• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama announces his Candidacy for 2012.

Here we go again, keep ignoring that the number of people dropping out of the labor market are no longer counted and thus the reason for the drop in unemployment. That number is still close to a million which reduces the unemployment number thus the rate. That is why unemployment rate means nothing, it is the unemployment number that matters. Are discouraged workers unemployed?

the fact is, we have been adding jobs for 6 months. so yes, the unemployment rate DOES mean something, relatively. if we had 3% unemployment you would still find a reason to dismiss it. fact is, fact don't seem to matter much to you.
 
They obviously mean little to you. Aren't you one of the few that actually admits to voting twice for GWB? LOL.....

Actually I voted for Bush for governor twice and then for President twice. I voted wisely and stand by my vote. The results always trump liberal rhetoric but results don't matter to the Obama cult.
 
Romney or some other more pragmatic conservative may win my vote away from Obama, but none of the crazies (such as Palin, Gingrich, Paul) would.

If Romney wins the primary, I say he can beat Obama. Romney comes from a liberal state in Mass. Independents and some dems would vote for him.
 
the fact is, we have been adding jobs for 6 months. so yes, the unemployment rate DOES mean something, relatively. if we had 3% unemployment you would still find a reason to dismiss it. fact is, fact don't seem to matter much to you.

We have been adding jobs, not enough to offset those dropping out of the market place or those retiring. Do you think discouraged workers are unemployed? Why aren't they counted? Has any other President in history had this number of discouraged workers dropping out of the labor force?
 




You gotta love politifact.... "in the works"..... :lol:


for example


"No. 896: Walk with picketers when collective bargaining rights are threatened

The Promise:


“If American workers are being denied their right to organize when I'm in the White House, I will put on a comfortable pair of shoes and I will walk on that picket line with you as president of the United States."

Update March 3rd, 2011:

President hasn't walked with Wisconsin protesters yet"



There's hope politileftistfact.... :lamo
 
Actually I voted for Bush for governor twice and then for President twice. I voted wisely and stand by my vote. The results always trump liberal rhetoric but results don't matter to the Obama cult.

LOL....just shed more light on the previous statement of yours.
 
You gotta love politifact.... "in the works"..... :lol:


for example


"No. 896: Walk with picketers when collective bargaining rights are threatened

The Promise:


“If American workers are being denied their right to organize when I'm in the White House, I will put on a comfortable pair of shoes and I will walk on that picket line with you as president of the United States."

Update March 3rd, 2011:

President hasn't walked with Wisconsin protesters yet"



There's hope politileftistfact.... :lamo

Exactly, then there are the promises "in the works." Anyone believe these are going to happen? What a joke these people are

In Works

No. 165: Train and equip the Afghan army
"Barack Obama will strengthen the training and equipping of the Afghan army and police and increase Afghan participation in U.S. and NATO missions, so that there is more of an Afghan face on security." In works

No. 175: End the use of torture
"From both a moral standpoint and a practical standpoint, torture is wrong. Barack Obama will end the use torture without exception. He also will eliminate the practice of extreme rendition, where we outsource our torture to other countries." In works

No. 286: Secure the borders
Will support "additional personnel, infrastructure and technology on the border and at our ports of entry".

No. 288: Provide a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants
Will support "a system that allows undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens." Stalled

No. 382: Secure nuclear weapons materials in four years
"Will lead a global effort to secure all nuclear weapons materials at vulnerable sites within four years - the most effective way to prevent terrorists from acquiring a nuclear bomb. Barack Obama will fully implement the Lugar-Obama legislation to help our allies detect and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction."

No. 395: Strengthen antitrust enforcement
"Will reinvigorate antitrust enforcement, which is how we ensure that capitalism works for consumers."

No. 439: Create 5 million "green" jobs
Will "create 5 million 'green' jobs; will invest $150 billion over ten years to deploy clean technologies, protect our existing manufacturing base and create millions of new jobs."

