Hannity’s big fake news scoop on Tuesday had a huge effect on his ratings. He crushed Maddow 871,000 – 480,000 in the demo. He even beat Billo, in the demo, but by a much smaller number. The effect carried over to Greta who had a rare, for recent weeks anyway, demo victory over LOD: 502,000 – 411,000.
I doubt it will have any long range effects on the recent demo trends that show Maddow and particularly LOD making sizable inroads into Hannity’s and Greta’s demo numbers.
Obama coming to Madison today for his liberal lovefest which he will need after last night.
Controversy here in Madison on why the university is linking from their home page to the Obama website for students to be able to get tickets for the event today. Of course to get a “ticket” you need to supply your email address, your phone and mailing address. Guess what that will be used for? And guess who benefits besides the Obama campaign? The President of our University system Board of Regents! So far this year his company has made $29.5 million from Obama this cycle!
Gotta admit this is the first time I heard this excuse today!
“Obama arrived in Denver at 2 p.m. today — just a few hours before the debate started,” Gore said on his network, Current. “Romney did his debate prep in Denver. When you go to 5,000 feet, and you only have a few hours to adjust, I don’t know…”
That’s actually a good excuse, accept for one minor detail: Everybody knows you don’t show up at high altitude for a big event the same day. When I go to Lake Tahoe, I’m jacked the first two days. I believe it affected him, and I believe his handlers should have prepared for it.
^^Everybody knows you don’t show up at high altitude for a big event the same day…..I believe it affected him, and I believe his handlers should have prepared for it.
^^Sorry Joe; not even I’m prepared to buy that one.
^You try doing the performance of your life while feeling ill. Like I said, it’s his fault he didn’t prepare, but I have no doubt it screwed up his energy.
So he was sick now? How about he wasn’t prepared and he simply got beat?
That’s what I just said, oh literate one. Knowing the damn place is called “The Mile High City” is part of being prepared. He blew that debate six ways to Sunday.
I blame global warming.
I think Michael Eric Dyson’s excuse is better (and by “better,” I mean more lunatic and offensive):
“Obama has just been subject to the Fox News treatment of ‘angry black man’ again,” said Dyson. “Let’s not forget this. Lest we pretend that that doesn’t make a difference to the specter hanging over his neck that ‘I can’t come off as too vigorous, because then it looks like I’m being an angry black man.’”
It’s not Obama’s fault… it’s FOX News’ fault. Which I guess then comes back to Obama, since he’s the one taking them very seriously, and is (at least according to Dyson) worried about Hannity’s opinion.
It’s interesting that Bob Woodward believes that there was something – either a personal problem or some foreign policy matter – that contributed to the President’s poor performance.
Obama was clearly pretty out of it last night – his passivity was alarming at times – but I think we’ve seen him act like that before. Not to that degree, perhaps, and not in a situation as important as that.
Maybe he just had a off night. A touch of the flu, fatigue…..
How many years has James Lipton been on television? Alex Wagner thanked him, then he kept talking. She thanked him again..he kept talking. They finally gave up and played him into commercial. He’s probably still talking..
That’s actually a good excuse, accept for one minor detail:
Obama did his debate prep in Las Vegas, which although not as high as Denver, still has the 2nd highest elevation of any large metro area.
It’s interesting that Bob Woodward believes that there was something
My pet theory: he got a preview of Friday’s unemployment report.
“It’s interesting that Bob Woodward believes that there was something – either a personal problem or some foreign policy matter – that contributed to the President’s poor performance.”
Just guessing here: re: personal problem: Maybe Michelle promised him something for their anniversary if he did a good job. Maybe he was so excited about what was offered that he couldn’t get his mind off of it to concentrate on the debate. Or maybe they had some private time before the debate and it didn’t go so well.
Or; foreign policy matter: that one doesn’t work for me since he went of to Las Vegas for a campaign rally as US citizens were dying and he had received 12 reports that Libya was a terrorist attack! (See Reuters for that article) Looks to me like he can put aside security stuff without blinking!
^You’re definitely qualified to host a cable news show.
Only question unanswered is whether it’s Fox or MSNBC.
Apparently the standard is to just say anything that pops into your head. Doesn’t have to make sense, just wing it.
Farris: Ah, I didn’t know about prepping in Vegas. You may be correct about the Friday numbers..that crossed my mind, too. Even if they’re not terrible, we all kow they’re a long way from being anything resembling “good”.
Sununu on Andrea Mitchell Reports: “He doesn’t HAVE to say what deductions he’ll trim!” Well then.
