Shared publicly  - 
Tallying President Obama's Jobs Record

Really fascinating comparison of job growth under Obama vs under Bush.  From the Wall Street Journal no less.  I wonder what Republicans make of the fact that government employment grew during the Bush administration while private sector employment shrank. Meanwhile, under Obama, government employment shrank while private sector employment grew.  

One wonders why these statistics aren't part of the political debate.
Antonio D'souza's profile photoCorey Sims's profile photoWilliam Harris's profile photoLeon Peshkin's profile photo
Shhh. Keep this quiet. People dont want to hear facts. 
Also why people use simple Pavlov's response (bell, saliva) analysis and correlation between a president and jobs, not that I support GOP.
+Tim O'Reilly  OK where did these figures come from again   OH the WSJ  guess you can't get more Democratic than that .
Statistics aren't facts, they are data points, adjusted by data manipulators to say what the person who wants to represent them, wants them to say

Really statistical analysis should be a course in Grade 12, I took it in University (I loved it so I took very advanced studies in it) but the basis is enough, there are multiple averages (3 main, 5 if you aren't a stickler) - then application of the methods is not governed by too many rules - and have many methods.

I could likely take the base data from this, and prove the opposite, so - FACTS? Sure, if you believe them, then they are, to you - to me, these are not facts but untruths waiting to be discovered.
The comments on the article tell the whole story:
U6 which includes those that have given up on finding employment has gone from 14.2% to 14.7% since Obama took office.

The federal workforce (which is what he actually has control over) has grown by 143,000 according to the Labor Department. More government with less money to pay for it means more debt.

Oil and gas leases in effect on federal land are down 11%. Gas prices have doubled since Obama took office.

As of September, China and Russia are now net sellers of Treasuries. So who’s buying our Treasuries? The Fed through QE1, QE2, and now QEp. We are just printing dollars without any market demand for them.

From the end of the 18-month recession in June 2009 until October 2012 (40 months), total nonfarm payroll is up 2.49%. Forty months after the end of the 16-month recession in 1982, total nonfarm payroll was up 11.4%. Reagan’s and Obama’s policies were markedly different, as are the results.
The government doesn't make jobs.  The people do.
Its not considered fact if fox news hasnt reported it. Fair and balanced. 
If you look at the chart itself, you would agree with Republican's that it's all Obama's fault. Adding the context of jobs under Bush would make it more relevant. Unfortunately, some people have been brainwashed into forgetting the meltdown under Bush
Chart only shows Obama's first term. Would like to see a comparison chart over Bush's first term and both terms.
Banks need to be somewhat regulated with firewalls like we have in Canada. These regulations were loosened under Clinton and people buying homes they couldn't afford but of course no politician is going to blame the people. So it would be nice to have a logical discussion of these issues.
I can't speak as a Republican since I'm not, but growth in government jobs under Bush is unsurprising but disappointing.  
We don't want to be dictated by facts, keep it to yourself.
Quad graphics is hiring in Wisconsin if anyone interested, FYI.
+Michael Gee I always wonder why people say this.

Teachers? Police Officers? Firefighters, FBI. The epidemiologists tracking the current meningitis outbreak? Our soldiers and all their support staff? I could list many more than are very good people, working very hard to make their fellow citizen's lives better.

Or indirectly the list expands exponentially. Just one example - the Small Business Administration helps so many small businesses to succeed in America. Even the business where Romney gave his last big speech in Iowa had previously received a quite sizable SBA loan (as well as TARP money).

I'm not saying that government creates all jobs. It doesn't. But to think that it is not part of the solution to growing our economy and creating more jobs I is just factually incorrect.
We need to hire MORE public employees to get our economy to recover more quickly!
+William Johnston Wall Street Journal Democratic? Wall Street Journal panders to conserative issues and stock marketers. I'm sure this world would be a much better place with more people, such as yourself, who place asinine labels on others.

If you couldn't tell previous sentence was sarcasm.
I did an integration contract for Quad/Graphics in WI from here in eastern Canada - to do with rolls of paper shipping, damaged, etc :) +Juneeya SUWAL
I would think that Republicans would be happy with Obama since he shrunk the government payroll and increased private sector jobs, while Bush did the opposite.
If something happens while something else happens, they must be correlated right?
Tim, I think Democrats don't make it part of the debate for two reasons:

1) Talking about it will 'activate' the framing narrative of Democrats being Big Government Job Killers, and

2) Refuting a deeply-held narrative with facts doesn't cause people to change their mind, it only makes them dig in with further rationalizations.
And of course there is the unfortunate statistic that unemployment for blacks is up to 14.3%.  Along with the other unfortunate statistics like 27 million out of work or stopped looking for work, 47 million on foodstamps, GDP at dismal levels (1.3%), incomes down $4,500.  Those are all meaningful numbers that can't be overlooked either.
And of course it's unfortunate that people cherry pick whatever data they think will support there side of the argument or make the other side look bad.
With all the information our there today, it's amazing that we can only say x or y went up under bush or obama, which is at such a simple mental level of understanding.
+William Johnston, for some, rational thinking and critical thought seem to become even rarer during the election silly season.
Mitt's response is the stats are a sad reminder of how poorly the economy I doing. However the article shows Obama had a recession with twice as many people unemployed than GW Bush. Both dropped unemployment but during Obama's administration, government ranks shrank where GW only succeded because the government ranks increase (private sector employee meant dropped). Appears Obama is acting very Republican. 
Again, still blaming a predecessor.. smh.. obama should be impeached.
He has a negative jobs record....duh! 
IMHO. Once side (Republicans) isn't interested in facts, in the slightest. They are making a cynical bet on the inattention of the electorate.
+William Johnston Are you joking?  The Wall Street Journal democratic?  It's the right-leaning national newspaper, owned by Rupert Murdoch, who also owns Fox News.
Poor +William Johnston . I just think he needs some friends, otherwise why would he always be trolling and spewing the same ole', same ole'?
Greg K.
Romney is running against a "fiction" (the real Obama is a far cry from his depiction of Obama). 

