Was Clinton wrong?

[Q Classic]

I mean, ****, if all that's required is full-time work, but everybody's making minimum wage or just a cut above it, which as many cases have shown isn't enough to make a real living off of... sure, unemployment is down.

Doesn't mean people are actually economically improving, or well off. (Granted, at least they're not in debtor's prisons, but...)

[CrONoS]

Yep, throwing only unemployment ratio is misleading.

Having the numbers of unactive person and the numbers of unemployed person is better. And you need to show how many created job are part time and full times job, along with the variation of median and means incomes. But, we all know this, that's elementary economics.

[Drake Tungsten]

Only 50,000 new jobs were created in September.

I'm not that concerned when 188,000 jobs were created in August.

[Q Classic]

But if 150,000 of them are nothing more than McJobs that don't have any benefits attached, are at depressed wages because they're that close to being outsourced...

...are they actually helping people? Other than keeping them out of immediate bankruptcy?

[Q Classic]

I mean, ****, I'm not that concerned that we're still turning corners in Iraq. They've had democratic elections, right? It's all good.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Only 50,000 new jobs were created in September.

I'm not that concerned when 188,000 jobs were created in August.

So we matched population growth in one month. Break out the champaigne!

That's probably why you don't understand why people feel like the economy is hurting.

[Drake Tungsten]

Well, Pelosi still seems to think the economy is the main issue...

Democratic priorities are clear: we will fight to get the economy back on track, we will create jobs, and we will help unemployed workers.

http://democraticleader.house.gov/press/releases.cfm?pressReleaseID=1857

I applaud the sentiment, but I have to wonder why she thinks we should elect the Dems to do these things when the GOP already is...

[chequita guevara]

Because the Dems know that people don't feel secure and are trying to hammer on what they think will resonate with people. And the GOP hasn't been doing a very good job.

[flash9286]

haven't real wages declined over the past 2 years.
.

[Lul Thyme]

Re: Was Clinton wrong?

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
The idea that the most important issue was "the economy, stupid" was one of Clinton's guiding principles during his first presidential campaign. It led him to success and seemed to reflect a basic truth about the electorate, ie. that they valued their economic well-being over most other issues.

Today, however, you have a situation where the Republicans are in danger of being thrown out of power despite presiding over a great economy the last few years. GDP growth is strong, unemployment is low, the Dow is at record levels, the federal deficit is at historically low levels, inflation is low and productivity and family incomes are both up. If this election were really about the economy, the GOP would be in no danger of losing control of Congress.

So, was Clinton wrong? Do voters really care that much about the economy? If you think they do, how do you explain the disconnect between our current economic strength and support for the GOP? And if you think they don't, what issue do you think is the most important to them?

I don't think many ppl feel Bush is a strong "Economic President".

I am not very qualified at all, but my impression is that the Economy is not doing bad (not doing great either, isn't there some great foreign balance problems and such?) and whatever good there is, is almost in spite of Bush.
Anyway my point is, it's not being something is going in a certain way that it's the president's fault.Specially in economy , the reasons can be hard to discern, but I wouldnt automatically praise a leader because the economy is going well and vice versa.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Only 50,000 new jobs were created in September.

I'm not that concerned when 188,000 jobs were created in August.

You may not be, but it seems to me a significant chunk of the electorate is.

[Drake Tungsten]

What would you know about the views of the American electorate?

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
What would you know about the views of the American electorate?

What Fox News tell me.

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Now be intellectually honest and show national total national debt. Also compare the surpluses we had when Bush took office compared to the real mess he has left while in office.

Addressing just the total national debt, the last number I saw (which was last week), was a little over $8 trillion. Regarding the annual (sad to say, but it's a fact) deficit, those numbers can be misleading because I don't think Congress includes the surplus from Social Security, which is diverted into non-SS programs, but must be repaid at some point in time.

Gatekeeper

[GePap]

For most voters the economy is, at best, OK. Cost of living has kept up or outdistanced wage growth for most individuals, and while OIl prices have goen down from six months ago, oil is still far more expensive than the last time we had an election.

Republicans have purposely framed this election on national security, as they did the last two. They have no chance at this point to change the game plan.

More importantly, the electorate is disgusted with Washington, and in the end, that means the party that controls all the elected branches of government.