• 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!

Republicans block Obama jobs bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
Conservative said:
Yes, you were wrong, now prove that the numbers I posted aren't at the sites I gave you. Let me help you here are the GDP numbers posted at bea.gov

Table 1.1.1. Percent Change From Preceding Period in Real Gross Domestic Product


[Percent] Seasonally adjusted at annual rates
Bureau of Economic Analysis
Last Revised on: July 29, 2011 - Next Release Date August 26, 2011

First qtr 2011 .4%
2nd Qtr 2011 1.3%
Click to expand...

Ya know the more you post these selective facts and the more I looked into it. The more I think the recovery from where the current administration started is actually pretty impressive esp. considering the political climate. And I also think we need to reverse the 678 billion dollar unfunded Bush jobs plan from 2003.
 
whysoserious said:
What? No, I posted historical context to your numbers. You do realize that you took each category of data, picked one nice round number that you liked, and posted it up. So yeah, you have 6 real statistics there, but you don't realize that they are meaningless until you attach meaning to them. You have no context. Ok, 25 million are unemployed, how many were unemployed when he took office? Which way was employment trending when he took office? GDP, what was it when he took office and which way was it trending when he took office? What is the average GDP growth in normal eras and eras of recession?

That's using data. You aren't using data, you cherry picked 5-6 statistics and posted them up with a smug look on your face.
Click to expand...

You can look at the site and get those numbers, but just to help you out

Total U-6-14.1% X 154 million vs 16.5% today X 154 million

2009 14.1 15.0 15.6 15.8 16.4 16.6 16.5 16.8 17.0 17.4 17.1 17.2
2010 16.5 16.8 16.8 17.0 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.7 17.1 17.0 17.0 16.7
2011 16.1 15.9 15.7 15.9 15.8 16.2 16.1 16.2 16.5
 
winston53660 said:
Ya know the more you post these selective facts and the more I looked into it. The more I think the recovery from where the current administration started is actually pretty impressive esp. considering the political climate. And I also think we need to reverse the 678 billion dollar unfunded Bush jobs plan from 2003.
Click to expand...

Of course you do, wonder why the voters don't with a JAR of 39%. Probably has something to do with the 25 million unemployed/under employed as well as very poor GDP after spending trillions. Then again I have seen no evidence that you have any common sense at all
 
winston53660 said:
Ya know the more you post these selective facts and the more I looked into it. The more I think the recovery from where the current administration started is actually pretty impressive esp. considering the political climate. And I also think we need to reverse the 678 billion dollar unfunded Bush jobs plan from 2003.
Click to expand...

Me too man. Just for ****s, I just took the mean of GDP growth during the Bush era and Obama era, and I couldn't believe that Obama actually has grown GDP more effectively than Bush during one of our worst economic periods. That's really impressive.
 
whysoserious said:
But those are wayyyy up from the previous years. You conveniently leave that out. Again, even during one of the worst recessions since the Great Depression, Obama has had better a better mean GDP growth per year than Bush did over his entire 8 year tenure. I showed you those numbers a few pages back.
Click to expand...

Doubt many people will be voting for Bush in Nov. 2012 and it really is amazing that you have such disdain for Bush and believe he was lousy that you would compare Obama to Bush yet ignore that Obama has higher unemployment, fewer employed, a higher misery index, higher debt than Bush ever had.
 
whysoserious said:
What? No, I posted historical context to your numbers. You do realize that you took each category of data, picked one nice round number that you liked, and posted it up. So yeah, you have 6 real statistics there, but you don't realize that they are meaningless until you attach meaning to them. You have no context. Ok, 25 million are unemployed, how many were unemployed when he took office? Which way was employment trending when he took office? GDP, what was it when he took office and which way was it trending when he took office? What is the average GDP growth in normal eras and eras of recession?

That's using data. You aren't using data, you cherry picked 5-6 statistics and posted them up with a smug look on your face.
Click to expand...

I can see 25 million unemployed and under employed Americans standing up and cheering your historical data. I can see the taxpayers standing up and cheering as well the debt service and I can see all Americans standing up and cheering the rising misery index. Oh, wait, that would be the 39% of the people that approve of the job he has done which probably includes you.
 
Conservative said:
Doubt many people will be voting for Bush in Nov. 2012 and it really is amazing that you have such disdain for Bush and believe he was lousy that you would compare Obama to Bush yet ignore that Obama has higher unemployment, fewer employed, a higher misery index, higher debt than Bush ever had.
Click to expand...

No, but be honest, if it was Bush vs Obama, you'd still vote Bush because you are a hack. And of course unemployment is higher during Obama's term, we're in a god damn recession! A deep recession at that. Bush had 7 years of a fairly decent economy, and it all went to hell in his last year. To be honest, I don't even blame him for it, because I am not a hack and I know there was little he could do about it. But this nonsense where you just post up random numbers is pathetic. It's embarrassing for you, I hate to say. Notice not one other conservative member is even touching this with a ten foot pole. You've killed the argument by making it so outrageous and factually wrong that no one else wants a part of it.

