- This topic has 1 reply, 4 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
It is a terrible position for a challenger to be in.
Rasmussen shows Bush with a 48-47 lead and a 52% approval rating.
Bush is also on the brink of taking leads in 3 of the 4 biggest battleground states.Considering that Kerry’s convention ended just about 2 weeks ago, this is a position that is very bad for a challenger. In fact, no challenger has ever won from this position in August.
We can only hope.
The recent jobs report was a real jolt to the Bush campaign…
a real momentum killer.
sad, because there is good reason to believe it is not accurate
Second….the monthly report on employnment.
the report said only 32,000 non farm payroll jobs were created in July.The media immediatly seized on it and began screeching “only 32,000 jobs created!”.
The problem is the very same report showed that 629,000 people found work in July…and the unemploynent rate dropped to 5.5%.
[url:2ndcxfhx]http://bls.gov/cps[/url:2ndcxfhx]The fact is that the payroll survey is no longer an accurate guage of our economy. Doesnt matter, they will only report what they want to report.
If the job situation is so horrible, why does Bush have the identical unemployment rate Clinton had at the same point in his presidency (june 1996)?
[url:2rap4w27]http://data.bls.gov/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=LNS14000000[/url:2rap4w27]
[quote:1fzkw8at]It is a terrible position for a challenger to be in.
Rasmussen shows Bush with a 48-47 lead and a 52% approval rating.[/quote:1fzkw8at]The Rasmussen poll is a month long poll, so most of it was done before the convention. In addition, a 48-47 rating is well within the margin of error, telling us that this is still a statistical tie.
As far as job creation goes: Despite the administration’s attempt to spin the numbers as favorable, any self-respecting economist will say that this is bad. There are two surveys used to indicate job growth and employment. One is the household survey, and is the one showing that unemployment went down by .1%. However, it is not considered as reliable as the payroll data, which has a much larger sample size and shows that job creation fell well short of expectations. The 32,000 jobs are just fifteen percent of the average numbers generated during Bill Clinton’s presidency. Far from turning the corner, we seem to be running against a wall.
First…there are 6 (six) National polls (Rasmussen being only 1 of them) that show this race even (1) or with Bush in the lead(5).
Among these is Gallup-the most respected of all- which shows Bush with a 3 point lead. No Challenger has ever won without a substantial lead on the eve of the Incumbent’s convention (nevermind one who is [b:2gm9xj3c]losing[/b:2gm9xj3c]).On your second point, there is scores of evidence that show that the corporate payroll survey does not accurately reflect our current economy.
The July numbers only serve to illustrate this.
The size of the sample merely decreases the Margin of Error but does not dismiss the clear and incontrovertable fact that somewhere in the neighborhood (+/- the MOE) of 629,000 people were working on August 1st who were not working on July 1st. Those people got work somewhere!!!If you accept the fact that only 32,000 jobs were added by corporations, I’d appreciate it if you are at least intellectualy honest enough to offer an explanation as to how you can dismiss, out of hand, another survey- produced by the very same Government Bureau- that suggests [b:2gm9xj3c]almost 20 times[/b:2gm9xj3c] as many new jobs as you imply. .
Mine?
People are changing the way they work and do buisness. Partnerships, small buisnesses and contractor jobs are on a step rise.The economy, despite the oil pressures, is still performing quite well- as Friday’s 2.8% GDP number demonstrates.
Consumer and investor confidence are rebounding and the market is again heading upward.Far from [i:2gm9xj3c]hitting a wall[/i:2gm9xj3c] , as you suggest, this economy appears to be crashing through barriers relentlessly.
If Bush has a good convention, he is virtualy a lock for reelection.
Thank you for your response, my friend.[/i]
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.