But the specifics — 7 million plus 3 million plus 2 million — mentioned by Romney in the ad are not in the White Paper. So where did that come from?

We asked the Romney campaign and the answer turns out to be: totally different studies … with completely different timelines.

For instance, the claim that 7 million jobs would be created from Romney tax plan is a ten-year number, derived from a study written by John W. Diamond, a professor at Rice University.

This study at least assesses the claimed effect of specific Romney policies. The rest of the numbers are even more squishy.

For instance, the 3-million-job claim for Romney’s energy policies appears largely based on a Citigroup Global Markets study that did not even evaluate Romney’s policies. Instead, the report predicted 2.7 million to 3.6 million jobs would be created over the next eight years, largely because of trends and policies already adopted – including tougher fuel efficiency standards that Romney has criticized and suggested he would reverse.

The 2-million-jobs from cracking down on China is also very suspicious.

This figure comes from a 2011 International Trade Commission report, which estimated that there could be a gain of 2.1 million jobs if China stopped infringing on U.S. intellectual property rights. The estimate is highly conditional and pegged to the job market in 2011, when there was high unemployment. “It is unclear when China might implement the improvement in IPR protection envisioned in the analysis, and equally unclear whether the United States will face as much excess labor supply then as it does today,” the report says.

The Romney campaign has already used this study, in a misleading way, to claim that Obama’s China “policies cost us 2 million jobs.” Now the campaign has just taken the same figure and credited the claimed job gain to itself, even though the report does not examine any of Romney’s proposed policies.

td11 wrote:this thing is awesome

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012 ... story.html

jerseyhoya wrote:Country would have been a lot better off if she had won the primary in 2008, but we wouldn't have a realistic chance at beating her. You win some, you lose some I guess.

mozartpc27 wrote:my conservative friends think he is to the left of Chairman Mao.

Grotewold wrote:

mozartpc27 wrote:my conservative friends think he is to the left of Chairman Mao.

While at same time having "no record to run on"

jerseyhoya wrote:I'm not a big conspiracy theory person, but I generally operate under the assumption that PPP turns out polls (including topline numbers) designed to boost Dem candidates. With kos's tweet yesterday about how the worst poll all week for Obama would be their PPP poll, the brain got confused and started churning. Why would they have worse numbers than everyone else?

1) Setting up for the comeback narrative after the second debate
2) Trying to highlight the 'even though Obama is losing nationally he'll still get to 270' storyline - PPP has Obama up five in Ohio
3) With the related thought that maybe PPP has a better/more accurate model for national polling but sucks at or fudges state polling
4) PPP is legit

It's more or less impossible for Obama to be down 4 nationally and up 5 in Ohio, although samples/random variance and whatnot can explain that without needing to ascribe nefarious motives to the findings. But the guy who runs it is a Dem pollster and a partisan who uses his polls in other ways to boost Dem candidates/story lines (and a Braves fan), so I distrust him.

The reasons for them to have Romney up nationally at this point are pretty weak so #4 looks more and more likely, or is that just what they want me to think? If I have to start trusting PPP I'm going to be really unhappy. This poll is throwing a wrench into my worldview.

td11 wrote:

the uber goober

td11 wrote:why romney's 12 million jobsclaim is complete bullshit

But the specifics — 7 million plus 3 million plus 2 million — mentioned by Romney in the ad are not in the White Paper. So where did that come from?

We asked the Romney campaign and the answer turns out to be: totally different studies … For instance, the 3-million-job claim for Romney’s energy policies appears largely based on a Citigroup Global Markets study that did not even evaluate Romney’s policies.

pacino wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

mozartpc27 wrote:my conservative friends think he is to the left of Chairman Mao.

While at same time having "no record to run on"

He's done everything. And nothing.

Bucky wrote:meh, it's yer classic photo op.

Paul Ryan visited a soup kitchen here Saturday on his way to the airport, but by the time the GOP vice presidential nominee and his family had arrived shortly before noon, the grits, sausage and doughnuts had been served, the hall was empty of patrons and the volunteers appeared to have already cleaned up.

Ryan stood at the sink and took some large metal pans that did not appear to be dirty, soaped them up and rinsed them, remarking as the cameras clicked and the TV cameras rolled that he had spent a summer washing dishes when he was younger.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Bucky wrote:meh, it's yer classic photo op.

Usually it's not this transparent though. I've done this charity appearances with elected officials (obv never this high profile though), and there is usually at least some degree of genuine work being done. Which does not appear to be the case here:

Paul Ryan visited a soup kitchen here Saturday on his way to the airport, but by the time the GOP vice presidential nominee and his family had arrived shortly before noon, the grits, sausage and doughnuts had been served, the hall was empty of patrons and the volunteers appeared to have already cleaned up.

Ryan stood at the sink and took some large metal pans that did not appear to be dirty, soaped them up and rinsed them, remarking as the cameras clicked and the TV cameras rolled that he had spent a summer washing dishes when he was younger.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/13/reporters-barred-from-covering-paul-ryan-exchange-with-homeless-ohioans-outside-soup-kitchen/

I really don't think it's a big deal at all, but it's still pretty pathetic IF it happened the way the WaPo is reporting it. (And the video seems to confirm that.)