Yeah that’s the same line Romeny used during the debate that he does not have to give any specifics.
So we have to wait for him to be elected and negotiate with congress first before we find out what deductions and loopholes are gong to be closed?
File this under you knew this was happening, Romeny and Ryan are on Hannity tonight.
“My pet theory: he got a preview of Friday’s unemployment report.”
^^I don’t know if you think it’s because the report is bad or good but it doesn’t matter because he doesn’t get the report until today. Of course, if the BLS is in the giant left wing conspiracy, like the entire MSM, it would all make sense – at least to you..
“We have to elect him, to find out what he’ll cut.”
I call that, holding Romney to the Pelosi-standard.
If Obama had agreed to the deal with Boehner he’d have taken away the deficit/debt issue from Romney.
But as Woodward points out in his book, Obama at that time was focused entirely on politics.
And here he is.
Neither of these guys are exactly profiles in courage.
And here we are.
Rudy Giuliani was on MSNBC last night and defended Romney not being specific abou what he’d cut. Rudy said that when he ran for mayor of NYC he said he would make cuts but never got specific about which ones. The reason was because he had to negotiate these cuts with Democrats and come to a compromise and you can never be specific before-hand for that reason.
I’ve been watching MSNBC all morning and the meme seems to be that Romney lied all through the debate last night and there are fact-checkers trying to rebut everything he said. Only Andrea Mitchell mentioned a couple of the “lies” Obama told.
Why does Alex of NOW think anyone is interested in hearing the wit and wisdom of James Lipton on political matters?
Obama did Bill Clinton in reverse. Clinton worked with Republicans, it worked, and he took credit for their ideas. Obama could have done the same, but that would have involved cooperating with Republicans, and he couldn’t abide that. So he decided to kill the deal, blame Republicans, rely on the press to cover for him, and run/govern based upon a mythical uncooperative Congress. It may yet work, but Romney did a helluva job poking holes in it.
^I’m not sure the Republicans would have worked with Obama the way that Gingrich was able to shepherd them with Clinton. Boehner didn’t have control over his backbenchers, especially the Tea Party types, the way that Gingrich did.
I think it’s true that Obama didn’t really try; but I also think it’s likely true that he wouldn’t have succeeded had he done so.
Except with that debt deal, which is a big exception I admit. If he had agreed to it and the Tea Party types squelched it, he could legitimately argue that he tried to reach out on the issue.
Right now he can’t.
“As God is my witness, I thought Barack Obama could fly.”
I’ve been watching MSNBC all morning and the meme seems to be that Romney lied all through the debate last night and there are fact-checkers trying to rebut everything he said.
What else are they going to do? Obama’s performance didn’t give them much gristle for the mill.
The debate prep. That’s why, according to the Obama spokespeople, Romney won the debate. He had more time to devote to debate prep. Obama is too busy being president.
^I think that it’s occasionally nit-picky and silly to rag on the President’s leisure-time activities, but they beg for it with excuses like that.
After last night’s performance between I’ll Just Say Stuff Guy and I’ll Just Stay Home Guy, I have one question: Can we pick from the two debating NEXT week..?
Why does Alex of NOW think anyone is interested in hearing the wit and wisdom of James Lipton on political matters?
He was on Hardball, too. Two answers: 1. His dissection of a stage performance (conventions, debates) is entertaining. 2. It’s cross-promotion for a show on NBC-owned Bravo.
I’m not sure the Republicans would have worked with Obama the way that…
‘Working with” in a cooperative way usually entails fostering working relationships. POTUS can foster those with others but others can’t really foster a relationship with him. If Bob Woodward’s book is to be believed, the White House had to call around in order to get House Minority Leader Boehner’s phone number to congratulate his side’s big win in 2010… that’s almost two years into Obama’s term.
3. Someone at MSNBC is hoping he’ll ask what their favourite curse word is.
Romney surrogate John Sununu called the President “Lazy” and “Not that bright” during his interview with Jon Scott on FNC this am and called him “lazy” and “disengaged” during an interview this afternoon with Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC.
If the situation was reversed and it was an Obama surrogate using those words about Romney then Hannity’s lead story tonight would be the hate speech of the radical left.
Most of us agree Romney won the debate.
Does Romney need John Sununu going on news channels insulting the President after a win?
Icemannyr, an Obama surrogate said Romney may have committed a felony re his taxes. An Obama commercial suggested that Romney killed a man’s cancer-stricken wife.
Does Romney need John Sununu going on news channels insulting the President after a win?
Your candidate just had a knockout debate win and one of your leading surrogates is making statements like that?
Dumb, really dumb.
