Romney Camp Defends Poor Jobs Record: He Inherited A Bad Situation

BUSHvOBAMA_jobsREV.png


CHART: Bush Vs. Obama On Private And Public Sector Job Creation | ThinkProgress

That chart seems to show that Private Sector Job growth was bouncing back under Bush and then really took a crap when Obama got in then started to recover again.

It would seem that you may not understand the chart. The chart reflects the "beginning" of Bush and Obama's 1st terms in office - not Obama beginning where Bush left off.
 

That chart seems to show that Private Sector Job growth was bouncing back under Bush and then really took a crap when Obama got in then started to recover again.

Umm that would seem to coincide with a recession, the housing bubble bursting and the finiancial fiasco.
All of which were in gear before Obama took office.
Remember Bush passed TARP.

Reality does get in the way of the NObama mantra.
 
Romney has hired more by his actions...and Obama has FIRED more by his.
Yes. Right now, America is telling themselves that at least Romney managed to improve the job situation without having to have people drop out just to improve the numbers. His numbers were people, actually going back to work.

Precisely...and Obama on such a grander scale.

Can't hold a candle...and We're NOT talking about gubmint jobs...Private sector.

Obama is at war with them.:eusa_shhh:
Yep.
 

That chart seems to show that Private Sector Job growth was bouncing back under Bush and then really took a crap when Obama got in then started to recover again.

And that public sector was really growing under Bush. Oops.

Public sector always grows exponentially during Republican administrations, because the Republicans allow their presidents to spend money and hire workers, because this improves the economy and they need that to get re-elected - and they know it. During Democratic presidents Republicans don't allow this, so that the economy tanks. Quite an astute electoral strategy, I must say! Democrats must wish they could do the same.
 
By Pema Levy

Mitt Romney has been dogged by an unfortunate statistic for his entire campaign: When he was governor, Massachusetts ranked 47th in job creation. President Obama’s campaign has ramped up the attack this week in response to Romney’s assertion that he knows how to create jobs — a fact he says is backed up by his record in the private sector. Sunday, Romney’s campaign struck back with a new line of defense: Romney stepped into a serious situation and improved it.

If it sounds familiar, it should — it’s the same line of reasoning that Obama is using to persuade voters to stick with his policies.

Twice on Sunday, Romney’s advisers appeared on television armed with different numbers than the ones wielded by the Obama campaign. On ABC’s “This Week,” Obama’s deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter and top Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom duked it out over Romney’s Massachusetts record.

Senior Romney adviser Ed Gillespie had a similar exchange with “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace. “When [Romney] took office it was No. 50 in job creation. Actually 51 if you count the District of Columbia,” Gillespie said.

Wallace: “We will check out the numbers.”

Gillespie: “Well, check it out, OK? And when ended his term in office, his four years in office, it was number 30. So, he moved it dramatically.”

Wallace: “Over the four years, it was 47th. There was no question about that.”

More: Romney Camp Debuts New Jobs Numbers To Defend Massachusetts Record | TPM2012

Do you seriously think it will be Romney dogged by his record here instead of the loser in the White House? As if somehow Obama has the superior record here? Really? REALLY?? ROFL!

This is one of the most ridiculous and deceptive ways to try and attack Romney's record. Massachusetts unemployment when he took office was around 5.6% and when he left it was about 4.7%. That is a hard fact no amount of spin, exaggeration, distortion and active re-writes of history will ever change -although I noticed some Democrats really are trying to re-write that history now years after the fact -and making up bullshit numbers and producing all sorts of phony graphs and charts trying to pretend this is what it was all along when it provably was not. Romney didn't write the real record and it is what it is. Funny, no one was attempting to re-write his true record until it was apparent he was the most likely to get the nomination. Funny they didn't try to re-write it 4 years ago, huh. I'd still rather have even that phony re-write over reality with Obama. When you get to that level of unemployment it is considered nearly full employment which means no one looking for a job is going without one. You want massive job creation when there is actually a NEED for them and there is no need for them at full employment or near full employment. When you have full employment you aren't going to get massive numbers of jobs created because they would just go unfilled. With near full employment you need the same number of jobs created as the difference between the number of new people entering the work force minus the number leaving the work force. That is not going to be an impressive number. So what is the point of yapping about the overall number of jobs created in an region that wasn't hurting for new jobs and actually had no use for massive new job creation whatsoever? Kind of dumb argument to make, huh.