No. 441: Reduce oil consumption by 35 percent by 2030
Will "reduce oil consumption overall by at least 35 percent, or 10 million barrels of oil, by 2030."

No. 520: If you don't have insurance, or don't like the insurance you have, you'll be able to choose a new plan on a health insurance exchange
"If you don't have insurance, or don't like your insurance, you'll be able to choose from the same type of quality private plans as every federal employee - from a postal worker here in Colorado to a congressman in Washington. All of these plans will cover essential medical services including prevention, maternity, disease management and mental health care. No one will be turned away because of a pre-existing condition or illness."

No. 522: Bring Democrats and Republicans together to pass an agenda
Obama and Joe Biden will "turn the page on the ugly partisanship in Washington, so we can bring Democrats and Republicans together to pass an agenda that works for the American people
 
Actually I voted for Bush for governor twice and then for President twice. I voted wisely and stand by my vote. The results always trump liberal rhetoric but results don't matter to the Obama cult.
So far President Obama hasn't started a war in a country that wasn't a threat where thousands of our service people were killed or maimed for life.
 
LOL....just shed more light on the previous statement of yours.

You really have a bad case of BDS and need to seek help. Bush isn't in office and the unemployment and debt are worse today than when Obama took office yet results don't matter to the Obama cult followers.
 
So far President Obama hasn't started a war in a country that wasn't a threat where thousands of our service people were killed or maimed for life.

I had three family members there, did you serve? What threat is Libya?
 
Why? What has he done that deserves a second term? Do results matter in your world or simply rhetoric?
Now that's pretty funny coming from you, someone results didn't matter to in 2004.

When you voted to reelect Bush in 2004, the Twin Towers were gone, over 2 million more people were unemployed from when Bush started in 2001, and Bush had invaded Iraq over WMD that weren't there.

Those were the results you voted for.
 
Now that's pretty funny coming from you, someone results didn't matter to in 2004.

When you voted to reelect Bush in 2004, the Twin Towers were gone, over 2 million more people were unemployed from when Bush started in 2001, and Bush had invaded Iraq over WMD that weren't there.

Those were the results you voted for.

Did you ever find out the economic policy that Bush implemented on January 22 that put us in recession on March 1?

When I voted for Bush those weren't the numbers and when I voted for re-elect him there was significant employment and economic growth

Your comments are again typical of a liberal, distorted and wrong

Employment numbers

2001 137778
2002 135701
2003 137417
2004 138472
 
Here we go again, keep ignoring that the number of people dropping out of the labor market are no longer counted and thus the reason for the drop in unemployment.
Umm, no, the number of those not in the labor force dropped by 11,000 last month.

Not in Labor Force

Had you read the article I posted, you would have seen the reason the unemployment rate dropped...

The economy added 216,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department said Friday. Factories, retailers, the education and health care sectors, and professional and financial services all expanded payrolls. Those job gains offset layoffs by local governments.

But g'head, keep hoping and praying for the economy to collapse again, just so you can see a Republican in the White House. What a patriot you are. :roll:
 
They obviously mean little to you. Aren't you one of the few that actually admits to voting twice for GWB? LOL.....
More than twice, he also voted for Bush for governor at least once, maybe twice. Double that for voting for Bush in the primaries too and Conservative may have given Bush as many as 8 votes!

I've asked him how many times he's voted for bush (including primaries) but he's too embarrassed to answer.
 
More than twice, he also voted for Bush for governor at least once, maybe twice. Double that for voting for Bush in the primaries too and Conservative may have given Bush as many as 8 votes!

I've asked him how many times he's voted for bush (including primaries) but he's too embarrassed to answer.

Not embarrassed at all but irrelevant. Told you how many times I voted for Bush for Governor and President. How does that affect the Obama results? Seems to me that rhetoric trumps reality in your world and always will. I can see why you need that massive liberal Central govt and nanny state promoted by Obama. You would never survive here in TX.
 
Did you ever find out the economic policy that Bush implemented on January 22 that put us in recession on March 1?
Asked and answered.