Instead, this thread has boiled down to about five people teaching you how to read and understand statistics, but to no avail.

Conservative said:
I can see 25 million unemployed and under employed Americans standing up and cheering your historical data. I can see the taxpayers standing up and cheering as well the debt service and I can see all Americans standing up and cheering the rising misery index. Oh, wait, that would be the 39% of the people that approve of the job he has done which probably includes you.
Click to expand...

Did I ever say the economy was good? They have nothing to cheer for in my data. In fact, the data I posted showed a horrible economic failure for the late part of 2008 and almost all of 2009, and a gentle recovery has begun ever since. The only thing to cheer is that it does look like the bottom was hit in 2009, but we still have a long, arduous road ahead of us.
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
Of course you do, wonder why the voters don't with a JAR of 39%.
Click to expand...

YAY an appeal to popularity. Using your method here Lady Gaga, Brittany Spears, The Macarana and even the Archies are great because all at one time enjoyed immense popularity!

Probably has something to do with the 25 million unemployed/under employed as well as very poor GDP after spending trillions. Then again I have seen no evidence that you have any common sense at all
Click to expand...

Bad Obama for getting the economy to the + side of GDP and stemming the flow of job losses that at one time were 750k per mnth, bad Obama!
 
whysoserious said:
No, but be honest, if it was Bush vs Obama, you'd still vote Bush because you are a hack. And of course unemployment is higher during Obama's term, we're in a god damn recession! A deep recession at that. Bush had 7 years of a fairly decent economy, and it all went to hell in his last year. To be honest, I don't even blame him for it, because I am not a hack and I know there was little he could do about it. But this nonsense where you just post up random numbers is pathetic. It's embarrassing for you, I hate to say. Notice not one other conservative member is even touching this with a ten foot pole. You've killed the argument by making it so outrageous and factually wrong that no one else wants a part of it.

Instead, this thread has boiled down to about five people teaching you how to read and understand statistics, but to no avail.
Click to expand...

Of course I would because Obama is a leftwing ideologue who doesn't have a clue how to manage a private sector economy. Doesn't matter because that isn't going to happen. I am definitely a hack that believes in capitalism and individual wealth creation. I believe in a limited role of the Federal Govt and the fact that you refuse to accept the data posted claiming it is random shows how little you really know about how the electorate votes and thinks. You haven't proven that my numbers are random, that anything I have posted is outrageous and factually wrong but you have proven that liberals don't want any part of actual data and facts.
 
You know what is ironic here is that he keeps posting statistics in his threads. If he had taken a statistics class then he would know that he is wrong... Oh the irony...
 
Jryan said:
You know what is ironic here is that he keeps posting statistics in his threads. If he had taken a statistics class then he would know that he is wrong... Oh the irony...
Click to expand...

The statistics I posted came from the sites listed, sites that I got a like from you on. If you have a problem with those sites and believe they are statistically wrong, then take it up with bea.gov, bls.gov, and the U.S. Treasury. Cannot help it that the data posted is right from those sites and is in context that matters to the electorate, unemployment, employment,misery index, and debt
 
Jryan said:
You know what is ironic here is that he keeps posting statistics in his threads. If he had taken a statistics class then he would know that he is wrong... Oh the irony...
Click to expand...

How does that change the fact that Obama is a completely inept cluster-****, who is in way over his head, who took a bad situation with the economy, and made it worse ?

Who voted for that jackass ?
 
Eighty Deuce said:
How does that change the fact that Obama is a completely inept cluster-****, who is in way over his head, who took a bad situation with the economy, and made it worse ?

Who voted for that jackass ?
Click to expand...

How did he make it worse? GDP is growing at a faster rate than it did in the past 10 years.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
How does that change the fact that Obama is a completely inept cluster-****, who is in way over his head, who took a bad situation with the economy, and made it worse ?

Who voted for that jackass ?
Click to expand...

...more people than voted for John McCain
 
Conservative said:
The statistics I posted came from the sites listed, sites that I got a like from you on. If you have a problem with those sites and believe they are statistically wrong, then take it up with bea.gov, bls.gov, and the U.S. Treasury. Cannot help it that the data posted is right from those sites and is in context that matters to the electorate, unemployment, employment,misery index, and debt
Click to expand...

The problem isn't the sites, the problem is you. You are not analyzing the data whatsoever... If I said your car is going 50 mph and you didn't analyze it, what good would it do you?
 
