Doctor Fate wrote:It's okay.

Danivon either is not paying attention or doesn't care.

I see your return has not been accompanied by a change in your level of personal abuse. Are you bothering to even try to keep to your 'rules' this time?

Job claims have been up for the last two weeks. That's not good and it was not expected.

I was looking at the trends over the past year or so, during the time you've been telling us it will get worse. Just as the polls today are not determinitive, neither are the jobs figures for a two-week period six months before polling - they will be history by the time of the Conventions and will either be shown in context or simply forgotten by the time of the election.

I don't think it's going to tank. I think it's not improving, or at least not noticeably so. I don't think most Americans will be running to the voting booth on account of the booming economy. If anything, we're in a period of stagnation.

Over the past year or so things have been improving. Jobs are up, unemployment down, GDP up, etc. I agree that the next six months, and the public perceptions of them - are more important, but without a longer time period the poor figures of the last couple of weeks could be blips within an overal trend, could be signals of a switch from recovery to stagnation, or could be somewhere in between.

Of course, you and the Republicans have no interest whatsoever in talking down the economy, do you?

The polls you really want to watch closely are the pollsin the Battleground states. today Fox News Polls had Obama up 6 points in Ohio and 2 in Florida.
Mitt has to pretty much sweep the battleground states to win.... If he's behind in these two.. (He's way way behind in Virginia for instance)
And he hasn't really faced a campaigning Obama yet... Either Barrack or Michelle.

rickyp wrote:The polls you really want to watch closely are the pollsin the Battleground states. today Fox News Polls had Obama up 6 points in Ohio and 2 in Florida.
Mitt has to pretty much sweep the battleground states to win.... If he's behind in these two.. (He's way way behind in Virginia for instance)
And he hasn't really faced a campaigning Obama yet... Either Barrack or Michelle.

Certainly the trends in the marginal states will be interesting to watch. The problem with a national poll is that if the large states that are already pretty much a lock dominate the swing, it masks what's happening elsewhere.

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:It's okay.

Danivon either is not paying attention or doesn't care.

I see your return has not been accompanied by a change in your level of personal abuse. Are you bothering to even try to keep to your 'rules' this time?

If you've been following the economic news here, you could fool anyone. That's not a personal slam. There is ample evidence that the economy, at best, has leveled off, yet you think, somehow, it's improving?

Please support your case. For every positive stat you can excavate, I can negate it or give a negative stat. If the economy were unquestionably improving, I could not do that.

What you believe is personal is just an observation: you have no case. If you think that's an attack, that's not my fault.

Job claims have been up for the last two weeks. That's not good and it was not expected.

I was looking at the trends over the past year or so, during the time you've been telling us it will get worse. Just as the polls today are not determinitive, neither are the jobs figures for a two-week period six months before polling - they will be history by the time of the Conventions and will either be shown in context or simply forgotten by the time of the election.

5.5 million have given up looking. If/when some of them return to the job market, the rate will go up. The four-week rate (of new applications for benefits) is at a 6-month high.

Again, the facts don't support the rose-colored glasses approach to viewing the economy. I understand some analysts see Europe's ongoing difficulties as a potential drag on our economy too.

My point remains: if the economy is the basis upon which one votes, the President is going to be hard-pressed to win those type of voters.

Over the past year or so things have been improving. Jobs are up, unemployment down, GDP up, etc.

This is half the story, at best. All of those areas are slight improvements. Unemployment is still higher than when he took office. Jobs are up, but not high enough to keep up with the population. GDP is up, but it is the slowest recovery from a recession in history. And, we've borrowed $5T to do this. To use the President's favorite word, that is "unprecedented."

I agree that the next six months, and the public perceptions of them - are more important, but without a longer time period the poor figures of the last couple of weeks could be blips within an overal trend, could be signals of a switch from recovery to stagnation, or could be somewhere in between.

Of course, you and the Republicans have no interest whatsoever in talking down the economy, do you?

It is what it is. If it were rocking and rolling, I could not do it. However, the results were predictable. We can't just grow the government and expect the economy to recover as a result. The President has focused like a laser on taking care of unions, investors in green tech, and government agencies. He has directed his minions to take steps that have necessarily increased energy prices, depressed hiring, and slowed the recovery.

You may not like it, but the proof is in the pudding.

*EDIT*

This will warm your heart too.

Drill down into the numbers of the latest CBS poll and there are ominous signs for Obama. Only 33 percent of Americans believe the economy is moving in the right direction. A mere 16 percent feel they are getting ahead financially. Some 38 percent think their situation will get worse if Obama is re-elected, 26 percent think it will get better.

Americans don't think the economy is getting better and they think if the President is reelected it will get worse for them, personally. That's not good.

rickyp wrote:And he hasn't really faced a campaigning Obama yet... Either Barrack or Michelle.

You don't think the President has been "really" campaigning? How many events do I have to list before you concede you don't know what you're talking about?

Give me a real number.

Doctor Fate wrote:Americans don't think the economy is getting better and they think if the President is reelected it will get worse for them, personally. That's not good.

Yes, but that's still a poll 6 months out from the election, and I wonder how many think Romney would be an improvement.

My election "prdeiction" is that we can and will have this conversation over the next 6 months and there won't be resolution until November.

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:Americans don't think the economy is getting better and they think if the President is reelected it will get worse for them, personally. That's not good.

Yes, but that's still a poll 6 months out from the election, and I wonder how many think Romney would be an improvement.

True re: six months. However, that puts more pressure on the economy to improve NOW. No one will wait to make up there mind on the economy until election day.

As to Romney being an improvement, well, those who actually consider the facts will understand Romney made his money via industry. Obama wrote two books, engaged in some shady deals, and became President to garner his wealth. Obama has never run any enterprise until now. Romney has a record of accomplishment and actually ran a State by reaching across the aisle. When has Obama ever done that?

In a side-by-side comparison, it's remarkably one-sided. Obama is, as Romney often says, over his head. Anyone who looks at the situation critically will agree. That does not mean they will necessarily vote for Romney, but if the President won't run on his record and he's not, how could someone vote for him on the basis of his competency?

They can't.

A vote for President Obama is one of two things: a hope for more entitlement money from the entitlement class, or a blind pulling of the lever for partisan reasons. No one can make the case that he has been an effective President. He's not even trying to do that.

steve

You don't think the President has been "really" campaigning?

No. And neither do you...

Steve

I think Team Obama is going to have to viciously attack Romney in order to win. And, I think they will. They will pull out every stop. We are going to see Chicago-style hardball politics applied across the country.

rickyp wrote:steve

You don't think the President has been "really" campaigning?

No. And neither do you...

Steve

I think Team Obama is going to have to viciously attack Romney in order to win. And, I think they will. They will pull out every stop. We are going to see Chicago-style hardball politics applied across the country.

Um, those contradict each other how?

He's been slamming Republicans for months now. He's been promoting himself since Labor Day. He absolutely is campaigning. Since you gave no number, I'll guess you just don't want to admit you're wrong. That's fine.

Ray Jay wrote:My election "prdeiction" is that we can and will have this conversation over the next 6 months and there won't be resolution until November.

About the most accurate yet!

Doctor Fate wrote:As to Romney being an improvement, well, those who actually consider the facts will understand Romney made his money via industry.

Well, other people's industries, but yeah.

Still, I didn't ask for your opinion, or what you think only sensible people should think, or for a party election broadcast on behalf of the GOP. I wondered what polling might show about how people see Romney.

I know you don't need much excuse to pontificate, so I'll let it slide.

As for polling, Romney is behind as far as how people see him. But polling at this point is meaningless. 60+% think the country is headed in the wrong direction. ANd yet Obama is ahead in the polls. So much for polls and the American public.

rush

But polling at this point is meaningless. 60+% think the country is headed in the wrong direction. ANd yet Obama is ahead in the polls. So much for polls and the American public

.

Professionally produced Polling is never meaningless. Its simply a snapshot in time, and when trended can indicate the direction attitudes are moving... Sure things can change.... but polls can measure that change too.

As for why a President can be the more popular chocie of candidates when the country is headed in the wrong direction and when he disappoint a plurality ... well try to think why that may be... Perhaps headed in the wrong direction but with plenty of blame to go around? You have a three part form of governance and NO ONE likes how Congress has performed. And a lot of people blame Wall Street excesses for both the crash and a continuing deliterious effect on the direction of society....
In the end, Obama is ahead in head to head polls because given a choice of two, he's either the best (or for some) the least worst choice...

Doctor Fate wrote:We can't just grow the government and expect the economy to recover as a result.

What's been interesting about employment change over the past couple of years is how different public and private employment has fared. Public sector employment continues to leak jobs, shrinking by on average 1.7% a month (year over year) over the past 12 months, while private sector employment has been increasing by an average of 1.9% a month over the past 12 months.

Since Obama started his term government employment fell by 585,000 jobs. During the Bush years it grew by over 1,000,000 jobs. Counter-intuitive, no?