The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

[Faun]

And your proof of this is .............? And your link is .........?
For the love of God turn off fox and try thinking for yourself. It will be difficult but at least give it a try and stop parroting the dummies.

I'm guessing he's talking about the U6 unemployment rate? That includes people who are working, just not as much as they would like; and discouraged workers.

However, the U6 rate, while still high at 12.7%, is less than the 14.2% that Bush left Obama with. And of course, thanks to Bush's recession, the U6 went as high as 17.1% At 12.7%, that represents a drop in the unemployment rate of 11% from when Obama became president and a decrease of 26% since its post recession high. Compared to George Bush, who nearly doubled it from 7.3% to 14.2%, an increase of a whopping 95%.

So we have a Republican president who increased the unemployment rate and his successor, a Democrat, who's lowered it. How do Conservatives spin that to make the Democrat appear worse than the Republican? They do something never done before and average out the unemployment rate to hide the fact that Obama was handed the highest unemployment rate any president inherited (which essentially blames Obama) with the lone exception of FDR.

Here's a revealing chart showing how bad Republican presidents have been in terms of unemployment ...

Here's a list of U.S. presidents, along with the diffenrence in the U3 unemployment rate after being in office for 62 months...

Clinton .............. -2.6
Johnson ............ -2.3
Obama .............. -1.1
Kennedy** ......... -0.9
Reagan .............. -0.3
Carter*** ........... 0.0
Bush ................ +0.5
Nixon ............... +1.7
GHW Bush*** ... +1.9
Ford* ............... +2.0
Eisenhower ...... +3.8


* = in office 29 months

** = in office 34 months

*** = in office 48 months

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data​

You'll notice that Reagan is the only president to lower the unemployment rate by this time in his presidency (and barely); while no Democrat ever increased it.

How does the GOP spin that? Average out the unemployment rate.

So after 5 years of almost total control of the government and trillions in stimulus Obama managed to reduce the real UE by 2 points? And you wonder why people call him a failure??

His job approval is higher than Bush's at this same point in his presidency. If Obama is a failure, than Bush was an even bigger failure. And Bush, at this point in his presidency, would have been a bigger failure before complete wrecking the economy -- that pretty much renders Bush as possibly the worst president in U.S. history. And despite the way you attempt to minimize Obama's feat of lowering the unemployment rate, the fact remains -- at 62 months in office, he has lowered it more than every single Republican president, including the GOP god, Ronald Reagan.

 

[The Rabbi]

I'm guessing he's talking about the U6 unemployment rate? That includes people who are working, just not as much as they would like; and discouraged workers.

However, the U6 rate, while still high at 12.7%, is less than the 14.2% that Bush left Obama with. And of course, thanks to Bush's recession, the U6 went as high as 17.1% At 12.7%, that represents a drop in the unemployment rate of 11% from when Obama became president and a decrease of 26% since its post recession high. Compared to George Bush, who nearly doubled it from 7.3% to 14.2%, an increase of a whopping 95%.

So we have a Republican president who increased the unemployment rate and his successor, a Democrat, who's lowered it. How do Conservatives spin that to make the Democrat appear worse than the Republican? They do something never done before and average out the unemployment rate to hide the fact that Obama was handed the highest unemployment rate any president inherited (which essentially blames Obama) with the lone exception of FDR.

Here's a revealing chart showing how bad Republican presidents have been in terms of unemployment ...

Here's a list of U.S. presidents, along with the diffenrence in the U3 unemployment rate after being in office for 62 months...

Clinton .............. -2.6
Johnson ............ -2.3
Obama .............. -1.1
Kennedy** ......... -0.9
Reagan .............. -0.3
Carter*** ........... 0.0
Bush ................ +0.5
Nixon ............... +1.7
GHW Bush*** ... +1.9
Ford* ............... +2.0
Eisenhower ...... +3.8


* = in office 29 months

** = in office 34 months

*** = in office 48 months

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data​

You'll notice that Reagan is the only president to lower the unemployment rate by this time in his presidency (and barely); while no Democrat ever increased it.

How does the GOP spin that? Average out the unemployment rate.

So after 5 years of almost total control of the government and trillions in stimulus Obama managed to reduce the real UE by 2 points? And you wonder why people call him a failure??

His job approval is higher than Bush's at this same point in his presidency. If Obama is a failure, than Bush was an even bigger failure. And Bush, at this point in his presidency, would have been a bigger failure before complete wrecking the economy -- that pretty much renders Bush as possibly the worst president in U.S. history. And despite the way you attempt to minimize Obama's feat of lowering the unemployment rate, the fact remains -- at 62 months in office, he has lowered it more than every single Republican president, including the GOP god, Ronald Reagan.

Obama's approval ratings have been falling like topsy. But approval ratings do not define success. Success defines success. And Obama has had no success. Not in foreign policy. Not in domestic policy. Bush turned around the recession he inherited from Clinton within 18 months. And he didnt spend a trillion bucks doing it either. Most of his foreign policy was a success.
That makes obama the most failed president in post WW2. The least qualified, the least competent, the most over hyped. Even progressives can't stand the guy.