Which, curiously, has rendered Romney into a fiction as well. He's a double-tongued pitchman seeking executive power, and as real as the Jolly Green Giant or the Pillsbury Doughboy. A creation, only.
+Steve Fines I totally understand where you are coming from and I agree with a large amount of it.  I just think people are putting to much faith in what the government says about making jobs. 

They can help make jobs and in some cases the jobs are government work.  But they don't just make them out of thin air, they facilitate.  Which is how it seems to be written in the jobs report.
If mitt romney wins this election on a "im going to tell you what i am going to do after im president, but for now i'll tell you anything you want to hear to get your vote" platform, then americans deserve everything they are going to get.
Obama has done a very good job, especially when you consider the mess he was given when he took office. 
From the BLS:
"Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for blacks increased to 14.3 percent in October, while the rates for adult men (7.3 percent), adult women (7.2 percent), teenagers (23.7 percent), whites (7.0 percent), and Hispanics (10.0 percent) showed little or no change. The jobless rate for Asians was 4.9 percent in October, down from 7.3 percent a year earlier.
In October, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little changed at 5.0 million. These individuals accounted for 40.6 percent of the unemployed.
In October, 2.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, little different from a year earlier. These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey.
In October, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged down by 1 cent to $23.58. In October, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees edged down by 1 cent to $19.79."
Interesting, huh? I don't see any general improvement. Nice to know I'm wa-a-a-ay below "average" hourly pay, too. Yep, he's doing a great job!  (not) In light of the first sentence, I would wonder...why all the support? Who wants more of that?
Have we identified what types of jobs and in what fields.  This isn't an anti-Obama comment, but a question about actual employment problems.

Remember that the population grew over the past four years.  So breaking even with 2008 is a net loss as a percentage of the population.  I also remember reading that we still have a net job loss in the prime earning age groupe (25-54) and that most of the gains over the last four years are entry level (18-24) and part time supplimental (55+).

The numbers we are being fed actually don't reflect the reality of the job market, and haven't for decades. 
Yea Rod even in his second term I am sure he wont hold himself accountable. With this clown it will always be someones else fault. 
we should all be educated to the point where we realize the days of 1 man being able to change anything in this country are long dead and gone with our founding fathers. keep in mind by the people for the people was coined wen our presidents came from the same background as ourselves. It has bees decades since anyone in the oval office has been able to relate to the problems of the people. our forefathers worked this land and reaped its rewards and now they are simply out of touch. They are no more than a puppet for congress and senate who truly run this country. 
+tyler bohan agreed! I'm still waiting for someone's input regarding the shadowstats I cited earlier that paint a different picture ...
+james Thompson, I propose an eligibility cap on a president/congressman candidate's gross income of $250,000.
+Bobby Andrews, the BLS figures even paint a different picture. Those supporting our President will only show you the "good" data interpretations. They don't tell the whole story, nor do they reflect reality. Few of these "smart people" (with a lot of money) showing how good things are have a clue how the "little people" live or what they have to live with.
My own personal IRA dividends dropped like a rock when Obama took office, and they've been flatlined ever since - on the bottom. Maybe I'm biased, but that doesn't seem like a positive sign. Maybe I'm just blinded by FoxNews. I'll check with MSNBC on my IRA situation. Maybe they can tell me how great I'm doing.
Oh, here's the chart - the real deal.
The first drop is when Democrats got control of Congress under Bush. Pretty neat, huh?
+tyler bohan and +Bobby Andrews, as to the point of unemployment being a key factor in job growth, I would agree.

I would note however that as +james Thompson pointed out, the president controls next to nothing, much less population growth. It is entirely possible to create jobs and have an increase in unemployment. 

As a pointless aside +tyler bohan, I would have personally appreciated a very valid point all the more if you hadn't used the clown term. I suppose such is the state of political discourse nowadays though.  
You've got it backwards, +Harvey Grant. Obama has been keeping Conservatives from being successful. Democrats are the obstructionists. I don't hate him, but I disagree strongly with his socialist/Marxist philosophy. Of course, you (and others) will brand me a racist anyway.
+james Thompson my only quibble would be that congress and the senate enjoy the same puppet like qualities as the president. Follow the money. They certainly do. 
+Will Kriski It's astounding. Pavlovian is a great description. Truth is, presidents get too much credit and blame. Economic cycles, demographics, etc. don't care who is in office.
"One wonders why these statistics aren't part of the political debate." -- Because, like almost all other figures, they've been cherry picked. This election comes down to one thing in my mind: do you want more or less federal government involvement in your life?
+James Hodgkinson agreed the president isn't the job creator, but the title of this post is "tallying president Obama's job record" - which is an assertion the president does. That aside, even if the president was the jobs guy I'd say the stats provided to support his record by the original poster are not strong evidence if compared to other veritable stats such as those on 
"do you want more or less federal government involvement in your life?"

Ummm.... Maybe when they are picking me off the roof of my flooded house? Or would Bain Capital do this?
Actually I think half his tenure has been campaigning to get re-elected.
+Bobby Andrews I actually don't fall on either side of this argument. I'm just bored at work and I do enjoy the absurdity of the either/or arguments. 99/100 times I steer clear of this type of nonsense. It must be Friday. 

