HEY HEY! MITT ROMNEY WON THE WEEK!
IT’S TRUE. Says so RIGHT HERE on the Daily Beast! Mark McKinnon said so! And you know that someone who served as principal media adviser for hundreds of campaigns for candidates, companies, and causes, including , John McCain, , Charlie Wilson, , and Bono (Sonny or Cher?) would NEVER lie about something so important.
Why did he win?
CUZ HE TOLD LIES PURTIER AND SLICKER THAN NOBODY NEVER DID BEFORE!
HOORAY FOR MITT! HOORAY FOR PREZNIT ROMNEY!
Whatever the actual impact is on the race, the psychological impact cannot be understated. From data we have already, we know that President George W. Bush, got in his first debate as incumbent president in 2004, when he was manhandled by John Kerry. And I can still feel the bruises from that one.won the debate by a greater margin than any ever recorded since the first debate polling by Gallup in 1984. That includes the shellacking my old boss,
Uh huh. Which data? Please cite the data that shows that Mitt from Kolob won the debate “by a greater margin than any ever recorded” since Ugg debated Torg in a prehistoric French cave over who should be the Top Neanderthal? (Info Byte: That election was won by “Joe Rockhead” who went on to form the Loyal Order of Water Buffaloes.)
Yabba Dabba BULLSHIT!
One of my Democratic counterparts,, smartly summarized Obama’s debacle. He said the president treated the debate like a press conference. Like he was just there to answer questions.
Sorry. That was the top of my head coming off. Hang on a sec.
There. Got it back on.
THAT’S WHAT THESE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES ARE, MARK! MODERATORS ASK QUESTIONS! CANDIDATES ANSWER THEM!
There is still no doubt that the president sits in a commanding position when you look at the electoral map. And while I would argue the jobs report is a mixed bag, there’s also no doubt that the unemployment number dropping below 8 percent is good for the president and his campaign. (I do remember, however, when adding twice that number of new jobs at an unemployment rate of 5.2 percent under a different president was thought pitiful.)
Nice thing about “straw men,” Mark. You can hack them to pieces and nobody gets hurt. Did that “different president” inherit a country where the Dow Jones closed at 7,949.09 on the day he was sworn in and closed yesterday (Oct. 5, 2012) at 13,610.15. Do you have a calculator, Mark? We do. JEEPERS! That’s an increase of 5,661.06 points since the day Obama took office. That means the DJIA has improved by 71.2% since Obama took the oath.
Add to that 31 straight months of job growth after 23 straight months of job LOSSES that began in February ’08 (that was under a “different president” TOO, Mark!).
And Obama IS back to where he started with the unemployment rate. It’s back to 7.8 percent, where it was when he was sworn in. This is after reaching a peak of 10 percent in October 2009.
Bush took office in January 2001 with 136 million jobs. The January 2009 jobs report showed 134.5 million jobs… a loss of 1.5 million jobs. And we were just getting warmed up.
President Bush had the good luck of his term ending in January 2009 before the full pain of his economic policies was felt. We lost 775,000 jobs in the first half of 2008 (That was under a different president, TOO, Mark!). Between June 2008 and December of 2008, we lost another 2,869,000 jobs. That’s a total of 3,644,000 jobs lost in all of 2008. In January 2009, between December 12, 2008, and January 12, 2009, just a week before Obama took the oath of office, we lost another 818,000 jobs. Therefore, a grand total of 4,462,000 jobs lost before Obama took one step into the Oval Office. Starting over 4.4 million jobs in the hole, the GOP seemed to want Obama to have everything fixed by February 1, 2009. But problems that took 8 years to create would take more than 10 days to fix. In fact, another 2,215,000 jobs were lost in Obama’s first three months in office. We lost another 4,317,000 jobs before we hit bottom in February 2010. Since then, month by month, bit by bit, job growth. Feel free to check these numbers yourself at http://bls.gov.
In the Marianas Trench of the Recession — the Feb. 2010 jobs report — we had lost 8.4 million jobs since Dec. 2007, according to the BLS. With this month’s job report, President Obama has completely dug the nation out of that 4.4 million jobs hole. As of Sept. 27, 2012, using the new data provided by the BLS we saw the net payroll growth rose from a previous net negative of -261,000 to a net positive of 125,000. President Obama’s net private sector job creation total is currently at 868,000. Add the 114,000 new jobs reported from September.
But Mark McKinnon is wearing a drool bib with a picture of Romney on it! Oh, sure, Obama is a net job creator now. How did he put it?
But is a decline to 7.8 percent unemployment enough? No matter how the media may hype the number, folks tend to believe what they see around them with their own eyes. And families are worried.
They are? Which families? This might have been a good place for a journalist to place — oh, I don’t know — A STATISTIC? WHAT families are worried? Has he TALKED to a lot of families? Where is his data? What “families” is he talking about?
I only really know one family. My own. So hold on, let me check.
“HEY, GAIL! ARE WE WORRIED?”
“Didn’t they just release new numbers that show things are better now?”
“YEAH, BUT THIS McKINNON GUY ON THE DAILY BEAST SAYS FAMILIES ARE WORRIED.”
“HE DOESN’T REALLY SAY.”
“I DON’T KNOW. MAYBE HE’S PULLING THAT OUT OF HIS ASS?”
“Sounds like it.”
“SO, WE’RE NOT WORRIED?”
“No. Except, maybe for Romney tying Big Bird to the top of his car and driving around with him up there.”
So, the official analysis… we got 99 things to worry about and right now, the recovery ain’t one of them.
But back to slobbery McKinnon.
But I think a lot of people actually saw Mitt Romney for the first time at the debate. He didn’t look like the caricature that had been painted of him. And I think a lot of people liked what they saw, because they saw someone who looked like he’d prepared for a job he really wanted.
That might be true. And if they haven’t already made up their minds, they might give him a closer look. And they’ll see that most of the crap that spewed out of his pretty little mouth was untrue.
How much will they like him, those that didn’t know him, when they realize he had a number of different stances on the “47% of us who will vote for this president regardless.” You know. The 47% that he’ll never convince to take responsibility for their own lives.
First, he said he stated it awkwardly.
Then, he said he was just talking off the cuff.
Then he said he could have stated the point more effectively, but he stood by it.
Then he said it was wrong and he doesn’t believe that.
How odd, coming from a candidate who does not believe in evolution.