If Romney wins let’s hope he names Sununu ambassador to the North Pole.
Yeah, we don’t have one – so make one.
This is the problem with some on the right; you’d rather destroy Obama than win the election.
This is the problem with some on the right…
What? Hitting back not quite as hard? Calling the presidnet “lazy” or “not that bright” certainly lacks class but it’s a far cry from being called a “felon” a “mean rich uncaring bast ard who lets a woman die of cancer.”
John Sununu is an expert at getting ink for John Sununu. He’d piss me off if it weren’t for the fact that it’s hilarious watching him spin those plates.
If I had any authority in the Romney campaign… or maybe just on my own, I’d pick Sununu up by the back of his pants and stuff his head in the loo.
Ohio absentee ballot data looking much better for Repubs than thought. McCain took overall absentee four years ago but didn’t do well at all with early voting. http://minx.cc/?post=333509
It could be that Romney rope-a-doped everyone, conservatives especially. He’s been stumbling like an old man, getting us all worried, then he feints to the middle, wins the debate, and we LOVE him. Brilliantly conceived and flawlessly executed. So far.
Romney was kinda odd in the Repub debates..then decimated his opponents with ads just before the votes. This time he used the first presidential debate to do the decimating. If the Obama camp underestimated his closing skills, they’ve seen the light now. And I called him a lousy politician…
Romney’s campaign was letting the Obama ad attacks smack him around with only token challenge. Millions of Americans seeing those ads saw Romney for the first time last night. The man they saw on the telly didn’t match what they were told in those ads.
Obama should be scared. The Romney that showed up last night was a person clearly willing to blow off the hard right for the more moderate Republican he was in Mass., and clearly capable of being a ruthless badass when the time comes to deliver. That’s presidential material.
Romney said absolutely nothing that the “hard’ right would object to.
It feels like Romney reset the table. All the ads, all the videos, all the stumbles are gone. People finally saw the real thing, and contrasted him with the representative of the last four years.
I have no idea who that idiot who pandered to the Tea Party to win the nomination was, but THAT guy isn’t running against Obama. As a liberal, I’m worried. As a student of presidential campaigns, I’m deeply impressed. I’ve never been more wrong about a man’s political skills in my life. That guy knows exactly what he’s doing, and doesn’t mind playing a really long game.
Every once in a while, Joey gets it right!
I don’t think Joe did get it quite right because, if you want to call it “pandering”, most Tea Party people are quite pleased with what he said last night.
Hey, when I’m giving your guy credit..try not to pile on. It’s rude. :-)
Not piling, Joe, just giving your opinion some open thought. I’ll be rude to you later.
This is one of those blissful situations where ‘media bias’ comes around and bites liberals in the ass. The Taranto Principle, as it is known. The man has not been questioned, he has not been challenged, and he can’t deal with it. That was fine when he was fresh and new and didn’t have a record. That time is over.
I think I’ve pretty well covered ‘rude to Joe’ this week. No need to thank me.
Her title should be “Dr. Dr.” since she holds a JD along with being a physician.
- Dr. Dr. –
Give me the news. Sorry..
She cracks herself up.
In the news tomorrow… Obama campaign donor scandal story – 9 month investigation, overseas donations.
Maybe Biden, at the next debate, can tell us that there is no controlling legal authority.
I’m not sure why people, including the Obama campaign; are surprised at Romney’s recent turn to the left. Romney’s whole political career is based on saying whatever will get him what he wants at that moment. And after all Eric Fehrnstom told us as much with his etch-a-sketch comment. I expect that in a couple of weeks Romney will be campaigning to the left of Obama.
I don’t expect much complaint from the Republican base as, if it works, it will get them exactly what they want; Paul Ryan as VP.
As for Ryan I expect he may not be as happy with Romney’s latest flip flop as it will put him in an awkward position of either moving left with Romney or trying to salvage what’s left of his conservitive credibility and go rogue, a la Sarah Palin.
It will make for a few interesting debates.
It’s going to be hard for Romney and all to spin a 7.8% unemployment rate to moderates and undecideds. The base will just say it all part of the giant left wing conspiracy; but they’re already in the bag for Romney.
It’s going to be hard for Romney and all to spin a 7.8% unemployment rate to moderates and undecideds.
“Are *YOU* working? Is your neighbor? We have all these jobs allegedly being created left and yet noone actually holds them.”
There ya’ go.
Gimme a break, Farris. You’d be over the moon if the number was higher, so don’t pretend its meaningless when it drops.
What will be very interesting, is the strategy taken by the Obama Administration, in reaction to these numbers.
Numbers like this (unless I’m confusing them for other numbers) are often “adjusted” later in the month. As such, if the Obama Admin plays up these numbers, they could be burned later. They’ll have to either gamble that they won’t be adjusted down (unlikely); or that people won’t pay attention when they’re changed, and only remember the positive.
So far the Admin response has been a cautious “encouraging, but we still have work to do”. They’re wise to let the numbers and pundits do the talking.
^ But Joe… that’s been their MO for a while now. They let the pundits, news people, and congress people do their fighting for them. That way, they keep their hands clean.
You wondered what their reaction would be, I gave you an answer. If you want to argue with yourself about it, go crazy.
No, I’m not aruging with you on your point. Calm down.
They have always let others do the dirty work. But I don’t think that’s going to work this time. They’ve got debates planned, and an election to win. If they don’t jump into this one, they won’t be able to reap it’s full benefit. And as things get tighter, missing this would be a wasted opportunity…
Unless they know something we don’t.
Al, I was referring to the “Obama should be scared.” post, not the one after it.
I’m surprised at today’s unemployment numbers. I’m still out of work and every week I hear of another friend who has lost his/her job. I wish people who are so discouraged and have given up looking for work would be included among the jobless.
^ Carol, it’s not in the official number, but everybody reports it frequently in discussions about the new figure. Even those evil ‘in the tank’ people on MSNBC.
Numbers like this … are often “adjusted” later in the month. As such, if the Obama Admin plays up these numbers, they could be burned later.
Adjustments wouldn’t be until after the election. Would they care?
so don’t pretend its meaningless when it drops.
Dropping because 500,000 people took 2nd McJobs is not a sign of economic health. At least, not to me. YMMV.
Dropping because 500,000 people took 2nd McJobs is not a sign of economic health.
Uh huh. When a President Romney gets the same number next year, you’ll be saying exactly the same thing, right? See, I can play “if it was the other guy”, too.
No wonder lefties identify with Big Bird. A 43 year old welfare layabout with imaginary friends.
Happy days are here again
The skies above are clear again
Let us sing a song of cheer again
Happy days are here again
Altogether shout it now! 7.8% !
Like I said, Obama must talk about those numbers:
President Obama began by speaking about the September jobs report, saying “Now, after losing about 800,000 jobs a month when I took office, our businesses have now added 5.2 million new jobs over the past 2 1/2 years. This morning, we found out that the unemployment rate has fallen to its lowest level since I took office.”
Romney and his spokespeople are trotting out the “it’s not really that good” line, which never works. The base may enjoy this Hannity-level bashing of a country trying to get better, but the average voter perceives it as poor-sport whining.
Unfortunately I haven’t had a chance to listen to any economic-wise talking heads better explain these jobs numbers because of some sick people who are rudely making me work today. I hope the 7.8 is true but somehow the “jobs added” isn’t making sense with that number. I don’t mean somebody’s cooking the numbers to make Obama look better, just that there has to be an anomaly or something.
Setting aside the political aspects, if there was truly a resurgence in job growth then the number should actually have risen a few points. Conversely, though, the numbers aren’t so bad that we’d see many more people dropping out of the labour market to cause the drop. Something is not right.
Al: The numbers are what the numbers are. There wasn’t “something is not right” last month when they were bad for Obama so now they show improvement there’s an anomaly?
There are adjustments made to the totals made every month,bi-annually and yearly so it will be a year before we know what the final numbers are.
The next job numbers are due just before the election. My expectation is the percentage will increase to about 8% but the job numbers will increase and there will be upward adjustments for August and September.
It’s too late, Fritz. The right has reflexively decided there’s a conspiracy at the BLS to make POTUS look good. This country is getting dumber by the day.
^ When will they learn there are no conspiracies… except for the voter suppression by the right, Jim Leher being biased and doing a bad job… and, uh… other things the right does. Yeah! Nothing is a conspiracy, and left never does nuthin’ wrong, no how.
And if you think about those numbers, or start asking questions… you’re probably a racist.
Joe: for the BLS to cook the books would require the knowledge and support of hundreds, if not thousands, of BLS and Dept. of Labour employees; including many Republicans. The idea that this could happen without any leaks to the right press or blogs is beyond silly.
But this is the vast left wing conspiracy we’re talking about. Logic doesn’t apply here; they believe the Bible is a history book.
We can do without the Bible references.
You’ll note that I explicitly stated I do not believe any books were “cooked”. I don’t care whether the numbers the previous month made someone look good or bad, I’m simply saying that these numbers aren’t making sense to me. Maybe they will once I have an opportunity to use my calculator. And of course, these are preliminary numbers as they are every month and will be adjusted up or down in a few weeks.
Unfortunately Jack Welch and Allen West think they’re cooked, so my Twitter timeline will be chock full of Obama Conspiracy hysteria tonight. The fact that so many conservatives will be happy to play this game depresses me. A lot.
This accusation that Obama OR ANY OTHER PRESIDENT has manipulated the jobs report is complete BS. If you have proof that Obama or the Labor Sec interferred with Bureau of Labor Statistics then show it. Otherwise, quit dragging the reputation of the hardworking folks at the BLS through the mad because you don’t like the result. It borders on treasonous for anyone in the media with a shred of credibility too make a stupid accusation like that. Shame on Welch, shame on Santelli, and shame on any other media idiot to peddle this conspiracy theory. Its total crap. It was crap when anyone said it about Bush and its crap when they say it about Obama.
^ That hits to the heart of the matter, though. Both sides have done it, and both will do it again.
“We can do without the Bible references.”
Sorry Joe; I’ve been reading too much Doonesbury lately.
Last time unemployment was 7.8%? Jan 2009, when Obama proclaimed 7.8% an economic catastrophe and demanded we waste $800B on stimulus.
Looks like stock and commodities markets don’t believe the numbers accurately represent what’s happening, either.
I don’t remember any grand conspiracies from the left when Bush got good job reports. This crap is offensive.
^ Yeah… the only conspiracies the left hit him with was stealing two elections, and allowing (or in some cases, planning) the 9/11 attacks.
But this… this is the real offense.
Gee, let”s not reflect on what the left did when Bush was president, since there is much selective memory on that.
The focus should be that 7.8% isn’t some magic number, and is pitiful after the trillions of dollars spent both on and off the books. That’s the way Romney is approaching it, and he’s right.
Right. It’s all good because of that other thing that other time. Got it.
I don’t remember any grand conspiracies from the left when Bush got good job reports.
Maybe not grand conspiracies, but certainly a “talking down of the economy” that Obama demands we dare not speak of.
Mr. Bush will talk about the 1.7 million jobs created since the summer of 2003, and will say that the economy is “strong and getting stronger.” That’s like boasting about getting a D on your final exam, when you flunked the midterm and needed at least a C to pass the course.
Mr. Bush is the first president since Herbert Hoover to preside over a decline in payroll employment. [ed. Thanks to huge growth in late 2004, this turned out not to be true. Obama, on the other hand…]That’s worse than it sounds because the economy needs around 1.6 million new jobs each year just to keep up with population growth. The past year’s job gains, while better news than earlier job losses, barely met this requirement, and they did little to close the huge gap between the number of jobs the country needs and the number actually available.
Mr. Bush will boast about the decline in the unemployment rate from its June 2003 peak. But the employed fraction of the population didn’t rise at all; unemployment declined only because some of those without jobs stopped actively looking for work, and therefore dropped out of the unemployment statistics. The labor force participation rate – the fraction of the population either working or actively looking for work – has fallen sharply under Mr. Bush; if it had stayed at its January 2001 level, the official unemployment rate would be 7.4 percent. [ed. If it had stayed at its January 2009 level, the official unemployment rate would be 11%]
Uh huh. That’s EXACTLY the same as claiming Bush doctored the numbers..
“It borders on treasonous for anyone in the media with a shred of credibility too make a stupid accusation like that.”
Treasonous? Really? How ridiculous to use a word like that for this situation..
How about the administration saying that employers don’t have to follow the WARN Act by giving out potential layoff notices and this administration saying that “No problem if you have any legal issues because of not following the law, the taxpayers of the United States will cover your expenses”.
This is an outrage but no one in the media will really follow up on this because they don’t want the nation to know we have someone in office who thinks he is a KING and can decide what laws should be followed and will commit our tax dollars at his whim.
Velshi on CNN has pointed out that the numbers don’t quite jibe. Someone on Fox mentioned the possibility of a sampling-error, and that it could lead to a precipitous jump right before the election. No ‘cooking’, no conspiracy.
Note to self: our great, free country has always had lots of foul-mouthed paranoid kooks. Social media just makes them more conspicuous now.
@Laura Except for one thing, those idiots are working IN the media now. It’s called FOX News.
It used to be that there were kooks on the extreme, on both sides. But the entire Republican Party hates Obama so much that the entire party has gone extreme. They hate him with a passion and, as a result, even sane Republicans are barking this insane rhetoric.
It’s maddening, Andy..we’re so far beyond a fact-based opposition now. They don’t have any evidence of book-cooking, and probably don’t REALLY believe it, but what the hell. Let’s just say he did it, then we can all point and laugh because we hate him so much. And we’ll do it as we head off to vote for a guy who says whatever he thinks will work on any given day. Lies, innuendo, false accusations..it’s all good. This country is in trouble.
Oh, and let’s not forget all the, “It’s a terror alert before the election,” cries from the left.
Yeah, MSNBC built their prime-time around that. But it’s a recent development.
Guys guys… big, HUGE, news.
I’ve found the evidence for the number cooking theory. Harry Reid’s buddy told me it was true.
Now all those “sane” Democrats who believed (and continue to believe) Harry Reid and his mysterious friend, can feel better.
Or be hypocritically outraged. You know, whichever suits their ideology.
I heard the president conspired behind the scenes to help people get jobs.
Waiting for “DJ Mashup in the Morning” to hit Obama with this one:
The best news anywhere in the U.S. economy over the past three months has been in the government sector, where unemployment has dropped dramatically from 5.7 percent in July to 5.1 percent in August to 4.3 percent in September, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Both the federal and state governments increased their employees in July, August and September.
Doesn’t this mean that Obama’s constant complaint that we need more cops/teachers/firefighters is patently untrue? To paraphrase a Nobel-Prize-winning Economist: “The Public Sector is doing fine.”
I’ll take all the cops/teachers/firemen I can get. Working for the public sector is a good job.
Well, I let the right wing dumbassery go for tonight. It’s time for POSTSEASON BASEBALL! And I have waited my entire life to say this in October: GO ORIOLES!
Let’s all work for the public sector! Hurray!!!
Of course, we’ll have to fire everyone a week later because there’s noone to fund the government. But man, what a ride that week was!
If you’d quit trying to gut the government of revenue, they might be able to keep employing people. They’re pretty good at it.
Here’s what’s funny about The Numbers Are Cooked-gate: Nobody is talking about Obama’s lousy debate, or how swell Romney is. Everything is “7.8% unemployment”. Congratulations.
Eh, the numbers would’ve been big no matter what. We just look like idiots with the other stuff. Oh, right..
Does Jack Welch eat newborns? I don’t have any evidence to prove he does, I just raised the question.
I’m going to hazard a guess and say that Jack Welch shot off an ill-considered tweet, and would probably undo it if he could. Rush was selling the same thing, but he ‘predicted’ this sudden drop in unemployment several months ago, which is a whole other business.
“Rush was selling the same thing, but he ‘predicted’ this sudden drop in unemployment several months ago, which is a whole other business.”
^^ Not really. If the UE% drop happens you say “I told you so”,. If it doesn’t you don’t mention it and no one remembers.
Exactly. He ‘predicts’ a lot of stuff that you never hear about again.
Welch was on Hardball proclaiming “I have no evidence, I’m just asking the question”. Chris gave him several oportunities to say “Yeah, it was kinda dumb”. Nope.
Where the heck is Kelly?
The conspiracy plot thing is nuts. What is true is that this month’s report does not match what is going on in the job market. As for the politics of it, too bad. Romney will just have to work at it a little harder if he wants the job.
FWIW, Jack Welch told Chris Matthews that he predicted last night (on Twitter) that the unemployment rate would drop to 7.9%.
There are two conspiracy theories floating around today: That the WH somehow cooked the unemployment numbers and that Romney won the debate because he cheated by using a crip sheet hidden inside his hanky which he placed on the podium. The problem with the second conspiracy is that Romney never looked down. So what was the point of having pre-written notes in front of him?
It’s a known fact that the economy is slowly improving. As Laura said, 7.8 ain’t exactly a barnburner number. This hysteria on both sides about a number marginally better than the last few – which may get adjusted up a couple points – is ridiculous.
“Romney won the debate because he cheated by using a crip sheet hidden inside his hanky which he placed on the podium.”
^^LOL! Where did you see that? I’ll bet a right wing blog. It’s the first I’ve seen of that “conspiracy theory’. It kinda reminds me of the Sarah Palin writing on her hand awhile back.
It’s a known fact that the economy is slowly improving…
Of course, and we know this because the consumer confidence improved for a couple months there. But an improving economy, especially a sluggish one, does not automatically correlate to an improving jobs market.
When things start to improve in earnest we should expect the unemployment rate to rise again temporarily before going into steady decline. I fear this may be the reverse of that and wonder if this is partly why Bernanke started up another QE.