Also, the "shadow" stats name cracks me up. It's all a nefarious plot, with code words and rhetoric. On both sides. 

I say peace and love to you all. 
A lot less government and jobs where you can make more than $8/hr.
I think Obama deserves a second term, but I'm not a US voter so my opinion doesn't count. However I think it's a shame that two candidates have to be all things to all people, including the fringe far right. Romney has no chance at credibility while the far right have sufficient numbers to be a force in US politics, but not enough to be the majority.
That said, of course it is possible to disagree with Obama's policies without racism. While that might underlie many such positions, it's lazy ad hominem to generalise.
Well its nice that you take a intrest in us elections but its a good thing you dont vote 4 more years of this and the US will be in Big Big Trouble.Look at His policies closer.Words and actions should be in sync..But I will leave that up to you to decide if Mr. Obama is shooting strait to the american people.Stand For Something or you will fall for anything
Wag the dog.  Both candidates are only different in degree.  Romneycare or Obamacare.  Romneywar or Obamawar.  Romneydebt or Obamadebt.  Gee, they're the same, lets vote for (either) and get hung up on wedge issues.  Great job everyone.
+James Hodgkinson lol - I just bought the Samsung s3 and taking android for run - I ended up here on a whim.

I don't support either candidate - it's the posts assertion of fact that roped me in. As for shadowstats it does sound a little nefarious lol, but it's a highly respected publisher and used by investors widely. It's non-partisan and credible.
Propaganda much? LOL so in 4 years Obama did nothing. Back to square one. Remember the under 5%? Was that a bold faced lie or is he just a moron?  This is what happens when you elect a guy with no experience that has not been vetted and was already considered the most radical political in Washington. LOL Hope and Change LOL How about worse than ever...   
Someone actually said "the WSJ, can't get more Democratic than that" . . . ???? are you serious????
+Bobby Andrews Android talk! I'm in.

I've heard the S3 is quite the phone. I was looking forward to getting the Nexus 4, but they won't have it on Verizon so I'm left to consider other options.  

To swing it back, I'm pretty sure it's Obama's fault that Romney couldn't get me the phone I wanted. 
I usually just vote for the best smile. Too me they're both liberal conservatives who claim to be radical progressives and are probably just puppets of our biggest industries.
No, +Jeffery MacMillian, that's what happens when you elect a guy whom the opposition party hates so unreasoningly they'd sooner destroy the country than see him succeed. So far as I'm concerned, the Republican leadership in congress ought to be tried for treason.
+Harvey Grant that was kind of the point I was making, with a two party system no-one is ever satisfied. Neither candidate represents your vote - they have to try to be all things to all people, even as surely they know it is impossible.
Fortunately there are alternatives to first-past-the-post electoral systems which allow for more than two parties in the House.
Much of the job cuts have been on the state level due to decreased tax revenues (tax cuts and the recession). Governors are trying to cut their way out of debt, but most states have cut as much fat as they can, and now are cutting "muscle." 
How about we cut the Nanny state and end food stamps, welfare and free government (taxpayer funded) healthcare... That might help out a bit!
Very nice, +Mike Mentges. You planning on feeding them all personally, or do you just like watching people starve and freeze? I suppose if they did it at a distance, then you wouldn't catch any of the diseases the lack of healthcare'd have them spreading...
They are clearly jealous of him because he is a great man period 
+Creag Emmons Do you see what I mean this guy/girl is correct! What if you were surviving on food stamps? Hmm.. How would you like it? Just think of if your not the only person!
+Mike Mentges That certainly is one option. The thing with giving money to poor people though, is they tend to spend every penny of it and it ends up being good for the economy in most cases. 

That said, in combination with other options it is not inconceivable it may work. I'd venture to say we wouldn't want to follow through with the other necessary steps to make it a success though. 
I can't wait to see how many pro-Obama posts the San Francisco kids working at +Google+ push into the 'hot' circle these last few days before the election.  I'm guessing they're easily going to break their old record of 5 in one hour.
"One wonders why these statistics aren't part of the political debate."

Because both Bush and Obama were handed recessions when they arrived into office.  It goes without saying, following 9/11, that Bush did not handle the economic uncertainty well but it also must be taken into account that government expansion (to a point) was necessary in the aftermath.  Obama was handed a much worse situation in comparison.  Had 9/11 happened in 2009, in the midst of the current recession, one wonders how much worse would it have been for us.  In essence, this is a solid story for Dems but its really an apples and oranges comparison.
+Scott Spencer No offense, you are being an Idiot like +Mike Mentges ! Help America don't down it! If Mitt get's voted president think of all the people starving and dying because of your stupidity! Oh don't think I forgot about you +Mike Mentges ! Both of you are being idiots, do the correct thing, vote Barack Obama! 
I just want to know why he keeps talking about Bush. Is he running against him again? 
Its funny in the one debate he sounds like Bush with all his um's and ands 
+James Hodgkinson the s3 is a serious upgrade from my former crackberry bold ... waiting for the jellybean update ... no regrets yet ... statistics show the s3 leads to better employment rates ;)
Look +Amonte Middleton no chance in hell Im voting for that piece of shit piss poor excuse of a President.. I wont starve that is for damn sure!
+Malki Zee Those are lies! Obama is doing better than any President in the world! You all are just hating on his fine work! I believe in what is right! Vote him and you never know one day you might need food-stamps! 
+Mike Mentges Ok. God is listening on your dumb conversation with me. So when you get laid off and cant buy food and have to sell your cheap computer, you'll see! President Barack Obama is helping America. Who killed Osama Ben Loten? Oh, yeah BARACK! Do you kiss your mother with that mouth! I wish Barack Obama himself could see this right now! 
+Amonte Middleton "Obama is doing better than any President in the world!".....seriously?  Really?  If you mean that by increasing food stamp, welfare and disability expenses while decreasing labor participation, then you're correct.  He's doing a fine job at those things.  I'm guessing you're 12, which would explain a lot.
Your conversation is very poor! You sound like a political fool! I believe that the world deserves better! You are being an idiot! You have your opinions and I have facts! So do what's right don't be stupid! 
Patrick Zimmerman, because thats how bad bush fucked up this country, no one has forgot that, yes! obama has added to the deficit because he refuses to let the american people fall in this recession, thats why foodstamps and unemployment have been increased wall street got a bailout why can't americans that are suffering get foodstamps and unemployment that they paid their taxes for before they lost their jobs.
Plus no one will even attempt to help him with or pass his jobs act, so hell! As the president he increased "entitlements" as you cons like to call it.
If you yell loud enough and long enough eventually folks will get tired of telling you to pipe down.  Some will even take up the call and add to the noise you're making.