Do you SERIOUSLY want to argue that Obama has a better record with the fake 8.2% unemployment everyone knows is really 15% -compared to Romney's 4.7%? Tough argument there -in addition he reduced the overall MA tax burden for people from 7.33% to 6.9% -even though most local governments raised taxes. Anyone arguing Massachusetts was worse off for Romney has to make it up because he has nothing to be ashamed of with that record. Unlike Obama, Romney actually has proof in both the private and public sector proving he has the critically necessary executive skills necessary to even do the job. Obama was THE most unqualified person to run for President in 100 years -and that time people weren't stupid enough to actually elect the guy. Obama is in over his head, hasn't a clue how the private sector works, no clue what it takes to run a business, meet a payroll and comply with the zillion regulations coming nonstop out of D.C. His statements revealing his total lack of comprehension are too numerous to list here but they are stunning commentaries about the true depth of his ignorance. But just one example -when he wondered why companies weren't hiring people when they could have their pick from so many unemployed. Where does he think all these unemployed people came from except they were DUMPED by these companies in the first place -for reasons that just zoom right over his head.

If you think THIS is the best it gets under a President -then Obama is your guy. But THIS is what it looks like when voters treat the job like an entry level position and give it to someone totally unqualified for the job. Obama was and still is totally clueless. His strong suit is being a political hack and he's good at it -but he has never stopped being one to actually BE President. He is also THE most narcissistic President I've ever seen in my life which combined with his level of sheer ignorance about how the real world works is disastrous. I'm not stupid though. I've been around a while to know this is actually one of the top two WORST Presidents in my life with some historians already deeming him to be even worse than Jimmy Carter which is a hell of an "accomplishment". You could put a gun to my head and I still won't vote for this guy. It will take decades to repair the damage he has done and that is assuming we find and elect the people we need to actually do it instead of putting their careers before the best interests of the nation itself and led by someone elected for reasons far more important than how well he can read off a teleprompter. I don't know what it is about Democrats who stupidly seem to think intelligence is correlated with that or with a gift for public speaking -but neither is true.

And that isn't even touching on the fact inflation is upon us even while it is being denied and minimized by Obama minions. My own grocery bill is on average $70 a month more than it was this time just six months ago and my family has started to pare back, we've changed our eating habits and we planted a massive garden this year and will be doing lots of canning. I don't see that getting better anytime soon either because our money is backed by nothing whatsoever. Government will be forced to just inflate its way out of debt and when that happens your money will become toilet paper.

I have increasingly less patience with liberals because I truly wonder at the mentality and utter lack of critical thinking skills that is just incapable of dealing with reality and refuses to see and acknowledge even basic cause-and-effect that has existed since the beginning of time. We are driving off a cliff -and you liberals stupidly insist on choosing the guy promising to stomp on the gas. And the best he can do against Romney is hope morons believe equally moronic people like Maxine Waters when she insists if Romney is elected, life as we know it will end and Republicans will run into hospitals, drag sick women out into the street to die and strip blacks of their right to vote etc. Because sure, no women and no black ever votes Republican. LOL At some point even really, really dumb people catch on to the over the top bullshit and the fact Democrats exist by lurching from phony crisis to the next. None of which are ever the least bit true.

BTW -GOVERNMENT doesn't create jobs. (To say nothing of the fact the kinds of jobs Obama talks about creating are more PUBLIC sector jobs which are not true jobs but more drain on government coffers!! We need PRIVATE sector jobs by the MILLIONS - NOT more public sector ones which only removes productive citizens from the private sector and puts them feeding at the public trough as well. That only increases the burden on those left in the private sector who are footing all the bills! Every time Obama opens his mouth about some fucking "jobs bill" that will hire more teachers, firemen, cops -he is talking about making the existing situation WORSE.) Government can only enact policies that encourage job creation in the private sector -or discourage and hamper it. THAT'S IT and THAT is what this election is about bubba. It is impossible to be pro-job growth but anti-business. Obama is and always has been vigorously anti-business. Which means he has also been anti-job growth. Which is why the true unemployment figure is around 15%. Vote for Obama if your IQ is in single digits.
 

Uuuhmmm, your OP was about ROMNEY not Booooosh!

Nice moving of goal posts again.

All roads lead back to Bush and the Republicans. The amount of devastation they caused is undeniable.

Who cares about Bush ? Hasn't he been gone for, like 3.5 years ?

Or did Obama forget that in his speeches when he was campaigning ?

The only thing udeniable is that your posts are good for a laugh.
 
Did he really blame the previous admin? Serious question?

