a hyperlink to Wikipedia, which sources its data with a further hyperlink directly to the federal Bureau Of Labor Statistics. Sadly, you are too cowardly to do such a thing.
Anyway, thanks for doubling down on the hilarity of your "people sure are dumb!" comment!
Obama has created more private sector jobs in his first two years than W did during his entire presidency. Obama also has had 30 straight months of positive job creation, and that's with the GOP trash trying to sabotage the nation at all costs.
You would have to be mentally ill to support the GOP in this day and age after the nightmare they did to the nation.
It doesnt bother you that Obama is one of only a very few Presidents who has a higher unemployment rate than it was when he assumed office? I support Ron Paul. My vote doesnt matter.
Oh, you were talking about the super-duper secret unemployment rate that is only revealed to "people in the know" ... like you...
I seriously wonder how you even type that with even a shred of self-respect!
Anyway, thanks for doubling down on the hilarity of your "people sure are dumb!" comment!
Its common knowledge that there is a real unemployment rate, and a government cited employment rate. These numbers are accessible to anybody who wants them. Toodles Mr. Green behind the Ears
I've read that the stock market's trajectory 3-years prior to an election predicts either the failure or success of an incumbent. On that measure, Obama will win?
What does this mean?
A upward stock market trajectory can beat unemployment as a correlation index
Unemployment is not a strong predictor - anymore - of a incumbents ability to remain elected. I.e. we have hit a new "normal"
Population still blames the last party for the issue, and does not want to return?
People realize that a President has very little impact on economy/unemployment. As such, the populace is now smarter.
The Republican party has so successfully handicapped romney, that a win is impossible.
- just a few of my conclusions.
I see no significant change regarding welfare state/etc . . .etc those changes as normal for a country with high unemployment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38
So when Obama is re-elected and I fully expect him to win what conclusions can we draw?
1. He has increased the welfare state and dependency on the government far more than any other President in recent times. If you didnt work and he gave you free things wouldnt you vote for him? Woud you care what the unemployment rate was?
2. The population is dumber. The hero worship on this guy is like nothing Ive ever seen before. The unemployment rate is higher than when he took office. Sad...
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,833,234 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38
Its common knowledge that there is a real unemployment rate, and a government cited employment rate. These numbers are accessible to anybody who wants them. Toodles Mr. Green behind the Ears
It doesnt bother you that Obama is one of only a very few Presidents who has a higher unemployment rate than it was when he assumed office? I support Ron Paul. My vote doesnt matter.
When Obama came into office, the nation was on the brink of complete collapse, we were losing 3/4 of a million jobs a month, it was a complete nightmare.
Obama was able to get the nation out of the hole and give us 30 straight months of positive job creation, which is impressive.
Why do you people keep repeating this nonsense? I'll tell you why -- because you heard it and you assume it's right. You've never bothered to actually research it for yourselves. It sounds good to you, so you buy it hook line and sinker.
That's what you do -- you regurgitate talking points without having any idea whether or not they're true.
So, let me educate you.
In 1940 the unemployment rate was at 14.6% and Roosevelt won re-election. In 1936 the unemployment was at 16.6% and, again, Roosevelt won re-election.
PS - I love the irony of you whining about how dumb the population is while you cluelessly repeat demonstrably false information!
Actually the OP just misquoted the stat...it's been pretty well known that no president since FDR has been re-elected with an unemployment rate higher than 7.3%. Obama still has to overcome the odds.
So when Obama is re-elected and I fully expect him to win what conclusions can we draw?
1. He has increased the welfare state and dependency on the government far more than any other President in recent times. If you didnt work and he gave you free things wouldnt you vote for him? Woud you care what the unemployment rate was?
2. The population is dumber. The hero worship on this guy is like nothing Ive ever seen before. The unemployment rate is higher than when he took office. Sad...
You forgot to add #3.
3. Obama could have done lots better with a compromising Congress. But he didn't. While Obama sucks, the GOP sucks more. They've put up a rotten candidate that the republicans are trying so hard to embrace, you almost want to pat them on their heads and go "AWWWW." The GOP has been taken control of by the religious folks in this country. It's as simple as: the GOP and Romney are distasteful to many voters. Instead of blaming and whining, look at yourself. It's up to you to overcome and triumph and the GOP is terribly misguided right now.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