A recent example occurred during the second Presidential debate between Romney and Obama.  Romney, on the defense, made the point to say trickle down economics was a failure.  Great, ok, so now the Republicans are ready to put, in the past, their failed economic world view.  What a relief.  Backed by decades of data they too see the light.  If you enable the wealthy through preferential tax policy, tax loop holes and business subsidies the rich become richer and the middle class... stagnates...

But wait, if this were true, if Romney believed what he said in front of the nation, why then would he advocate more tax cuts for the top 1%?

Perhaps the meme is everything?  The Republicans have spent decades establishing their platform as the party of less, not more, government.  Most folks if asked to define the Republican platform would start by saying something along these lines.

However, here they stand, the Republican party, wolves in sheep's clothing, chewing away on freshly killed sheep, all the while muttering out of the sides of their mouths the occasional "Baaaaaaaaa...".
Your biggest problem, as a nation, is that the vast majority of you refuse to acknowledge the fact that you may be wrong in your views. That's not unique to the US, but you're stereotypically the loudest about it.

And you put all your effort into trying to tell the other guys how wrong you are and ignoring the faults of your own side. Its the only genuinely nonpartisan mindset to be found in the US.
Look it's simple after the war of course he can't fix everything in just 4 years. And for those who gave up that's on you not the president...
He's doing a great job. Best President Ever !
Obama will win by a landslide. Everyone remembers what the Republicans do. 
And just before the election, too! How convenient!
+Dave Zinn What's the chance that right after the election, the unemployment numbers are strangely adjusted up, just like they normally are? Ya think? 
I really wonder what the + or - on these stats are? Is this not a natural progression of jobs?
It took many years to get where America is today. Perhaps one should not forget that four years is a short period in this ever faster paced world. Upward trends (national debt, unemployment) initiated by administrations may not show yet when so many other factors weigh in.
I think there's what 200-300K net jobs under Obama?

Those statistics probably aren't part of the debate because no one wants to split hairs with such a small number...
Millions losing benefits does not equal job growth.
Obama > Bush = Romney

Reality but not exactly a ringing endorsement.
I really think Romney n Ryan will do a better job in the white house n create more jobs for. The American people!!!! 
LOL @ +James Hodgkinson! Yeah, I know. I was making the point that it's all in the perspective. Yep, Republicans resist Democrats and Democrats resist Republicans. Neither side wants to try to find common ground. "They" want the sides to be divided and at each other throats. No desire to reach across the aisle (except to try and jerk them over to the one side). It's working pretty well, don't you think?
Transcend the Bullshit . Figures don't lie.However liars figure .
I just now got this notice emailed to me from the National Dem. office

"all democrates are to vote on the Nov 10 because of the storms up and down the easy coast , sorry for any inconvenience this may have cause"

LOL @ +Amonte Middleton too! You're calling people idiots with a profile pic like that????
Oh...sorry. You're just a child. I hope I didn't hurt your self-esteem.
Obama's "Big" Government, government jobs: [2009 -97,000] [2010 -221,000] [2011 -256,000] [2012 +20,000] = 554,000 less Government jobs, but Private Sector Jobs: [2009 -4,705,000] [2010 +1,248,000] what could have caused that CHANGE [2011 +2,447,000] and  2012 (so far) +1,748,000 ...32 straight months of growth.
Article fails to consider population growth in US.
Additional jobs created under Obama did not absorb even half of ADDITIINAL people at the job market.
It means that unemployment keeps rising all of the years Obama is in charge. 
+rick hollis To quote Romney:  "The government doesn't create jobs."  Of course, this was on the same day that he said "As President, I will create 12 million jobs."

So... there's that.
I debated for years.  Both sides.  You can find "facts" to support whatever position you choose.  There are a lot of things that aren't part of the political discussion and with 20+ million people unemployed, it is likely that no one really cares about this set of figures.  If Obama were running against Bush, it might be relevant.  Right now I think that he is running against himself since he set very specific objectives for his administration.  Of course, what is truly sad is no one seems to recognize that our Presidents are not kings and the Congress is deserving of significant scrutiny.
It's a shame our two candidates are arguing about such low percentage changes isn't it?  The sad thing is, the unemployment numbers don't reflect employment, only how many people have filed for unemployment benefits.  Perhaps this is something Government 2.0 could tackle?
Probably contributed to why Bush wasn't exactly the most popular of GOP presidents... among the GOP.
I wish there was a second graph showing the change since the stimulus money started being spent. The first six months (at least) of rapid job loss can't be blamed on Obama.
You're right, +Leslie Morgan. Congress generally makes and passes the bills. All the President can do is stop them.
In a way, I guess the President does dictate laws by way of Executive Order, though. That's scary in itself.
My guess is the stats are false.
+Amonte Middleton sure it might get the capable off their entitled asses... allowing funds to go to people with REAL disabilities, not just the lazy disability.
+Amonte Middleton id love for obama to see my posts, although id probably wind up in a fema camp for hating un furhor.
You can play with job numbers all you like.  If you start tallying change in jobs on the day a President starts in office you will get one set of numbers.  If you start tallying the count on the day the new federal budget goes into effect (September following the inaugeration) you will get a different set of numbers and one associated with policies of the sitting president.

Both Bush and Obama started their presidencies in the midst of recessions and job loss periods.  The more current one has been far mroe devastating.  There is no comparison in terms of stark negative impact on the nation.

There is startling information how government employment (mostly state and local) soared during the Bush term.  That is so contrary in nature to the politics, claims, and propaganda from the Right Wing.

On the other hand state and local employment has dropped during the Obama administration.  Clearly its a result of terrible tax revenues at the state and local levels...a function of the past recession...and very much a function of depressed real estate tax revenues at the local levels....along with other forms of state and local revenues.

During the Obama administration   state and local loss of jobs trailed the loss of private jobs on a timing basis.   Private jobs were lost first, and real estate values plummeted.  State and local government employment was resilient at first while private employers were shedding jobs.

The impact on the economy then hit government coffers.  Lower sales tax revenues, lower fees on a state and local level, and most seriously huge drops in real estate taxes from properties whose values plummeted and were subsequently reassessed at lower values.   On top of lower assessments you had massive numbers of properties going bankrupt. 

On an historical basis compared to past presidencies overall job growth was most miserable during the Bush 8 years;  slow job growth in the first 6 years or so and then the devastation of the recession.

Its interesting.  Romney has specifically articulated that he would create 12 million jobs in 4 years.  Alternatively there are non partisan economic forecasts that predict job growth in that matter who is president....most of the predictions predicated on natural recovery from the recession.

Presidents have impact on jobs but they aren't dictators and they don't control what private companies do.   While Obama's initial recovery legislation passed and had a positive impact on both saving and creating jobs, he had subsequent proposals for more job investment that were defeated in Congress.

But simply compare job creation at different starting points...say the date of inaugeration or starting with Feb ....and compare it with September of that year when a new budget formulated by the sitting president (and congress) is started.   You will have changing numbers for job growth for EVERY SINGLE PRESIDENCY.

The interpretation and presentation of these numbers is subject to manipulation for political purposes.
It will be fascinating to have a real man as commander in chief. 
I think's it because of obama not think that will appeal to his voters entirely as public sector work is more left wing, and similary, but in reverse for romney
For every job on Obama's watch, 75 people have gone on food stamps. Why dont you include that statistic on your graph?

Oh right, because you are a media troll fire the left wing.

Nothing like voting "present" huh.
To little to late. You think?
+rick hollis how do you figure.romney had his chance as governor..his state was ranked 47 out of 50 in job creation..60%disapproval ratings his last year as governor.
Why isn't this data more widely distributed, absolutely illuminating! 
+Mike Mentges. Please define the articles of impeachment. What part of the Constitution has President Obama violated. Also, if the vote to impeach comes up, do you really think they'll find him guilty. Impeachment won't remove him from office; it will only create turmoil. 
That is unless one looks at U6 as opposed to U3 numbers. People have just given up or working part time. Unemployment is stratospheric in black and Latino communities. Governments have been slashing workforces. That's why govt employment is down. 80% of people I have worked with are gone.
Obama's done jack squat about unemployment -- like every other President of these United States. That's a bonus for POTUS when it's up, and an "oops" when it's down, with zero accountability either way.
"Certainty is learning's enemy, for it already knows and it cannot be surprised." J. Leinhard
Yeah.... And for every 1 of those jobs created 4 people dropped out of the labor force.

And that's the most conservative number.

It's been reported as high as 10 for every one job created.

The longest stretch of over 8 percent unemployment since the Great Depression.

Labor force that has shrank from 65.7 percent in Jan 2009 to 63.7 percent last month.

The average length of time on unemployment jumped from 20 weeks in 08 to 40 weeks today.

And we still have the left trying to convince the rest of us that Obamas policies aren't massive failures.

Not likely. 
Comparing Obama to Bush is like comparing apples to oranges. Bush was handed a great economy with plenty of time to do great things but he didn't. Obama was handed the worst economy in 60 or 70 years for a 4 year term and you expect miracles. I share a lot of republican views but I'm disgusted at what the republican party has turned into. Far right mad men.
So, in an economy where nearly 300k per month are needed to keep up, adding 580k jobs in four years is a good thing? The President spoke harshly of the last president when about 280k jobs were adding in one month and said it was not enough. Now adding less the 150k per month is not only a good thing but should be impressive? No, I do not agree with that line of thinking personally.