What other state moved up 20 spots in Job Growth in that time span?

What state did? It sure as hell wasn't MA under Romney's "leadership". MA went from the 30s to 47th in job creation. The only states that did worse were hit by hurricane Katrina.

Romney is running from his term as Governor because he had such a poor jobs record, instituted "Romneycare" and passed gay marriage.

:lol:

Oh, and of course there were all those renewable energy investments he made...has to run from those too. :lol:

Romney Claimed Now-Bankrupt Solar Company Would ‘Become A Major Economic Springboard’ In 2003 Speech
 
Last edited:
Bush cannot be forgotten until the Great Bush Recession is over, his wars are ended, and the Treasury refilled.
 

That chart seems to show that Private Sector Job growth was bouncing back under Bush and then really took a crap when Obama got in then started to recover again.

That's what happened. Prior to the Stimulus package being implemented..UE spiked to about 10%.

But that's not really the point.

Public sector hiring under Bush was very brisk. Mainly because of 2 wars...but Congress didn't seem to have a problem with it.

Now? The public sector has lost some 600K people. But instead of cheering this, conservatives are complaining about unemployment.

Why is that? This is EXACTLY what you guys were looking for..right? And if a Conservative President ever comes to office again..no way public sector employment will go back up. Right?

:eusa_shifty:
 
Uuuhmmm, your OP was about ROMNEY not Booooosh!

Nice moving of goal posts again.

All roads lead back to Bush and the Republicans. The amount of devastation they caused is undeniable.

Who cares about Bush ? Hasn't he been gone for, like 3.5 years ?

Or did Obama forget that in his speeches when he was campaigning ?

The only thing udeniable is that your posts are good for a laugh.

Bush was basically responsible for damage to the economy..2 wars and a plethora of other problems caused by 8 years of his administration..including spending that never was paid for..

And you guys expected that ALL to be fixed in 3.5 years.

How come it's okay to leave with 2 wars ongoing, a crater in NYC, TARP and the GM bailout..but it's not okay to have time to fix all those things?
 
By Pema Levy

Mitt Romney has been dogged by an unfortunate statistic for his entire campaign: When he was governor, Massachusetts ranked 47th in job creation. President Obama’s campaign has ramped up the attack this week in response to Romney’s assertion that he knows how to create jobs — a fact he says is backed up by his record in the private sector. Sunday, Romney’s campaign struck back with a new line of defense: Romney stepped into a serious situation and improved it.

If it sounds familiar, it should — it’s the same line of reasoning that Obama is using to persuade voters to stick with his policies.

Twice on Sunday, Romney’s advisers appeared on television armed with different numbers than the ones wielded by the Obama campaign. On ABC’s “This Week,” Obama’s deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter and top Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom duked it out over Romney’s Massachusetts record.

Senior Romney adviser Ed Gillespie had a similar exchange with “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace. “When [Romney] took office it was No. 50 in job creation. Actually 51 if you count the District of Columbia,” Gillespie said.

Wallace: “We will check out the numbers.”

Gillespie: “Well, check it out, OK? And when ended his term in office, his four years in office, it was number 30. So, he moved it dramatically.”

Wallace: “Over the four years, it was 47th. There was no question about that.”

More: Romney Camp Debuts New Jobs Numbers To Defend Massachusetts Record | TPM2012

Do you seriously think it will be Romney dogged by his record here instead of the loser in the White House? As if somehow Obama has the superior record here? Really? REALLY?? ROFL!

This is one of the most ridiculous and deceptive ways to try and attack Romney's record. Massachusetts unemployment when he took office was around 5.6% and when he left it was about 4.7%. That is a hard fact no amount of spin, exaggeration, distortion and active re-writes of history will ever change -although I noticed some Democrats really are trying to re-write that history now years after the fact -and making up bullshit numbers and producing all sorts of phony graphs and charts trying to pretend this is what it was all along when it provably was not. Romney didn't write the real record and it is what it is. Funny, no one was attempting to re-write his true record until it was apparent he was the most likely to get the nomination. Funny they didn't try to re-write it 4 years ago, huh. I'd still rather have even that phony re-write over reality with Obama. When you get to that level of unemployment it is considered nearly full employment which means no one looking for a job is going without one. You want massive job creation when there is actually a NEED for them and there is no need for them at full employment or near full employment. When you have full employment you aren't going to get massive numbers of jobs created because they would just go unfilled. With near full employment you need the same number of jobs created as the difference between the number of new people entering the work force minus the number leaving the work force. That is not going to be an impressive number. So what is the point of yapping about the overall number of jobs created in an region that wasn't hurting for new jobs and actually had no use for massive new job creation whatsoever? Kind of dumb argument to make, huh.