While the “I’m only asking” ruse is old, and has been used by both parties… stupidly… at least Welsh has some basis for the opinion. He’s looking at all the surrounding data, and considering the trends… he’s found something that is out of the norm, and doesn’t see the logic in it.
Does that mean it’s impossible? No, of course not. But should it give reasonable people pause? I think, yes.
Now it’s no surprise the most ardent fans of the President are willing to swallow this whole… they’d believe anything that supported him or Democrats, no matter how questionable. And similarly, the most ardent anti-Obama folks will believe any negative theory about why the numbers aren’t true. But unless you (any “you”) have the experience and economic resume that Welsh does, I’m not sure you should be the one calling him stupid.
LOL! Where did you see that?
She probably saw it at Daily Kos Thursday, as there were several links to it and they attributed the video to Democratic Underground.
And on Fox, so far, the only one I’ve heard promoting the numbers conspiracy is Sean. Studio B, Fox Report and Special Report dismissed it. In case that’s of interest.
A whole news cycle spent on a conspiracy theory around a not-great number. When the right should be riding Romney’s debate victory. As Jon Stewart said last week, Obama is one lucky m*****f*****.
Nah, that only amounted to a little spit in a swimming pool of news. It means something to math nerds but most others probably barely noticed.
They would have spent the whole news-cycle talking about it anyway, since it was such a big drop. Other than some sour grapes that will be forgotten by Monday, I’m not seeing the big ‘lucky’.
Yeah, Welch isn’t backing-off. Sigh.
“Where the heck is Kelly?”
It’s a rough night for Texas. Baltimore messed with Texas tonight. The Rangers were knocked out of the playoffs and it’s looking like President Obama will win the election.
Was the election declared “over” by the left last week (prior to the debates)?
Now we’re into, “probably” territory? Before long, it will be a “tight race.” At least to the left. Reality seems to already be there.
I’ll take all the cops/teachers/firemen I can get. Working for the public sector is a good job.
This is where the left & right routinely talk past each other. Public sector jobs aren’t bad jobs; they are non-productive jobs that are, at best, wealth neutral but often a net consumption of wealth. This in no way implies that such jobs are not equally vital to society.
If you’re a…. say, plumber, things are different. With a contract to fix the plumbing in an old house, for example, the value of your product is worth more than the value of your materials and labour combined. Thus, wealth is created from nothing. This is the well from which the “economy” draws to pay for cops/teachers/firemen/trash haulers/etc..
Doctors and nurses, public or private sector, are also wealth neutral at best. While we may earn revenue for our employers, the product of our labour is simply the transfer of wealth from one holder to another. Like firemen, we’re certainly necessary and do contribute to the flow of commerce, but still an unsustainable component of the economy if our portions rise too high relative to the wealth-producing parts of the private sector.
When the economy is good public sector employment will take care of itself at the municipal level. When the economy is bad non-productive jobs are an added strain, not a fix. Obama focuses on public sector jobs in hopes that this will energise the private sector. Romney wants to focus on the private sector which, he believes, will provide the fuel for hiring much needed cops/teachers/firemen.
Fritz, I saw the hanky conspiracy on left-wing blogs, as a matter of fact. They have to blame Obama’s poor performance on SOMETHING.
Al, I never read Kos. I saw the hanky conspiracy on HuffPost, The Daily Beast, Buzzfeed, the New York Daily News website, and Slate.
Last night Letterman said that we have a felon (Romney) running for the presidency. Letterman said that he believes Romney never paid a nickel in federal income taxes. Did he forget that Romney paid $2 million in federal income taxes according to the tax returns he released a few weeks ago. Dave is becoming almost as un-hinged as Chris Matthews. Since when did he become such an ugly, angry liberal?
Yeah, he paid taxes after getting amnesty for burying his money in Switzerland for so many years. There’s a reason he’ll never show the older returns..
^ selective conspiracy nut
Well, Obama has his Kenyan birth certificate and his personal copy of the Koran in a Swiss safety box.
Oh yeah, along with his college grades.
So it all breaks out even.
Elections do bring out the crackpots, don’t they?
Anyone who thinks the amnesty for Swiss accounts is an outrageous theory needs to do a little reading.
Amnesty for undisclosed Swiss accounts is pure speculation. When asked, the manager of the blind trust confirmed that there had been $3 Million is a UBS account for Ann Romney Trust. Income from the account shows up in their joint tax returns, some of which has been released.
It is neither illegal nor improper to have money in foreign banks, Swiss or otherwise. Anyone who has invested retirement benefits – pensions or 401(k)s – also likely has some money in such offshore accounts.