Are you forgetting about 911, which happened in his first year? Department of Homeland Security was created, two wars started, and a collapsing economy at the end of his Presidency caused in part by the governments involvment in the banking industry (can you say Frank / Todd?). Look at the whole picture...16,000,000,000,000 in debt, a health care system that does not guarantee everyone coverage, violates our Constitutional rights, and for those who do get coverage, a higher premium with less coverage.
Thank you George Bush for creating such a fine mess I think we all should vote for Romney so he can sell all of America off to the Chinese.
Hey TIM thanks for cheering everybody up with the good news. Service jobs for all HURRAY. Now maybe if we're all real lucky we can work till the day we die (Broke and in suffocating Debt) Rather than working two jobs maybe just maybe we can squeeze in a third.
+Thomas Bell, you ignore or simply overlook the simple fact that both parties have been selling our industry overseas for a lot of years. NAFTA and similar bills have taken their toll - and they have been bi-partisan all the way. Government's policies of both parties over the years have made it too attractive and easy for them to move out - so they do.
+Rich Oliver :  $16T in debt, caused (with few exceptions) by Republican policies.  Two wars, Medicare D (unpaid), two huge tax cuts (unpaid, did not deliver promised growth).

"A health care system that does not guarantee everyone coverage":   So, you're arguing for single-payer?  No?  Thirty million more Americans will be able to access health care services, thanks to Obamacare.  

"violates our constitutional rights":  But the Supreme Court ruled... oh, never mind.

"A higher premium with less coverage.":  If anything, it's the increase in coverage that's raising premium rates.

Premiums are probably going up, yes.  But that's because many of the crappiest plans are no longer available, and because insurers are no longer able to deny people based on pre-existing conditions, or cap their lifetime expenditures.  This is bad for you if you're one of the lucky people who never gets an expensive condition, but wait, isn't that the whole point of insurance?

P.S.:  Even if you chop off the first and last years of the Bush presidency (under the ridiculous notion that Bush policies had nothing to do with the financial collapse), his remaining jobs record is simply awful.

Add them back in, and Bush created a whopping 1.1M jobs, despite having the cooperation of Congress for six years.

+Eric Lortie, the biggest problem with our country is that we (as a country) have no clear, unified goal or objective. Our politicians are diametrically opposed to each other, therefore the country is. When one party has "control", they shoot for one goal. When the other is in "control", they shoot for the opposite. As a direct result, they keep us at each others' throats - and feed on it with a frenzy. How can we get anywhere like that? How can any other country trust us when they never know what to expect from us one 4-year period to the next? We need a unified long-term vision. No, it will never happen. The Constitution was supposed to be that vision, but it's seen as a liability (as opposed to a blueprint) by too many people - politicians and The People alike. It will be our downfall. We need to go back to our roots - The Constitution - without the constant bastardization. I'm not convinced it will happen.
I find it interesting that you actually beleive those jobs numbers. Because of course that takes into account the people that have stopped looking, those that are underemployed and the exponential growth of welfare. Keep drinking the koolaid +Tim O'Reilly 
Thank you...I was hoping for a response that would provide details...really. I have paid my own health care for over 35 years, raised a family, and never been unemployed, and none of it from the help of the government. I get up every day and make my own destiny, I don't wait for somebody else. I am glad we have a safety net for those truly in need. I have never defaulted on my mortgage, both of my cars paid for, and changed careers at least five times because I wanted to. Now, about the Constitutionality; I was not referring to the case already settled, I am referring to the part that goes against my religious beliefs. That part has not been decided yet. Anyway, both sides can take blame for a fxxxxx up economy, but if I had to have brain surgery, I would rather have the doctor that graduated top of his class at a top medical school than the guy that got by getting high and barely made the grade but still got the degree, regardless if I liked or disliked either. Bottom line, go vote on Tuesday to what your mind and heart tell you, but don't categorize everyone as good or evil, as it is not personal, it is politics. Have a good evening! final word...make sure to use multiple sources for your data...everyone tries to spin the facts to their on point of view.
So the past four years of news reports coming out are all BS and now that its election time this shows up and we're supposed to believe it?  Wow, you must be insanely idiotic to think we believe this crap.
"$16T in debt, caused (with few exceptions) by Republican policies."
Keep telling yourself that, +Bryce Anderson. This fix was was caused by spending too much money we don't have, plain and simple. It was caused by borrowing too much. Both sides spend way more than they should. Both sides go a$$hole deeper in debt than the administration before them. This one is no different. When you borrow much more than you should, you will go down and lose everything. Give me all the "macroeconomics" mantra you want, but the government is not immune. The same rules apply. 1 + 1 = 2 and 2 - 4 = (-2). That will never change, no matter how many zeroes you put after them.
Rule #1: When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
+Brandon Jamison :  Not sure where you're getting that 280K figure from.  There were exactly seven months during Bush's two terms when he broke 280K jobs created in one month.  Every last one of those months was somewhere in the 2004-2006 range (a.k.a. "The Housing Bubble").

And even if you chop off the first and last years of Bush's time in office, he was only creating 130K jobs a month.  Which was indeed inadequate, especially given that the whole thing was being fueled by an overclocked housing market.

Bush got his tax cuts.  He got his wars.  He got his scaled-back regulations.  According to the Republicans' whole worldview, this should have been a recipe for a roaring economy.  Instead we got rising poverty, sluggish job growth, and a recession so bad it took down most of the world.  Somebody on your side needs to step forward and admit that this trickle-down supply-side stuff (that Romney wants to return us to) does not work.
I trust Romney has tha capacity to make US get back to its track once again and recover.
Patrick Harris demonstrates why this hasn't been more widely publicized. It doesn't matter to those suffering Obama dementia syndrome.
I thought we elected Obama because of the perceived failings of Bush. So now we should re elect him because he is doing as good as Bush? America is improving despite Obamas policies not because of them.
Perfect timing, right before an election. I also have beach from property in Arizona for sale. 
+Edwin Dearborn It's not a sudden change, its the natural result of a steady progression, those numbers could have been predicted months ago because the trend has been evident for anyone who took the ideological blinders off for half a second.
+Bryce Anderson exactly when did the "housing bubble" start? When did the "American Dream" become a slogan of an administration? This idea that banks should make loans to anyone wanting to buy or build a house started under Clinton! It's Bush's fault he continued it and didn't reign it in. When is someone on the Democratic side of the aisle every going to take responsibility for anything?