Do you SERIOUSLY want to argue that Obama has a better record with the fake 8.2% unemployment everyone knows is really 15% -compared to Romney's 4.7%? Tough argument there -in addition he reduced the overall MA tax burden for people from 7.33% to 6.9% -even though most local governments raised taxes. Anyone arguing Massachusetts was worse off for Romney has to make it up because he has nothing to be ashamed of with that record. Unlike Obama, Romney actually has proof in both the private and public sector proving he has the critically necessary executive skills necessary to even do the job. Obama was THE most unqualified person to run for President in 100 years -and that time people weren't stupid enough to actually elect the guy. Obama is in over his head, hasn't a clue how the private sector works, no clue what it takes to run a business, meet a payroll and comply with the zillion regulations coming nonstop out of D.C. His statements revealing his total lack of comprehension are too numerous to list here but they are stunning commentaries about the true depth of his ignorance. But just one example -when he wondered why companies weren't hiring people when they could have their pick from so many unemployed. Where does he think all these unemployed people came from except they were DUMPED by these companies in the first place -for reasons that just zoom right over his head.

If you think THIS is the best it gets under a President -then Obama is your guy. But THIS is what it looks like when voters treat the job like an entry level position and give it to someone totally unqualified for the job. Obama was and still is totally clueless. His strong suit is being a political hack and he's good at it -but he has never stopped being one to actually BE President. He is also THE most narcissistic President I've ever seen in my life which combined with his level of sheer ignorance about how the real world works is disastrous. I'm not stupid though. I've been around a while to know this is actually one of the top two WORST Presidents in my life with some historians already deeming him to be even worse than Jimmy Carter which is a hell of an "accomplishment". You could put a gun to my head and I still won't vote for this guy. It will take decades to repair the damage he has done and that is assuming we find and elect the people we need to actually do it instead of putting their careers before the best interests of the nation itself and led by someone elected for reasons far more important than how well he can read off a teleprompter. I don't know what it is about Democrats who stupidly seem to think intelligence is correlated with that or with a gift for public speaking -but neither is true.

And that isn't even touching on the fact inflation is upon us even while it is being denied and minimized by Obama minions. My own grocery bill is on average $70 a month more than it was this time just six months ago and my family has started to pare back, we've changed our eating habits and we planted a massive garden this year and will be doing lots of canning. I don't see that getting better anytime soon either because our money is backed by nothing whatsoever. Government will be forced to just inflate its way out of debt and when that happens your money will become toilet paper.

I have increasingly less patience with liberals because I truly wonder at the mentality and utter lack of critical thinking skills that is just incapable of dealing with reality and refuses to see and acknowledge even basic cause-and-effect that has existed since the beginning of time. We are driving off a cliff -and you liberals stupidly insist on choosing the guy promising to stomp on the gas. And the best he can do against Romney is hope morons believe equally moronic people like Maxine Waters when she insists if Romney is elected, life as we know it will end and Republicans will run into hospitals, drag sick women out into the street to die and strip blacks of their right to vote etc. Because sure, no women and no black ever votes Republican. LOL At some point even really, really dumb people catch on to the over the top bullshit and the fact Democrats exist by lurching from phony crisis to the next. None of which are ever the least bit true.

BTW -GOVERNMENT doesn't create jobs. (To say nothing of the fact the kinds of jobs Obama talks about creating are more PUBLIC sector jobs which are not true jobs but more drain on government coffers!! We need PRIVATE sector jobs by the MILLIONS - NOT more public sector ones which only removes productive citizens from the private sector and puts them feeding at the public trough as well. That only increases the burden on those left in the private sector who are footing all the bills! Every time Obama opens his mouth about some fucking "jobs bill" that will hire more teachers, firemen, cops -he is talking about making the existing situation WORSE.) Government can only enact policies that encourage job creation in the private sector -or discourage and hamper it. THAT'S IT and THAT is what this election is about bubba. It is impossible to be pro-job growth but anti-business. Obama is and always has been vigorously anti-business. Which means he has also been anti-job growth. Which is why the true unemployment figure is around 15%. Vote for Obama if your IQ is in single digits.

Why is it..that your metrics are accurate..but anyone else's metrics aren't?

If you aren't going to agree on numbers..there's no way to post a valid critique.
 

Forum List

Back
Top