 

[Faun]

So after 5 years of almost total control of the government and trillions in stimulus Obama managed to reduce the real UE by 2 points? And you wonder why people call him a failure??

His job approval is higher than Bush's at this same point in his presidency. If Obama is a failure, than Bush was an even bigger failure. And Bush, at this point in his presidency, would have been a bigger failure before complete wrecking the economy -- that pretty much renders Bush as possibly the worst president in U.S. history. And despite the way you attempt to minimize Obama's feat of lowering the unemployment rate, the fact remains -- at 62 months in office, he has lowered it more than every single Republican president, including the GOP god, Ronald Reagan.

Obama's approval ratings have been falling like topsy.

WTF are you smoking? His approval rating is around 43% It's been around that for about the last 5 months. And despite going up and down over the years, it was 42% in 2011. That's your idea of "falling??"

But approval ratings do not define success. Success defines success. And Obama has had no success. Not in foreign policy. Not in domestic policy.

And Bush's successes were ... ? Invading a country over WMD that weren't there? Protecting us on 911? Killing bin Laden? Cratering the economy? Being only the second president in history to leave office with fewer jobs in the private sector than when he started? C'mon, help me out here?

Bush turned around the recession he inherited from Clinton within 18 months. And he didnt spend a trillion bucks doing it either. Most of his foreign policy was a success.
That makes obama the most failed president in post WW2. The least qualified, the least competent, the most over hyped. Even progressives can't stand the guy.

There was no recession when Clinton left office, therefore Bush couldn't have inherited one from Clinton. Sad that you have to lie to make your non-point.

 

[Oldstyle]

Actually, the number isn't even 8.86%. But then, righties never can handle math. Still, the actual number is high and higher than the rest. No, my contention is this reflects just how desperate the right is. It's kind of like them talking about the labor force participation rate. No one has ever averaged out the unemployment rate before, yet since the right has this insatiable need to attack Obama over the unemployment rate, even as it improves, they have to keep finding innovative ways to make him look bad.

Averaging out the unemployment rate is an effective way to hide the fact that he was handed the worst economy since the Great Depression though, so I understand why they resort to a metric that has never been used before.

Still, righties can't escape the fact that Reagan remains the only Republican president to lower the unemployment rate by the end of his presidency or the fact that no Democrat president has increased it.

By the way, what do you think averaging out the unemployment rate means in terms of a presidents' handling of the economy?

The "real" unemployment rate is higher than 8.86.

And your proof of this is .............? And your link is .........?
For the love of God turn off fox and try thinking for yourself. It will be difficult but at least give it a try and stop parroting the dummies.

Do you people really not know that the real unemployment number (U6) is usually substantially larger that the unemployment number that is normally quoted? You want cites? Fine...

The Unemployment Rate: Get Real

 

[Oldstyle]

His job approval is higher than Bush's at this same point in his presidency. If Obama is a failure, than Bush was an even bigger failure. And Bush, at this point in his presidency, would have been a bigger failure before complete wrecking the economy -- that pretty much renders Bush as possibly the worst president in U.S. history. And despite the way you attempt to minimize Obama's feat of lowering the unemployment rate, the fact remains -- at 62 months in office, he has lowered it more than every single Republican president, including the GOP god, Ronald Reagan.

Obama's approval ratings have been falling like topsy.

WTF are you smoking? His approval rating is around 43% It's been around that for about the last 5 months. And despite going up and down over the years, it was 42% in 2011. That's your idea of "falling??"

But approval ratings do not define success. Success defines success. And Obama has had no success. Not in foreign policy. Not in domestic policy.

And Bush's successes were ... ? Invading a country over WMD that weren't there? Protecting us on 911? Killing bin Laden? Cratering the economy? Being only the second president in history to leave office with fewer jobs in the private sector than when he started? C'mon, help me out here?

Bush turned around the recession he inherited from Clinton within 18 months. And he didnt spend a trillion bucks doing it either. Most of his foreign policy was a success.
That makes obama the most failed president in post WW2. The least qualified, the least competent, the most over hyped. Even progressives can't stand the guy.

There was no recession when Clinton left office, therefore Bush couldn't have inherited one from Clinton. Sad that you have to lie to make your non-point.

Bush took office just as the Dot Com Boom fizzled out and was fighting a recession from the start. It's always amusing how you liberals conveniently overlook how much the Dot Com Boom (along with a Republican led Congress that reined in spending) helped Clinton's numbers look good.

 

[Oldstyle]

Actually, the number isn't even 8.86%. But then, righties never can handle math. Still, the actual number is high and higher than the rest. No, my contention is this reflects just how desperate the right is. It's kind of like them talking about the labor force participation rate. No one has ever averaged out the unemployment rate before, yet since the right has this insatiable need to attack Obama over the unemployment rate, even as it improves, they have to keep finding innovative ways to make him look bad.

Averaging out the unemployment rate is an effective way to hide the fact that he was handed the worst economy since the Great Depression though, so I understand why they resort to a metric that has never been used before.

Still, righties can't escape the fact that Reagan remains the only Republican president to lower the unemployment rate by the end of his presidency or the fact that no Democrat president has increased it.

By the way, what do you think averaging out the unemployment rate means in terms of a presidents' handling of the economy?

The "real" unemployment rate is higher than 8.86. If you looked at how many full time jobs Barack Obama has turned into part time jobs with the legislation he's pushed the numbers get even worse for him!

The "real" unemployment rate was still higher when Bush left office. At any rate, the claim is that the average under Obama is 8.86, and it's not. Demonstrating yet again how bad Conservatives are at math.

So why isn't Barry doing what Reagan did? At this point in his second term Reagan had the economy growing by leaps and bounds, inflation under control and unemployment was coming down as well. Barack Obama isn't doing ANY of those things!

What did Reagan do?

Trust me...you don't have to do "creative accounting" to make this President look bad when it comes to the economy. The people that were getting creative were whoever it was who came up with a new economic statistic..."jobs created or saved"...when the Obama Stimulus failed miserably at creating the jobs that Barry, Harry and Nancy assured us it would!

Sure, uh-huh. If you didn't have to resort to "creative accounting," then you wouldn't be averaging out the unemployment rate (something never done before).

And you never did answer the question .... what do you think the average unemployment rate means in terms of a presidents' handling of the economy?

How do you propose to measure the success or failure of a President's economic policies if not with an examination of things like the unemployment numbers or the rate of growth of the overall economy? You've got your panties in a twist because you think Barack Obama is being "unfairly" scrutinized by his critics, which is laughable.

The bottom line is this...President Barack Obama has overseen the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression. That's a fact! At some point the choices he has made when it comes to economic policy are going to be questioned because to be quite blunt...the results have sucked!!! If he were a conservative President and his policies gave this kind of result I would fully expect that he would be figuratively "tarred and feathered" by the opposition. I certainly wouldn't be on here whining about it like you are.

You keep bringing up Reagan in a comparison with Obama, Bluesman and you don't seem to grasp the glaring difference in results between the two Presidents at this point in their second term. The REASON that Reagan was reelected in a landslide was the country could see that his economic policies were working! Inflation was under control...unemployment was down...and the economy was growing at an increasing rate. That simply hasn't happened under Obama. His policies have led to economic stagnation with long term unemployment at levels we haven't seen SINCE the Great Depression.

 

[The Rabbi]

His job approval is higher than Bush's at this same point in his presidency. If Obama is a failure, than Bush was an even bigger failure. And Bush, at this point in his presidency, would have been a bigger failure before complete wrecking the economy -- that pretty much renders Bush as possibly the worst president in U.S. history. And despite the way you attempt to minimize Obama's feat of lowering the unemployment rate, the fact remains -- at 62 months in office, he has lowered it more than every single Republican president, including the GOP god, Ronald Reagan.

Obama's approval ratings have been falling like topsy.

WTF are you smoking? His approval rating is around 43% It's been around that for about the last 5 months. And despite going up and down over the years, it was 42% in 2011. That's your idea of "falling??"

But approval ratings do not define success. Success defines success. And Obama has had no success. Not in foreign policy. Not in domestic policy.

And Bush's successes were ... ? Invading a country over WMD that weren't there? Protecting us on 911? Killing bin Laden? Cratering the economy? Being only the second president in history to leave office with fewer jobs in the private sector than when he started? C'mon, help me out here?

Bush turned around the recession he inherited from Clinton within 18 months. And he didnt spend a trillion bucks doing it either. Most of his foreign policy was a success.
That makes obama the most failed president in post WW2. The least qualified, the least competent, the most over hyped. Even progressives can't stand the guy.

There was no recession when Clinton left office, therefore Bush couldn't have inherited one from Clinton. Sad that you have to lie to make your non-point.

Facts just arent your friends here.
Obamacare reaches lowest approval rating ever | The Daily Caller

Bush's success? Imposing UN mandate on violating country. Getting rid of state sponsor of terrorism. Neutering al Qaeda. War on Terror so successful his successor copied it. Neutralize Libyan program of WMD. Increased AIDS resources to Africa. Humanitarian missions in Haiti and elsewhere. Second longest string of postiive GDP growth post ww2. Prescription drug benefit for seniors. Bipartisan legislation signed. Among the lowest average unemployment of any president. Lowest avareage inflation.
etc etc.
The dot com bust happened as Clinton left office. Combined with 9/11 it caused the recession. Bush turned it around in 18 months. No radical expansion of government needed.

 

[U2Edge]

Folks, when looking at unemployment, all the months for the time each president is in office, the unemployment rate for all those months, is added up and then divided by the number of months in office. That is the only fair and accurate way to assess what life was like in the labor force during the entire time the said President was in office.