When you voted to reelect Bush in 2004, the Twin Towers were gone, over 2 million more people were unemployed from when Bush started in 2001, and Bush had invaded Iraq over WMD that weren't there.

Those were the results you voted for.


When I voted for Bush those weren't the numbers and when I voted for re-elect him there was significant employment and economic growth

Your comments are again typical of a liberal, distorted and wrong

Employment numbers

2001 137778
2002 135701
2003 137417
2004 138472
Now this is too funny. You accuse me of distorting and being wrong, however, I [accurately] claimed that unemployment increased by more than 2 million during Bush's first 45 months and you try [and fail] to show I'm wrong and distorted the numbers by posted employment numbers!


That's not what I said con, I said, "over 2 million more people were unemployed from when Bush started in 2001."

Unemployed:

Jan 2001: 6,023,000
Oct 2004: 8,061,000

BLS.gov: Unemployment Level

Those were the results you voted for.
 
Umm, no, the number of those not in the labor force dropped by 11,000 last month.

Not in Labor Force

Had you read the article I posted, you would have seen the reason the unemployment rate dropped...


The economy added 216,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department said Friday. Factories, retailers, the education and health care sectors, and professional and financial services all expanded payrolls. Those job gains offset layoffs by local governments.

But g'head, keep hoping and praying for the economy to collapse again, just so you can see a Republican in the White House. What a patriot you are. :roll:

By the way not in the labor force is different than discouraged workers or people who have dropped out of the labor force. You really are desparate to distort this President's results. 921,000 people are removed from the unemployment count in March. What affect does that have on the unemployment rate? Obama supporters are just too easy.
 
Asked and answered.


Now this is too funny. You accuse me of distorting and being wrong, however, I [accurately] claimed that unemployment increased by more than 2 million during Bush's first 45 months and you try [and fail] to show I'm wrong and distorted the numbers by posted employment numbers!


That's not what I said con, I said, "over 2 million more people were unemployed from when Bush started in 2001."

Unemployed:

Jan 2001: 6,023,000
Oct 2004: 8,061,000

BLS.gov: Unemployment Level

Those were the results you voted for.

It is all about jobs and jobs gained as jobs can be counted but regarding unemployment, here are the results. 670K fewer unemployed in October 2004 vs 2003 and the economy improving dramatically. still want to divert to Bush, wonder why? "Your" guy is in the office now and the results are worse today than when Bush left office and that is after added 4 trillion to the debt. That to a liberal is a success.

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2000 5708 5858 5733 5481 5758 5651 5747 5853 5625 5534 5639 5634
2001 6023 6089 6141 6271 6226 6484 6583 7042 7142 7694 8003 8258
2002 8182 8215 8304 8599 8399 8393 8390 8304 8251 8307 8520 8640
2003 8520 8618 8588 8842 8957 9266 9011 8896 8921 8732 8576 8317
2004 8370 8167 8491 8170 8212 8286 8136 7990 7927 8061 7932 7934
 
Really? Wonder why BLS shows the following? Looks like 921k to me, not 11,000. Obviously you don't know what you are talking about.
No, you don't know what I'm talking about. First of all, I was talking about those no longer in the labor force, secondly, 921K is the total amount, not the monthly change. And it's the monthly change which affects the rate. Thirdly, I posted a link to the BLS.gov website to confirm the number I posted.

By the way, even the numbers you show of discouraged workers indicates there were almost 100,000 fewer in March than there were in February.
 
Asked and answered.


Now this is too funny. You accuse me of distorting and being wrong, however, I [accurately] claimed that unemployment increased by more than 2 million during Bush's first 45 months and you try [and fail] to show I'm wrong and distorted the numbers by posted employment numbers!


That's not what I said con, I said, "over 2 million more people were unemployed from when Bush started in 2001."

Unemployed:

Jan 2001: 6,023,000
Oct 2004: 8,061,000

BLS.gov: Unemployment Level

Those were the results you voted for.


And in Bush's first 45 months, were there any incidents that may have caused a recession?

j-mac
 
Back
Top Bottom