Nixon resigned because he tried to help cover up and break in on the DNC.

Benghazi , Fast & Furious. When questions are asked about this problems people are seen as a witch hunt. It's sad that congress will not do its job and reign in the power of the executive branch or get off its ass actually do things to stimulate this stalemate we are in. Sad. 
+Tim O'Reilly yes, but a lot of cash went to banks and wall street.  Politicians are never what they seem.
When you factor out the job losses within government, job growth over the four years looks even better.
Obama/Biden, four more years in my book!
Look I dont like either side. 3rd party is must or else theres going to be civil war. Im not saying a liberal candidate would be ideal but I think that at least one will be in between both and no matter what party that was, it would get my vote. Right now Obama is the one leaning closer to the middle even though he spent money like a mad man. There is nothing out of Romney's mouth that I could possibly believe. The man has given Politics a bad/worst name.
Matt L
I for 1 am so sick of election crap I wish they would have it every 20 years
You want jobs?  Putting money in the hands of consumers is the only way to accomplish that.  It will create demand and the capitalist cycle will flourish.  The real question is, where does all the money go if it's not going to consumers?
I get sick of the mudslinging, This one done this, The other one done that, Should be laws against it.SHOW US HOW PASSIONATE YOU ARE, DONATE YOUR "MUDSLINGING" AD MONEY TO SOMETHING YOU SAY CONCERN'S YOU SO MUCH!
Obama came into office at the top of a Bush roller coaster that was losing 800,000 jobs a month. The roller coaster didn't even hit bottom until 2010. In California, where I live we had some places with unemployment approaching the high teens maybe even 20%. Now, almost every area is nearly have or bless than that. We're still above the national average in my area by around 3 percentage points. But we are way better off than the bottom of the George Bush roller coaster and so is the rest of the country.

Obama took an economy in free fall and used as much government resource as he could get to prop it up. In the end, we are better off than Europe. And, when we the people stop watching all the moaning and complaining on Tv and the web and get our collective behinds out to do something in our communities, we will all be better off. I'm tired of all the brain dead couch potatoes letting talking heads fill their heads.

JFK asked us what we could do for our country. Obama said it was going to take at least 3 years for us to see some relief and he was going to need our help to do it. The question is...what have we done to help. As a contractor, I was without one for almost 9 months. Yes, I sought contract and permanent work without success until now. But I used that time to help in my community in as many ways as I could. Even though I wasn't making money, I don't feel like my time was wasted. And I will continue to get out there and help. With elections I feel that people who don't vote don't have a right to complain. Likewise, I feel that people
who don't volunteer to make where they live a better place don't have a right to complain either.

Capitalism is not a panacea. Corporations are not people. Neither of these things was ever created for the benefit of the many. It was a transfer of feudalism to the 19th and 20th century. It doesn't have to be harmful or abusive but in its current most prevalent incarnation, it is rarely about the worker but always about the profit. I am not a socialist but I am passionate about social enterprise.

We have to pick the leader who will not give greatest favor to capitalism and still understands that the entrepreneurial spirit of our country must be nourished. He must understand that without health, nothing else is important and we can't be productive. He needs to help business see that without the burden of healthcare on them, they can free up both financial and knowledge capital to expand and innovate. He must believe that people come first, that women don't need their husbands to get to heaven, and that quality of work to provide a living wage is far more important than all the burgers at a fast food giant. I only see one candidate that can take that perspective and more. So I'm voting for Obama AGAIN and I hope you do too!
Mit forgot to hire Joe the Plumer, ho he is working doing what he does best pluming work. 
+james line Revenue to President Obama? #WTF  I do believe you are confusing that aspect with the sociopath Mitt Romney. Romney thinks revenue with every brain synapse and with every breath he takes. He has been fucking over people since he was a young man, using other people's money to rip off companies, even using tax payer funded loans and grants to build up the value of a company, take out his fees, and walk away. It would be a daunting task for somebody to figure out just how much tax payer dollars he has lost for us as many of those companies faced bankruptcy or simply had to close their doors.

Tell us all when and how President Obama has ever taken any tax dollars and put them into his personal revenue portfolio, or stashed hundreds of millions in the Cayman Islands or in Swiss bank accounts to avoid paying U.S. taxes? You need to stop watching Fox news dude. Fox news breeds stupidity.
None of these data points mention the fact that the number of jobs increased isn't even enough to keep even with the number of new workers available due to growth of the workforce. And, it doesn't account for unemployed who have stopped looking or dropped off the unemployment rolls. It's still a losing proposition. Gotta do MUCH better than this! Also, more govt workers means less productivity to the economy. They produce nothing, only cost taxpayers. 
If someone produced a chart showing Bush speak a sentence coherently or Romney spoke two words without lying on one of the words, I would also deny the reality of the charts. So I understand where the right wingers are coming from. So right wingers!!!! , I GET you. We have common ground. Finally .
those jobs only cost 800 billion dollars of borrowed stimilus money, impressive. i am not fan of either side, and I do like to see all of the facts considered vs the old 'us against them' attitude that is destroying this country.
Look racists do not care about facts and they do not want to hear them. That's why they love Romney, Ryan and the GOP so much. They already said they care nothing for the facts.
There are racists who will vote against Obama and there are racists who will vote for him. And I agree with you, they could not care less about the facts.
"Facts? Wee don' need no stinkin' facts!"--most of the GOP.
+Gord Birch

I'm not arguing that you couldn't do that - but how can you count jobs and have that be a misleading figure? When isn't more jobs = more jobs?
Slanted, very slanted. The bias is too obvious!
+vincent balagot Wall Street Journal is a right-wing publication, so "slanted, very slanted...and...the bias is too obvious!" is ridiculous. Facts are facts; get over it.
please don't confuse the issue with facts
+Kevin Penrose correction gas prices had already doubled under president Bush. Remember summer 2008 gas had averaged at more than $4 a gallon.