Conservative said:
Of course I would because Obama is a leftwing ideologue who doesn't have a clue how to manage a private sector economy. Doesn't matter because that isn't going to happen. I am definitely a hack that believes in capitalism and individual wealth creation. I believe in a limited role of the Federal Govt and the fact that you refuse to accept the data posted claiming it is random shows how little you really know about how the electorate votes and thinks. You haven't proven that my numbers are random, that anything I have posted is outrageous and factually wrong but you have proven that liberals don't want any part of actual data and facts.
Click to expand...

Which means you don't actually care about the stats you posted. I showed Bush had a worse rate of increase of GDP. You don't care. I showed unemployment was trending upward at an alarming rate when Bush was leaving office. I showed Bush had a misery index over 10 during a period of his presidency. I have matched you number for number with Bush, and it doesn't matter to you. And the key thing you are missing, is I don't blame Bush. You blame Obama, but I don't blame Bush for this economic downturn.

The fact that you admit you would vote Bush, even though I can match everyone of your statistics with an equally bad or worse one for Bush means, again, that you have shown yourself to be a hack.
 
whysoserious said:
How did he make it worse? GDP is growing at a faster rate than it did in the past 10 years.
Click to expand...


Sell that to the American voter. Bush GDP growth 4.5 TRILLION dollars, 9.9 trillion 2000 and 14.4 trillion in 2008, what is the Obama GDP growth? you want badly to buy the Obama rhetoric but all that does is make you look foolish
 
Conservative said:
Sell that to the American voter. Bush GDP growth 4.5 TRILLION dollars, 9.9 trillion 2000 and 14.4 trillion in 2008, what is the Obama GDP growth? you want badly to buy the Obama rhetoric but all that does is make you look foolish
Click to expand...

I already showed you like five pages back. Mean GDP growth under Bush was lower than mean GDP growth under Obama. Is that not good enough? Do you want me to do it again? And if I do it again, and I post every number and show you how I arrived at them, will it shut you up?
 
whysoserious said:
Which means you don't actually care about the stats you posted. I showed Bush had a worse rate of increase of GDP. You don't care. I showed unemployment was trending upward at an alarming rate when Bush was leaving office. I showed Bush had a misery index over 10 during a period of his presidency. I have matched you number for number with Bush, and it doesn't matter to you. And the key thing you are missing, is I don't blame Bush. You blame Obama, but I don't blame Bush for this economic downturn.

The fact that you admit you would vote Bush, even though I can match everyone of your statistics with an equally bad or worse one for Bush means, again, that you have shown yourself to be a hack.
Click to expand...

Every stat I posted is something that not only I care about but also the electorate is seeing thus the 39% JAR. Percentage change means nothing, dollars mean everything. Change in GDP growth that doesn't translate into job creation isn't going to generate votes nor support except by people like you

Yes, you showed that Bush had a misery index over 10, Obama's in September was approaching 13. I blame Obama for being a leftwing ideologue how is trying to change this country into a failed liberal socialist model and with the help of people like you succeeding.
 
whysoserious said:
I already showed you like five pages back. Mean GDP growth under Bush was lower than mean GDP growth under Obama. Is that not good enough? Do you want me to do it again? And if I do it again, and I post every number and show you how I arrived at them, will it shut you up?
Click to expand...
'

Means absolutely nothing since the job losses are higher than when he took office and there are 25 million unemployed and under employed Americans
 
Conservative said:
Every stat I posted is something that not only I care about but also the electorate is seeing thus the 39% JAR. Percentage change means nothing, dollars mean everything. Change in GDP growth that doesn't translate into job creation isn't going to generate votes nor support except by people like you

.
Click to expand...

Then by your method FDR is one of the greatest Presidents of all time since he only increased debt by 269 billion dollars and created in the neighborhood of 19 million jobs.
 
Jryan said:
The problem isn't the sites, the problem is you. You are not analyzing the data whatsoever... If I said your car is going 50 mph and you didn't analyze it, what good would it do you?
Click to expand...

I have seen how you analyze data and am not impressed. What is there to analyze, 25 million unemployed Americans? 2.6 million fewer employed today? rising misery index today? We are three years into this Administration and he had total control of the Congress with overwhelming numbers the first two years and the result today are worse than when he took office. Analyze those numbers
 
Conservative said:
I have seen how you analyze data and am not impressed. What is there to analyze, 25 million unemployed Americans? 2.6 million fewer employed today? rising misery index today? We are three years into this Administration and he had total control of the Congress with overwhelming numbers the first two years and the result today are worse than when he took office. Analyze those numbers
Click to expand...


Quote Originally Posted by Jryan View Post
Now conservative:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-...n-obama-grows-strongly-59.html#post1059891740

(Do I have to add this to my sig too?)


1) cut
2) paste
3) get debunked
4) spiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnn
5) make personal insult
Click to expand...

How we analyze data is wrong? You are yet to prove that my analyzing or anyone of our analyzing data is wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom