dajafi wrote:Also, I sincerely love you guys for using U3, U5 and U6 and assuming everyone knows what they mean. INTERNET FRIENDS FTW!

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:And remember how we were talking yesterday about the theory that Romney might've won the debate but still hurt himself through the PBS/Big Bird comment?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2012/10/04/big-bird-will-haunt-mitt-romney/

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:And remember how we were talking yesterday about the theory that Romney might've won the debate but still hurt himself through the PBS/Big Bird comment?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2012/10/04/big-bird-will-haunt-mitt-romney/

It was his only stylistic miststep, imo. Who wants PBS cut outside of hardcore members of his base? And the "I even like you, Jim" thing was smarmy.

Grotewold wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:And remember how we were talking yesterday about the theory that Romney might've won the debate but still hurt himself through the PBS/Big Bird comment?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2012/10/04/big-bird-will-haunt-mitt-romney/

It was his only stylistic miststep, imo. Who wants PBS cut outside of hardcore members of his base? And the "I even like you, Jim" thing was smarmy.

td11 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:If labor force participation rate was the same as when Obama took office, U3 rate would be 10.7%. If labor force participation was the same as it was in January 2012, it'd be 8.3%.

this is the first month in four years where the total employed/population ratio went up and you wanna bring up when the pres first took office and we were still bleeding jobs from the recession?

dajafi wrote:Baby Boomers are starting to hit retirement age in pretty large numbers, and the pace of immigration has slowed in the downturn. Would seem a stretch to blame either of these things on Obama, though I'm sure Fox will give it a try.

td11 wrote:

dajafi wrote:Baby Boomers are starting to hit retirement age in pretty large numbers, and the pace of immigration has slowed in the downturn. Would seem a stretch to blame either of these things on Obama, though I'm sure Fox will give it a try.

pacino wrote:Sure would be nice if we didn't cut all those government jobs

The best news anywhere in the U.S. economy over the past three months has been in the government sector, where unemployment has dropped dramatically from 5.7 percent in July to 5.1 percent in August to 4.3 percent in September, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Werthless wrote:

td11 wrote:

Jobs are always created post recession, and the argument is that job growth has been horrendous, given the deepness of the recession. Compared to any previous recession, jobs have been created startlingly slowly. See here:

td11 wrote:the brown(1990) and black (2001) lines seem to be of a similar slope. it looks to me like the depth of the recession we hit is pretty unprecedented while the rate of growth since the valley is not

Grotewold wrote:It seems naive to me to compare this recession to previous ones. I feel like there are major systemic problems (for which the parties share blame) which have taken us here and that most people instinctively understand we aren't going back to the 50s or 90s anytime soon.

Grotewold wrote:It seems naive to me to compare this recession to previous ones. I feel like there are major systemic problems (for which the parties share blame) which have taken us here and that most people instinctively understand we aren't going back to the 50s or 90s anytime soon.

So anything less than horrible economic news is good news for a mostly likeable president.