Gas prices after the financial crisis had collapse because the economy was contracting, and demand for oil had drastically dropped. Fall '08

Also presidents don't control the price of gas, the markets do. Gas leases on federal land are down because the.administration have to rescind leases that were not being used by oil corporations.

Reagonics financed job growth in America on debt. Slashed taxes, and enlarged the role of.government through defense and domestic spending, I.e the war on drugs. 
+Kevin Penrose correction gas prices had already doubled under president Bush. Remember summer 2008 gas had averaged at more than $4 a gallon.

Gas prices after the financial crisis had collapse because the economy was contracting, and demand for oil had drastically dropped. Fall '08

Also presidents don't control the price of gas, the markets do. Gas leases on federal land are down because the.administration have to rescind leases that were not being used by oil corporations.

Reagonics financed job growth in America on debt. Slashed taxes, and enlarged the role of.government through defense and domestic spending, I.e the war on drugs. 
From 2008 to 2010 we had a Democratic Controlled House and Senate.

2010+ Republican controlled.

What did Obama spend his first two years with a Democratic Congress? Pass Obamacare. Things look like they are slowly recovering with Republicans in charge.

The Obama vs Bush segment in a article is a single paragraph plus 1 sentence comparing first year and overall jobs numbers without accounting for which industries those losses occurred.
Not talked about because it is confusing. Election campaigns are not for education. It's all emotion and atmospherics. 
+Michael J Pierce So tell us exactly what job growth bills that Republican house passed from 2010 till present, when did they take effect and how many jobs are attributed to each? Or are you just attributing the job growth in the last two years to the magical presence of a republican majority in the house of representatives? 

I'm betting on option #2, conservative magical thinking entirely devoid of facts. 
+John Poteet In the world of business you don't rely on government to pass a "jobs bill" you wait for market conditions.

When republicans are in charge there seems to be a tendency towards favorable market conditions.

How about we try and address the issue. Or you could just continue to be a smart ass on the internet.
Working for the man is relatively new trend. Mass employment began as slavery and serfdom, I would guess.

Reporting to a workstation sounds kind of grim, when you think about it. Prisoners in outer-space-ish.

Jobs are a red herring.

That people want jobs rather than to run small businesses is a problem. Not their fault: they can't compete without access to the economies of scale that let bigger players stay in the game. No one's fault. Just capitalism succeeding.
So during Obama he spent nearly $20 trillion (four years of federal spending) to have a slight gain of 200k more workers?  And people think this is good news?
+Janice Rooths, "Obama came into office at the top of a Bush roller coaster"
Yes, and it was all downhill from there - just like the dividends on my personal IRA.
Someone's managed to get us $16 trillion in debt so far - without even passing a budget. Now, that's scary!
Presidents have about as much to do with economic statistics during their terms in office as what I will have for breakfast on Wednesday!
If you really have a problem with the National Debt you should be looking at the voting records of your Senators, Congressman & State representatives. They have lead us to this point by NOT attending to the People's business. We got were we are through inaction, deferred decisions, refusal to deal with difficult issues & an over-riding concern for their political careers.
+Scott Spencer +Mike Mentges You too are imbecile's. I hope you are later smart enough to figure out that Obama is the main function of America. Mitt is a lazy little fool. All he's doing is attacking Obama. Obama is more mature to not say anything rude!
+Amonte Middleton I not hating, I see through clear lies and agenda that Hussein Obama is up to. He wants people to stay on welfare forever instead of enabling them to their feet and personal prosperity.
Obama's main function is to break America, and have us pledging allegiance to China. We can't keep borrowing from them, we owe them 16 trillion dollars. His much have we paid back? Zilch. We keep raising the debt ceiling without a budget. That completely freaks me out. He needs to go.
Here are some of the jobs he's created:
This is from a trusted friend - Greg Hillen in Colorado, reposted to "Public" with his permission. It is concerning an incident that happened yesterday - just three days before election day.

"Ok, what the hell is going on? Our daughter told us that an Obama (self identified as such) campaign worker came to her door, asked if she had voted, and said f she was doing it by mail, he could take it and deliver it for her. When she told him she had voted in person he asked her to sign a card saying she had voted for Obama. She refused. When our son in law came home a few minutes later and she told him about it, he said there was a group of about 5 people at the end of the street with clip boards appearing to be waiting for something or someone. Don't let anyone handle your ballot, whichever side you are on. She will be talking to the election board Monday. This isn't urban legend. It happened a few hours ago to a member of my family."
(This is posted in its entirety, cut-n-pasted without edits or alterations.)
+Dale Stanton That has been happening across the country for Romney supporters as well, it is a sham by both sides, and people should be ashamed of it.
+Sean McCollum Do you even know how much debt is owned by China percentage wise or in comparison to other countries?
Obama is mentioned 8 times:
2 times it's President Obama
6 times it's Mr. Obama 
Bush is mentioned 2 times:
2 times it's President Bush
What is the grammatical rule for referring to a president?
Add a comment...