Or, you're willfully ignoring the evidence.
The simplified version of the very complex facts is: If Bush 43, Paulson, Bernanke, Obama and others had done nothing, there is little doubt we'd be in far worse shape today. The economy as a whole and unemployment would've hit a deeper trough, and specifically the auto industry would be decimated. Lots of people from a variety of political persuasions get partial credit both for causing the crisis, and helping the recovery. That includes Obama, who in particular was instrumental in helping the auto industry.
You should also keep in mind that we are in a consumer economy. The more people unemployed, and for longer time, has longer-term effects. Companies pull back on manufacturing and inventories, because people are buying less; this in turn causes them to reduce staff. More staff reductions mean yet more reductions in manufacturing, inventory, and thus staff; it's a vicious cycle. A stimulus can help blunt the worst effects of a recession. This, in turn, helps explain some of what we see in employment figures.
lol... Yes, Bush 43 gave them a $13bn loan from TARP, he gets some credit. The total loan amount was around $80bn; the restructuring also obviously took place during, and was largely designed by, the Obama administration.
Saving auto industry jobs is definitely saving private sector jobs; getting people back to work faster helped the economy recover faster. Expand your horizons.
Sorry, but that's a bit absurd. An economy with strong fundamentals can still be crippled by a financial crisis; if the damage hadn't been stopped, at a
minimum unemployment would be much worse.
It was -- in part. His policies were one of many factors that allowed the bubble to get so big. Part and parcel of that is that the bubble drove down unemployment for a few years. It's not a good way to lower unemployment rates, and he definitely wasn't solely responsible, but yes his policies had an effect on employment rates.