Is Obama's ad a load of bull?

In Obama's first campaign ad of 2012, he makes some sketchy claims.

He claims that he created 4.2 million jobs. However if you look at net job growth he actually lost 2.5 million. That's a 6.7 million spread between his claim and the truth. Kinda a big deal. In fact, Bush netted 1 million jobs. That is 3.5 million more jobs than Obama actually created.

Obama claims he brought the troops home from Iraq. But considering he mixed an Iraq drawdown with a 30,000 troop surge in Afghanistan, I think it would be more accurate for him to say he brought our troops to Afghanistan, not home. In fact, Obama planned on keeping 3,000-5,000 troops in Iraq, but couldn't negotiate a simple immunity deal. So when Obama says he brought our troops home from Iraq, what he actually means is he couldn't keep Iraq from kicking our troops out of Iraq, so he sent them to Afghanistan.

Obama says he has revitalized Detroit, but doesn't mention that much of the growth of the auto industry is from Ford who avoided taking bailout cash and Chrysler who Obama stole from bondholders and sold to Italy. So if his idea of economic turnaround is seizing companies and selling them at a discount to overseas companies, I hope he doesn't do me any favors.

So here is the question. Is Obama just plain full of it? Does he think people aren't going to fact check his ads? Or does he actually believe this?

Yes it's bull, but not to the extent you think probably. It's just that the figures represent different jobs, so both can be taken into account, only the ad leaves out the job loss. Who knows how many of that 4 million are long term, or well paying. I'm sure it includes temp work, mcdonalds etc. That's why the economy still sucks. Why even bring Bush into it though? Clinton had estimated 22.7 million job growth. None of that is relevant to Obama's ad. It's so obvious in all of those data that the politicians won't factor in job loss. So yes, it's all bull.

I don't like that other crap either, and as someone who has been to Detroit in the past year, i can guarantee it isn't revitalized and never will be. It's a completely lost cause.

wolv67 said:

Why even bring Bush into it though?

Click to expand...

Because Obama still needs Bush to blame for all of Obama's own failures.

Pretty much all political ads are a load of bull

friday said:

So here is the question. Is Obama just plain full of it?

Click to expand...

For the most part, yes.

Which makes him like 99.9% of all politicians.

Almost every political add looks at the information that is available in the most positive and happy light as possible. This isn't an "Obama" thing, it's how politics works. Outside of the fact it's yet another example of how the man that campaigned to "Change politics as usual" is just the "Usual Politics", there's really nothing of note here or to be bothered by. It's good to fact check it, as it's good to fact check any of these, but I don't see it any more necessary to get up in arms about than any other political ad.

Zyphlin said:

For the most part, yes.

Which makes him like 99.9% of all politicians.

Almost every political add looks at the information that is available in the most positive and happy light as possible. This isn't an "Obama" thing, it's how politics works. Outside of the fact it's yet another example of how the man that campaigned to "Change politics as usual" is just the "Usual Politics", there's really nothing of note here or to be bothered by. It's good to fact check it, as it's good to fact check any of these, but I don't see it any more necessary to get up in arms about than any other political ad.

Click to expand...

Basically this. He's running for re-election, so anything he says is going to be framed in the best possible light. What it really tells me is that his political people are really good. The true believers think he's "different" and "changing" things, but it's SSDD.

friday said:

\...
Obama says he has revitalized Detroit, but doesn't mention that much of the growth of the auto industry is from Ford who avoided taking bailout cash and Chrysler who Obama stole from bondholders and sold to Italy. So if his idea of economic turnaround is seizing companies and selling them at a discount to overseas companies, I hope he doesn't do me any favors.

So here is the question. Is Obama just plain full of it? Does he think people aren't going to fact check his ads? Or does he actually believe this?

Click to expand...

Your post is full of partial facts and inaccuracies you haven't fact checked with any depth, e.g. Ford was rescued also. Why do you leave this out?