Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
Replies to Msg. #757856
.
 Msg. #  Subject Posted by    Board    Date   
10610 Re: Job stats
   CF, The question is: How many people are going to check the figur... 		joe-taylor   ALEA   06 Oct 2012
 4:46 PM
10608 Re: Job stats
   Now I understand. 7.8% is awesome. How did I not see that before? 		wavydog   ALEA   06 Oct 2012
 4:35 PM

The above list shows replies to the following message:

Re: Job stats

By: Cactus Flower in ALEA
Sat, 06 Oct 12 4:22 PM
Msg. 10607 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 10606 by clo)
Jump to msg. #  

hi clo,

yes. but to be fair to the dawg, he produced a number! that's a start. and being the person of warmth and compassion that y'all know me to be, I'm going to help him along with another one.

here it is! more than 50% of all the job losses under obama occurred in the first 3 months of his presidency. that is, before his stimulus policy went into effect. 50 per cent. more than half. under. the. policies. of. the. previous. president.

so for me, the explanation of the dawg's number has a name. that name is gwb.

thereafter, there's a clear recovery pattern.

so, any vaguely sentient being would surely say the successful policies were the ones that created the recovery.

but this kind of statistic produced by wavy is why the gop is in trouble. it's that same old torture thing. look the numbers square in the face and the story is obvious.

but try really hard and you can find a form of presentation that sounds bad. until you actually check the record. the chart makes it all very clear.

and of course, this is why the partisans don't comment when the simple story is presented. how do you argue against the actual numbers?

7.8%! awesome.

that one job is not vacant.