Over a 96 month period, two full terms, the unemployment rate will rise and fall many times. It is grossly inaccurate to simply compare the first month the President is in office to the last month the President is in office. That's only two months of information. Your missing 94 months of data. Would you like your job performance to be based only on your first month of work and your last month of work. Would you like your grades in school to be based only on your first month of school and your last month of school. Do colleges and Highschools rate GPA of students by its rise or fall from the first month to the last month?

NO, they take the average of all data points that go into making up that GPA! Its the same with the unemployment rate. If you don't like the results for your favorite President, too bad. But the results are solid facts from BLS!

 

[ron4342]

And your proof of this is .............? And your link is .........?
For the love of God turn off fox and try thinking for yourself. It will be difficult but at least give it a try and stop parroting the dummies.

I'm guessing he's talking about the U6 unemployment rate? That includes people who are working, just not as much as they would like; and discouraged workers.

However, the U6 rate, while still high at 12.7%, is less than the 14.2% that Bush left Obama with. And of course, thanks to Bush's recession, the U6 went as high as 17.1% At 12.7%, that represents a drop in the unemployment rate of 11% from when Obama became president and a decrease of 26% since its post recession high. Compared to George Bush, who nearly doubled it from 7.3% to 14.2%, an increase of a whopping 95%.

So we have a Republican president who increased the unemployment rate and his successor, a Democrat, who's lowered it. How do Conservatives spin that to make the Democrat appear worse than the Republican? They do something never done before and average out the unemployment rate to hide the fact that Obama was handed the highest unemployment rate any president inherited (which essentially blames Obama) with the lone exception of FDR.

Here's a revealing chart showing how bad Republican presidents have been in terms of unemployment ...

Here's a list of U.S. presidents, along with the diffenrence in the U3 unemployment rate after being in office for 62 months...

Clinton .............. -2.6
Johnson ............ -2.3
Obama .............. -1.1
Kennedy** ......... -0.9
Reagan .............. -0.3
Carter*** ........... 0.0
Bush ................ +0.5
Nixon ............... +1.7
GHW Bush*** ... +1.9
Ford* ............... +2.0
Eisenhower ...... +3.8


* = in office 29 months

** = in office 34 months

*** = in office 48 months

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data​

You'll notice that Reagan is the only president to lower the unemployment rate by this time in his presidency (and barely); while no Democrat ever increased it.

How does the GOP spin that? Average out the unemployment rate.

So after 5 years of almost total control of the government and trillions in stimulus Obama managed to reduce the real UE by 2 points? And you wonder why people call him a failure??

"... almost total control of the government ...." In case you are living on some other planet or are delusional have you taken the time to look at the behavior of the republicans in both the House and Senate. By the use of filibusters they have managed to kill almost every bill that has been proposed. Meanwhile they have written numerous bills, all with a rider killing ACA, knowing they would be rejected. They don't want anything to pass and become law. It is no accident that thanks to the republicans the Congress is making a strong run at being the worst Congress in 238 years. Give Obama 61 votes in the Senate and then your 2/3 statement would have merit other than that, it is just more mud from the terminally ignorant.

 

[The Rabbi]

I'm guessing he's talking about the U6 unemployment rate? That includes people who are working, just not as much as they would like; and discouraged workers.

However, the U6 rate, while still high at 12.7%, is less than the 14.2% that Bush left Obama with. And of course, thanks to Bush's recession, the U6 went as high as 17.1% At 12.7%, that represents a drop in the unemployment rate of 11% from when Obama became president and a decrease of 26% since its post recession high. Compared to George Bush, who nearly doubled it from 7.3% to 14.2%, an increase of a whopping 95%.

So we have a Republican president who increased the unemployment rate and his successor, a Democrat, who's lowered it. How do Conservatives spin that to make the Democrat appear worse than the Republican? They do something never done before and average out the unemployment rate to hide the fact that Obama was handed the highest unemployment rate any president inherited (which essentially blames Obama) with the lone exception of FDR.

Here's a revealing chart showing how bad Republican presidents have been in terms of unemployment ...

Here's a list of U.S. presidents, along with the diffenrence in the U3 unemployment rate after being in office for 62 months...

Clinton .............. -2.6
Johnson ............ -2.3
Obama .............. -1.1
Kennedy** ......... -0.9
Reagan .............. -0.3
Carter*** ........... 0.0
Bush ................ +0.5
Nixon ............... +1.7
GHW Bush*** ... +1.9
Ford* ............... +2.0
Eisenhower ...... +3.8


* = in office 29 months

** = in office 34 months

*** = in office 48 months

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data​

You'll notice that Reagan is the only president to lower the unemployment rate by this time in his presidency (and barely); while no Democrat ever increased it.

How does the GOP spin that? Average out the unemployment rate.

So after 5 years of almost total control of the government and trillions in stimulus Obama managed to reduce the real UE by 2 points? And you wonder why people call him a failure??

"... almost total control of the government ...." In case you are living on some other planet or are delusional have you taken the time to look at the behavior of the republicans in both the House and Senate. By the use of filibusters they have managed to kill almost every bill that has been proposed. Meanwhile they have written numerous bills, all with a rider killing ACA, knowing they would be rejected. They don't want anything to pass and become law. It is no accident that thanks to the republicans the Congress is making a strong run at being the worst Congress in 238 years. Give Obama 61 votes in the Senate and then your 2/3 statement would have merit other than that, it is just more mud from the terminally ignorant.

Ron, man. No offense and I love you like a brother. But you're one stupid motherfucker. Democrats controlled Congress from 2009 to 2011. For at least some of that time they had a filibuster proof majority. For the rest of it, if they could persuade one or two Republicans to their side, they would get their legislation through. And indeed in the first two years of Obama's term Congress passed plenty of legislation. SOmetimes they even had GOP votes.
And the results have sucked. Worst recovery on record. Highest level of gov't dependence since WW2. Slowest income growth. On and on. By every measure Obama has been a gross failure.

 

[ron4342]

Obama's approval ratings have been falling like topsy.

WTF are you smoking? His approval rating is around 43% It's been around that for about the last 5 months. And despite going up and down over the years, it was 42% in 2011. That's your idea of "falling??"


And Bush's successes were ... ? Invading a country over WMD that weren't there? Protecting us on 911? Killing bin Laden? Cratering the economy? Being only the second president in history to leave office with fewer jobs in the private sector than when he started? C'mon, help me out here?

Bush turned around the recession he inherited from Clinton within 18 months. And he didnt spend a trillion bucks doing it either. Most of his foreign policy was a success.
That makes obama the most failed president in post WW2. The least qualified, the least competent, the most over hyped. Even progressives can't stand the guy.

There was no recession when Clinton left office, therefore Bush couldn't have inherited one from Clinton. Sad that you have to lie to make your non-point.

Facts just arent your friends here.
Obamacare reaches lowest approval rating ever | The Daily Caller

Bush's success? Imposing UN mandate on violating country. Getting rid of state sponsor of terrorism. Neutering al Qaeda. War on Terror so successful his successor copied it. Neutralize Libyan program of WMD. Increased AIDS resources to Africa. Humanitarian missions in Haiti and elsewhere. Second longest string of postiive GDP growth post ww2. Prescription drug benefit for seniors. Bipartisan legislation signed. Among the lowest average unemployment of any president. Lowest avareage inflation.
etc etc.
The dot com bust happened as Clinton left office. Combined with 9/11 it caused the recession. Bush turned it around in 18 months. No radical expansion of government needed.

The Daily Caller???? You really like to wallow at the ultra right sewer sites, don't you? Your posts are not even worth pissing on.

 

[Faun]

Obama's approval ratings have been falling like topsy.

WTF are you smoking? His approval rating is around 43% It's been around that for about the last 5 months. And despite going up and down over the years, it was 42% in 2011. That's your idea of "falling??"


And Bush's successes were ... ? Invading a country over WMD that weren't there? Protecting us on 911? Killing bin Laden? Cratering the economy? Being only the second president in history to leave office with fewer jobs in the private sector than when he started? C'mon, help me out here?

Bush turned around the recession he inherited from Clinton within 18 months. And he didnt spend a trillion bucks doing it either. Most of his foreign policy was a success.
That makes obama the most failed president in post WW2. The least qualified, the least competent, the most over hyped. Even progressives can't stand the guy.

There was no recession when Clinton left office, therefore Bush couldn't have inherited one from Clinton. Sad that you have to lie to make your non-point.

Bush took office just as the Dot Com Boom fizzled out and was fighting a recession from the start. It's always amusing how you liberals conveniently overlook how much the Dot Com Boom (along with a Republican led Congress that reined in spending) helped Clinton's numbers look good.

Translation: Bush did not inherit a recession since the country was not in a recession in January, 2001.

Take it up with Rabbi ... he's the one who lied, fallaciously claiming Bush inherited a recession.

As far as your nonsense about Republicans making Clinton's numbers look better -- if Republicans had anything to do with it, and they didn't, they would have been able to keep the numbers looking good. Instead, the numbers fell into the toilet after Clinton left.

 

[U2Edge]

I'm guessing he's talking about the U6 unemployment rate? That includes people who are working, just not as much as they would like; and discouraged workers.

However, the U6 rate, while still high at 12.7%, is less than the 14.2% that Bush left Obama with. And of course, thanks to Bush's recession, the U6 went as high as 17.1% At 12.7%, that represents a drop in the unemployment rate of 11% from when Obama became president and a decrease of 26% since its post recession high. Compared to George Bush, who nearly doubled it from 7.3% to 14.2%, an increase of a whopping 95%.

So we have a Republican president who increased the unemployment rate and his successor, a Democrat, who's lowered it. How do Conservatives spin that to make the Democrat appear worse than the Republican? They do something never done before and average out the unemployment rate to hide the fact that Obama was handed the highest unemployment rate any president inherited (which essentially blames Obama) with the lone exception of FDR.

Here's a revealing chart showing how bad Republican presidents have been in terms of unemployment ...

Here's a list of U.S. presidents, along with the diffenrence in the U3 unemployment rate after being in office for 62 months...

Clinton .............. -2.6
Johnson ............ -2.3
Obama .............. -1.1
Kennedy** ......... -0.9
Reagan .............. -0.3
Carter*** ........... 0.0
Bush ................ +0.5
Nixon ............... +1.7
GHW Bush*** ... +1.9
Ford* ............... +2.0
Eisenhower ...... +3.8


* = in office 29 months

** = in office 34 months

*** = in office 48 months

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data​

You'll notice that Reagan is the only president to lower the unemployment rate by this time in his presidency (and barely); while no Democrat ever increased it.

How does the GOP spin that? Average out the unemployment rate.

So after 5 years of almost total control of the government and trillions in stimulus Obama managed to reduce the real UE by 2 points? And you wonder why people call him a failure??

"... almost total control of the government ...." In case you are living on some other planet or are delusional have you taken the time to look at the behavior of the republicans in both the House and Senate. By the use of filibusters they have managed to kill almost every bill that has been proposed. Meanwhile they have written numerous bills, all with a rider killing ACA, knowing they would be rejected. They don't want anything to pass and become law. It is no accident that thanks to the republicans the Congress is making a strong run at being the worst Congress in 238 years. Give Obama 61 votes in the Senate and then your 2/3 statement would have merit other than that, it is just more mud from the terminally ignorant.

The Democrats have controlled the US Senate for his entire Obama Presidency to this point.

 

[The Rabbi]

WTF are you smoking? His approval rating is around 43% It's been around that for about the last 5 months. And despite going up and down over the years, it was 42% in 2011. That's your idea of "falling??"


And Bush's successes were ... ? Invading a country over WMD that weren't there? Protecting us on 911? Killing bin Laden? Cratering the economy? Being only the second president in history to leave office with fewer jobs in the private sector than when he started? C'mon, help me out here?



There was no recession when Clinton left office, therefore Bush couldn't have inherited one from Clinton. Sad that you have to lie to make your non-point.

Bush took office just as the Dot Com Boom fizzled out and was fighting a recession from the start. It's always amusing how you liberals conveniently overlook how much the Dot Com Boom (along with a Republican led Congress that reined in spending) helped Clinton's numbers look good.

Translation: Bush did not inherit a recession since the country was not in a recession in January, 2001.

Take it up with Rabbi ... he's the one who lied, fallaciously claiming Bush inherited a recession.

As far as your nonsense about Republicans making Clinton's numbers look better -- if Republicans had anything to do with it, and they didn't, they would have been able to keep the numbers looking good. Instead, the numbers fell into the toilet after Clinton left.

Of course Bush inherited a recession. It was coming. It was going to come. It was in the making when he took office.
Gingrich and the House GOP worked with Clinton on his signature issues: Welfare reform, NAFTA, a balanced budget. Clinton had no interest in those issues prior to the GOP taking the House.

 

[paulitician]

How can anyone still believe this Administration on anything? They're lying criminals. There is absolutely no way Unemployment is as low as they're claiming. No way. They lie. Period, end of story.

 

[Faun]

The "real" unemployment rate is higher than 8.86. If you looked at how many full time jobs Barack Obama has turned into part time jobs with the legislation he's pushed the numbers get even worse for him!

The "real" unemployment rate was still higher when Bush left office. At any rate, the claim is that the average under Obama is 8.86, and it's not. Demonstrating yet again how bad Conservatives are at math.


What did Reagan do?

Trust me...you don't have to do "creative accounting" to make this President look bad when it comes to the economy. The people that were getting creative were whoever it was who came up with a new economic statistic..."jobs created or saved"...when the Obama Stimulus failed miserably at creating the jobs that Barry, Harry and Nancy assured us it would!

Sure, uh-huh. If you didn't have to resort to "creative accounting," then you wouldn't be averaging out the unemployment rate (something never done before).

And you never did answer the question .... what do you think the average unemployment rate means in terms of a presidents' handling of the economy?

How do you propose to measure the success or failure of a President's economic policies if not with an examination of things like the unemployment numbers or the rate of growth of the overall economy? You've got your panties in a twist because you think Barack Obama is being "unfairly" scrutinized by his critics, which is laughable.

The bottom line is this...President Barack Obama has overseen the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression. That's a fact! At some point the choices he has made when it comes to economic policy are going to be questioned because to be quite blunt...the results have sucked!!! If he were a conservative President and his policies gave this kind of result I would fully expect that he would be figuratively "tarred and feathered" by the opposition. I certainly wouldn't be on here whining about it like you are.

You keep bringing up Reagan in a comparison with Obama, Bluesman and you don't seem to grasp the glaring difference in results between the two Presidents at this point in their second term. The REASON that Reagan was reelected in a landslide was the country could see that his economic policies were working! Inflation was under control...unemployment was down...and the economy was growing at an increasing rate. That simply hasn't happened under Obama. His policies have led to economic stagnation with long term unemployment at levels we haven't seen SINCE the Great Depression.

