Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
This is a case of bait-and-switch. Romney, in his convention speech, spoke of his plan to create 12 million new jobs, which the campaigns white paper describes as a four-year goal.
But the candidates personal accounting for this figure in this campaign ad is based on different figures and long-range timelines stretching as long as a decade which in two cases are based on studies that did not even evaluate Romneys economic plan. The numbers may still add up to 12 million, but they arent the same thing not by a long shot.
In many ways, this episode offers readers a peek behind a campaign wizards curtain and a warning that job-creation claims by any campaign should not be accepted at face value. The white paper at least has the credibility of four well-known economists behind it, but the new math of this campaign ad does not add up.
As readers know, we tend to judge more harshly claims in prepared speeches or ads that were the result of considered discussion by political aides.
Clearly, some clever campaign staffer thought it would be nice to match up poll-tested themes such as energy independence, tax reform and cracking down on China with actual job numbers. We just find it puzzling that Romney agreed to personally utter these words without asking more questions about the math behind them.
Put up alleged facts or findings from a reputable source, you will get debate... put up unsubstantiated crap from a blog.. you get ridicule... but you, troll, should be used to the ridicule
We asked the Romney campaign and the answer turns out to be: totally different studies with completely different timelines.
For instance, the claim that 7 million jobs would be created from Romney tax plan is a ten-year number, derived from a study written by John W. Diamond, a professor at Rice University.
This study at least assesses the claimed effect of specific Romney policies. The rest of the numbers are even more squishy.
For instance, the 3-million-job claim for Romneys energy policies appears largely based on a Citigroup Global Markets study that did not even evaluate Romneys policies. Instead, the report predicted 2.7 million to 3.6 million jobs would be created over the next eight years, largely because of trends and policies already adopted including tougher fuel efficiency standards that Romney has criticized and suggested he would reverse.
From the BLOGGER who called people liars when they said that Obama did not go to Israel when he did not go to Israel...
He is a biased troll hack, much like yourself...
fail
It's incredible how Mitt can be such a liar, and the wingnuts just buy into it.
Mitt Romney’s ‘new math’ for his jobs plan doesn’t add up - The Washington Post
This is a case of bait-and-switch. Romney, in his convention speech, spoke of his plan to create 12 million new jobs, which the campaigns white paper describes as a four-year goal.
But the candidates personal accounting for this figure in this campaign ad is based on different figures and long-range timelines stretching as long as a decade which in two cases are based on studies that did not even evaluate Romneys economic plan. The numbers may still add up to 12 million, but they arent the same thing not by a long shot.
In many ways, this episode offers readers a peek behind a campaign wizards curtain and a warning that job-creation claims by any campaign should not be accepted at face value. The white paper at least has the credibility of four well-known economists behind it, but the new math of this campaign ad does not add up.
As readers know, we tend to judge more harshly claims in prepared speeches or ads that were the result of considered discussion by political aides.
Clearly, some clever campaign staffer thought it would be nice to match up poll-tested themes such as energy independence, tax reform and cracking down on China with actual job numbers. We just find it puzzling that Romney agreed to personally utter these words without asking more questions about the math behind them.
From the BLOGGER who called people liars when they said that Obama did not go to Israel when he did not go to Israel...
He is a biased troll hack, much like yourself...
fail
So you're too fucking stupid to refute the facts and conclusion presented. Go figure.
The bottom line remains. Romney pulled a magic number out of his ass, and tried to support it by using studies that didn't support it. You swallow it whole, turds and all.
BTW, Obama visited Israel twice, both in 2006 and 2008. Ronald Reagan never did.
Just being elected and having obama out of office is good for most of the 12 million jobs. There are hundreds of companies either planning lay offs or delaying hiring until after the election.
From the BLOGGER who called people liars when they said that Obama did not go to Israel when he did not go to Israel...
He is a biased troll hack, much like yourself...
fail
So you're too fucking stupid to refute the facts and conclusion presented. Go figure.
The bottom line remains. Romney pulled a magic number out of his ass, and tried to support it by using studies that didn't support it. You swallow it whole, turds and all.
BTW, Obama visited Israel twice, both in 2006 and 2008. Ronald Reagan never did.
BLOG OPINION does not equal FACT... even if you keep wishing REALLY REALLY HARD
Get something other than a blog, you nitwit... you will pounce on people using a blog like breitbart, yet put forth this bullshit... typical hypocritical liberal lemming
