The U.S. LOST 33,000 JOBS in September!

Exactly the same way the Obama-ites blamed Bush for everything that was not seen as positive. That's just how it works, regardless of party affiliation.

29029 wrote:

Exactly the same way the Obama-ites blamed Bush for everything that was not seen as positive.

To be honest I didn't notice this much, at least after the first few months of BHO's term. And I was no fan of Obama (actually I've *never* pulled a Dem lever), so I was kind of paying attention.

The most entertaining part of the anti-intellectualism of the old white male conservative can be observed in the WSJ comments section. When Obama was president and unemployment declined there would be over 1,000 comments each month with emotional men whining that the calculation is fraud. As it continues to drop with Trump as president, the comments have dwindled to under 100 as the cognitive dissonance is too overwhelming for these femboys to deal with.

It's good to lose

A minor blip during the tremendous Trump recovery from the horrible Hussein Obama years.

Similarly: Obama definitely lucked out, with not too many horrendous storms to deal with during his tenure. Trump, unfortunately, is presiding over a series of hammerin' hurricanes.

If identical storms had arrived last year, I promise that not a few people would have blamed Obama for them. (I'm not talking about the government's response; I'm talking about the storms themselves.) I notice that even the rabid anti-Trump crew don't seem to be doing that this year.

Good.

First drop in seven years wrote:

29029 wrote:

Exactly the same way the Obama-ites blamed Bush for everything that was not seen as positive.

To be honest I didn't notice this much, at least after the first few months of BHO's term. And I was no fan of Obama (actually I've *never* pulled a Dem lever), so I was kind of paying attention.

First of all, I enjoyed your post. You and I sound fairly similar in our views, though I did vote for Bill Clinton's first term. With 100% respect to your views, and a grasp on healthy discourse, a couple of contradictions to your assessment immediately jumped to mind:

1) pelosi blaming bush for $9 trillion in debt generated under obama

2) blaming bush for the rise of isis

3) that was his mantra: claim the victories, but deflect the failures or incompetence on others (Clapper or Cameron for the underestimation of the Syrian debacle, Solyndra/BP oil spill, hostage switch for the 5 at guantanamo/Hagel, etc, etc,

etc) There are so many more, but I just haven't the time pursue the post any further.

As incompetent and divisive as this current buffoon currently is at the helm, the polarization created by his predecessor was equally as intense. Human nature leads us to embracing short memories, and acting only on emotion. Still, it doesn't make clear to me why his own side continues to be angry at America itself. Truly, Democrats have no one to blame except themselves. Their corrupt (borderline scary) 2016 candidate unable to beat Trump shows just how little faith people had.

Look buddy, Bush handed Obama a sh!t sandwich. Yeah, maybe Obama blamed Bush a bit, but frankly Bush deserved it.

We're due for a recession soon and the signs are lining up. This why I am confident that Trump is a one term President. All the investigations, blustering, and lack of legislative accomplishments should doom him but, when the recession hits, a lot of his base will leave when they feel the pain and their "savior" hasn't done squat to improve their lives.

Yeah, about that... wrote:

Similarly: Obama definitely lucked out, with not too many horrendous storms to deal with during his tenure. Trump, unfortunately, is presiding over a series of hammerin' hurricanes.

If identical storms had arrived last year, I promise that not a few people would have blamed Obama for them. (I'm not talking about the government's response; I'm talking about the storms themselves.) I notice that even the rabid anti-Trump crew don't seem to be doing that this year.

Good.

Correct, it would be interesting to see next month's data.

The unemployment rate is now 4.2% and participation rate has continued to drift up above 63%.

Jose the Plomero wrote:

Look buddy, Bush handed Obama a sh!t sandwich. Yeah, maybe Obama blamed Bush a bit, but frankly Bush deserved it.

There *was* some of that criticism of Bush at the start of BHO's reign--and deservedly, I thought, though presidents have a *lot* less effect on the economy than many people seem to think. But I honestly didn't see much direct, continuing criticism of Bush once the recovery started--what was that, about a year later?

I mean, at that point you've gotta go with the guy you have, for good or ill. And though I didn't like the man much, for 70+ consecutive months of job growth I have to give BHO at least as much credit at DJT was taking for a few months of job growth while he's been in the WH. I just find it kind of amusing, watching people tie themselves in knots as they try to give Trump credit for job growth in his first few months, but somehow blame Obama for last month's temporary dip.

It would be nice if more grownups understood (and *spoke* as if they understood) that the world is complicated, and you really don't get to divide everything easily into Us vs. Them. Life is messier than that.

Parenthetically, I think the whole failure-to-repeal-ACA fiasco could not have worked out better for the GOP. *Any* plan they'd passed would have sucked, and the voters might well have taken it out on GOP candidates next fall. Instead, the Prez and Congress are just making sure that the ACA fails in the next twelve months--and they'll get to blame *that* on Obama and the Dems. Seriously, couldn't have gone better for the GOP if they'd planned it that way.

Let's look a the streak.

Obama was sworn in during the biggest financial crisis almost any of us alive have ever seen.

Bush helped with some rescue at the end of his term.

Obama continued the rescue starting with saving the American auto industry which also helped foreign cars sold in the US because they shared a supply line for parts.

Then he implemented additional stimulus including e temporary payroll tax cut.

Jobs kept bleeding for a year and a half. Local government jobs were really falling off.

Finally the tide turned and we started to see monthly net job gains even as local governments were still shedding job.

That monthly streak lasted for over six years through the handoff to Trump.

Up until now, the streak continued.

Now the streak has ended.

Yes, probably a blip because of the storms. But not enough gains to offset that issue.

And we are close to full employment so there aren't as many gains to be made.

Coincidentally, aren't there about 33,000 positions not yet filled in the Trump administration?

Portland Hobby Jogger wrote:

We're due for a recession soon and the signs are lining up. This why I am confident that Trump is a one term President. All the investigations, blustering, and lack of legislative accomplishments should doom him but, when the recession hits, a lot of his base will leave when they feel the pain and their "savior" hasn't done squat to improve their lives.

I could be wrong but I don't think you understand most of Trump's voters. A few of them might stay home in 2020, but Trump was literally accurate when he said he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and not lose any votes.

A lot of Trump's voters are angry people. They'll still be angry in 2020--maybe angrier, considering how the economy is likely to go. But because they've chosen DJT as the embodiment of their anger, they are certainly not going to vote against him.

Mike Bloomberg was quoted as saying that he considered Trump's chances for re-election to be better than 50-50. I agree.

L L wrote:

Coincidentally, aren't there about 33,000 positions not yet filled in the Trump administration?

Well played.