Don't misrepresent what I say. I never said we shouldn't examine unemployment numbers. I myself presented unemployment numbers. What I did say was that Conservatives are so desperate to make Obama look bad, they're inventing new ways to look at unemployment numbers since the conventional ways of looking at them is improving.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for an answer to the question, what do you think the average unemployment rate indicates in terms of a presidents' handling of the economy?

Speaking of Reagan and unanswered questions, I also asked what Reagan did to turn the economy around?

As far as this being the slowest recovery since the Great Depression, it was also the biggest recession since the Great Depression. The deeper the hole, the harder it is to climb out of.

 

[The Rabbi]

The "real" unemployment rate was still higher when Bush left office. At any rate, the claim is that the average under Obama is 8.86, and it's not. Demonstrating yet again how bad Conservatives are at math.


What did Reagan do?


Sure, uh-huh. If you didn't have to resort to "creative accounting," then you wouldn't be averaging out the unemployment rate (something never done before).

And you never did answer the question .... what do you think the average unemployment rate means in terms of a presidents' handling of the economy?

How do you propose to measure the success or failure of a President's economic policies if not with an examination of things like the unemployment numbers or the rate of growth of the overall economy? You've got your panties in a twist because you think Barack Obama is being "unfairly" scrutinized by his critics, which is laughable.

The bottom line is this...President Barack Obama has overseen the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression. That's a fact! At some point the choices he has made when it comes to economic policy are going to be questioned because to be quite blunt...the results have sucked!!! If he were a conservative President and his policies gave this kind of result I would fully expect that he would be figuratively "tarred and feathered" by the opposition. I certainly wouldn't be on here whining about it like you are.

You keep bringing up Reagan in a comparison with Obama, Bluesman and you don't seem to grasp the glaring difference in results between the two Presidents at this point in their second term. The REASON that Reagan was reelected in a landslide was the country could see that his economic policies were working! Inflation was under control...unemployment was down...and the economy was growing at an increasing rate. That simply hasn't happened under Obama. His policies have led to economic stagnation with long term unemployment at levels we haven't seen SINCE the Great Depression.

Don't misrepresent what I say. I never said we shouldn't examine unemployment numbers. I myself presented unemployment numbers. What I did say was that Conservatives are so desperate to make Obama look bad, they're inventing new ways to look at unemployment numbers since the conventional ways of looking at them is improving.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for an answer to the question, what do you think the average unemployment rate indicates in terms of a presidents' handling of the economy?

Speaking of Reagan and unanswered questions, I also asked what Reagan did to turn the economy around?

As far as this being the slowest recovery since the Great Depression, it was also the biggest recession since the Great Depression. The deeper the hole, the harder it is to climb out of.

Translation: I want to find the best metric to make Bush look bad and Obama good.
Reagan worked to get comprehensive tax reform, elimiating loopholes in exchange for lower rates across the board. What we should be doing. He slowed down the growth of the bureaurcracy. He deregulated natural gas prices. He slashed milk price supports.
The bigger the recession, the stronger the recovery. That is the rule in every recession post war except this one. Wonder why?

 

[Oldstyle]

The "real" unemployment rate was still higher when Bush left office. At any rate, the claim is that the average under Obama is 8.86, and it's not. Demonstrating yet again how bad Conservatives are at math.


What did Reagan do?


Sure, uh-huh. If you didn't have to resort to "creative accounting," then you wouldn't be averaging out the unemployment rate (something never done before).

And you never did answer the question .... what do you think the average unemployment rate means in terms of a presidents' handling of the economy?

How do you propose to measure the success or failure of a President's economic policies if not with an examination of things like the unemployment numbers or the rate of growth of the overall economy? You've got your panties in a twist because you think Barack Obama is being "unfairly" scrutinized by his critics, which is laughable.

The bottom line is this...President Barack Obama has overseen the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression. That's a fact! At some point the choices he has made when it comes to economic policy are going to be questioned because to be quite blunt...the results have sucked!!! If he were a conservative President and his policies gave this kind of result I would fully expect that he would be figuratively "tarred and feathered" by the opposition. I certainly wouldn't be on here whining about it like you are.

You keep bringing up Reagan in a comparison with Obama, Bluesman and you don't seem to grasp the glaring difference in results between the two Presidents at this point in their second term. The REASON that Reagan was reelected in a landslide was the country could see that his economic policies were working! Inflation was under control...unemployment was down...and the economy was growing at an increasing rate. That simply hasn't happened under Obama. His policies have led to economic stagnation with long term unemployment at levels we haven't seen SINCE the Great Depression.

Don't misrepresent what I say. I never said we shouldn't examine unemployment numbers. I myself presented unemployment numbers. What I did say was that Conservatives are so desperate to make Obama look bad, they're inventing new ways to look at unemployment numbers since the conventional ways of looking at them is improving.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for an answer to the question, what do you think the average unemployment rate indicates in terms of a presidents' handling of the economy?

Speaking of Reagan and unanswered questions, I also asked what Reagan did to turn the economy around?

As far as this being the slowest recovery since the Great Depression, it was also the biggest recession since the Great Depression. The deeper the hole, the harder it is to climb out of.

With all due respect, Faun...who invented new ways to look at unemployment numbers...those who used the established methods for determining unemployment...or the Obama Administration and progressive Democrats who invented a new economic statistic "jobs created or saved" to hide how bad things really were?

The truth of the matter is that the Obama Stimulus failed to create the numbers of jobs that liberals promised it would and instead of simply reporting the numbers as they WERE...your side came up with a number that couldn't be verified in a rather laughable attempt to obscure that!

I've already answered question #2. One of the ways you judge the effectiveness of a President's economic policies is by an examination of unemployment data and economic growth. You don't like it when that is done to the Obama Administration because they don't look good when their numbers are looked at.

As for what Reagan did to turn the economy around? Reagan was facing an especially daunting task because Jimmy Carter had left him rampant Stagflation...a combination of high unemployment and high inflation. Reagan attacked that by supporting Paul Volcker's tightening up the money supply to bring down inflation (something which actually worsened the unemployment situation early on) and then cutting taxes to stimulate the economy. One of the other things he did that helped to turn around the economy was getting rid of "price controls" that had been imposed by both Nixon and Carter. Contrast that with what Obama has done since taking office! He's supported loosening the money supply and raising taxes while at the same time imposing more government regulations on American businesses.

As for your claim about the bigger the hole the harder it is to climb out of? History doesn't back up that statement. Economic downturns are historically followed by economic rebounds. The two glaring exceptions to that rule are the Great Depression (where many economists now believe FDR's policies and meddling with the economy actually PROLONGED the Great Depression)...and the Great Recession that we find ourselves mired in now.

 

[Faun]

Obama's approval ratings have been falling like topsy.

WTF are you smoking? His approval rating is around 43% It's been around that for about the last 5 months. And despite going up and down over the years, it was 42% in 2011. That's your idea of "falling??"


And Bush's successes were ... ? Invading a country over WMD that weren't there? Protecting us on 911? Killing bin Laden? Cratering the economy? Being only the second president in history to leave office with fewer jobs in the private sector than when he started? C'mon, help me out here?

Bush turned around the recession he inherited from Clinton within 18 months. And he didnt spend a trillion bucks doing it either. Most of his foreign policy was a success.
That makes obama the most failed president in post WW2. The least qualified, the least competent, the most over hyped. Even progressives can't stand the guy.

There was no recession when Clinton left office, therefore Bush couldn't have inherited one from Clinton. Sad that you have to lie to make your non-point.

Facts just arent your friends here.
Obamacare reaches lowest approval rating ever | The Daily Caller

Bush's success? Imposing UN mandate on violating country. Getting rid of state sponsor of terrorism. Neutering al Qaeda. War on Terror so successful his successor copied it. Neutralize Libyan program of WMD. Increased AIDS resources to Africa. Humanitarian missions in Haiti and elsewhere. Second longest string of postiive GDP growth post ww2. Prescription drug benefit for seniors. Bipartisan legislation signed. Among the lowest average unemployment of any president. Lowest avareage inflation.
etc etc.
The dot com bust happened as Clinton left office. Combined with 9/11 it caused the recession. Bush turned it around in 18 months. No radical expansion of government needed.

Holy shit!!! Talk about retarded.

We're talking about JARs, you rightard. You can't spin the fact that Obama has a higher job approval than Bush had at this point in his presidency by pointing out the publics' disapproval of ObamaCare.

As far as your idiotic claim that 911, combined with dot com bust, caused the recession ... 911 had nothing to do with that recession. 911 occurred in September, 6 months after the recession began and had absolutely nothing to do with causing it. That has got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read here.

And still, no matter how hard you try, there was no recession when Bush became president. Therefore, it's ridiculous to claim he inherited one. You do not inherit something which does not exist.

 

[Faun]

Folks, when looking at unemployment, all the months for the time each president is in office, the unemployment rate for all those months, is added up and then divided by the number of months in office. That is the only fair and accurate way to assess what life was like in the labor force during the entire time the said President was in office.

Over a 96 month period, two full terms, the unemployment rate will rise and fall many times. It is grossly inaccurate to simply compare the first month the President is in office to the last month the President is in office. That's only two months of information. Your missing 94 months of data. Would you like your job performance to be based only on your first month of work and your last month of work. Would you like your grades in school to be based only on your first month of school and your last month of school. Do colleges and Highschools rate GPA of students by its rise or fall from the first month to the last month?

NO, they take the average of all data points that go into making up that GPA! Its the same with the unemployment rate. If you don't like the results for your favorite President, too bad. But the results are solid facts from BLS!

If that's the only fair way to measure the labor force, then why has no one ever averaged out the unemployment rate before Obama? And since Obama's average is inflated due to the recession he inherited, you think it's fair to attribute job losses from the recession during the beginning of his term to him? And when looking at their first 62 months in office, Obama at 8.6 is barely behind Reagan at 8.3. Are you saying Obama has done almost as good a job with unemployment as Reagan?