Should probably also point out how ridiculous the charge is in terms of how much money Romney would have saved by not disclosing it. Swiss bank interest since 2000 averaged 1.3% or so, and 1.3% of $3million is $39,000. Assuming an effective tax rate of 14%, the Romneys would have saved a whopping $5,070 in federal taxes by not disclosing the investment.
Income tax is paid on earnings, not principle. One common reason to have accounts over there with such paltry returns is to hedge against losses from currency conversions when between foreign invest vehicles. There is no tax on saving what you could have lost.
Let’s see: it’s gone from “Romney paid no income taxes” to “He’s hiding money in Swiss accounts”.
The goal posts keep moving.
It’s like the birthers with the birth certificate. “No, not that certificate! The other one!”
There’s always a document somewhere that will show us how truly vile Obama/Romney/whomever are.
Debate about policies? Nah, that’s hard. Let’s just throw stuff out there.
The 47% want to know what that greedy lying arse paid.
Guys, lets cut Joe a break. He was reasonable in this thread for a post or two… he’s earned his lunatic theories, crazy babble, and psychotic rage towards Romney.
We can’t expect much from The Child, so let’s be happy that we got this much. Small victories for sanity should be celebrated… no matter how brief.
^ It’s what Jesus would do,
^ If you say so. As a Jew, the J-Man and I aren’t exactly familiar. All I know is that he had one sweet beard, and some bad a$$ abs.
A true conspiracy theory exists in it’s own atmosphere, impervious to fact. The rest are just political disagreements, and it’s often difficult to differentiate. ‘Conspiracy’ becomes a loose charge, like everything else.
The difference between today and twenty years ago is the internet. I should think that all of us are old enough to remember the Clinton conspiracy theories (some might even recall when Reagan was a doddering old man who would criminalize abortion and blow up the world, starting with Russia, but I digress). The thing was, you had to be looking for it.
The early Clinton-era was all about direct-mail, VHS and newsletters. I used to watch The 700 Club, and many small fortunes were made hawking videotapes about the various Clinton scandals, real and imagined. For a time, Salon Magazine seemed to exist if only to refute such theories, coming mostly from David Brock and The American Spectator.
MediaMatters came into being in ’04, which also happened to be when Keith Olbermann went over to the Dark Side. Media Research Center had existed for decades prior, but no one paid much attention beyond strictly conservative outlets, and maybe Fox. I think that with MediaMatters, you started to see more of an over-all view of the “media”, as conservative ‘watchdogs’ followed suit. With this, you no longer had to view certain shows, in order to know what was being said. MediaMatters seemed to usher in a time of constant monitoring of all programs, big and small, which had the effect of nationalizing even local radio-shows. This has a lot to do with local ‘personalities’ making more appearances on primetime shows, for better and worse.
It seems to me that people are no more inclined toward conspiracy than they ever were, but there’s just more exposure to it, and more affirmation of it. There are infinitely greater opportunities to hear people say things and believe things, and to perhaps be persuaded. It requires much more critical thinking, which is always in short supply.
- The Child –
I prefer The One.
I wonder if there’s ever been a political conspiracy theory, left or right and like the ones we discuss here, that was proven true. I can’t think of any, but there must be some.
Watergate, although it wasn’t publicly known at the time and so doesn’t really count. The Attorney General’s wife blabbed to the press about her husband’s involvement in a cover-up and she named some other players. She was a drunk and no one paid her much attention until some time later when her words had been proven accurate.
Aah, I remember Mrs. Mitchell blabbing what was considered The Crazy at the time. When Watergate hit, I remember making the connection. Geez, that was quite a memory jog you did there, Al. I was 10-years-old at the time, and I doubt it’s crossed my mind once in 40 years.
I remember reading about Martha Mitchell in Mad Magazine, and it was not the most flattering portrayal.
Oh my God. I remember the Mad Magazine thing, too!
Kudos for Laura’s conspiracy treatise, btw. That’s some good thinking/writing right there, people.
I remember neither Martha Mitchell nor Mad Magazine. I did have an M&M once.
Uhh..you’re the one who mentioned Martha, Dr. Absent-Minded.
Mrs Attorney General.
Because I read about it in a book. But “Dr. Absent-Minded” does sorta kinda fit, I’m not happy to admit.
This article uses factual information to make the point. What’s missing is the irony lost on so many Obama supporters that his policies are strongly favouring the already wealthy at the expense of the working poor.
Conspiracy theory… of the Clinton Oval Office BJ… which turned out to be true.
That was an easy one, no?
You guys on the right post cray all over the place, then say it’s the left posting lunatic fringe stuff? Just another example of how far to the right the Republican dumbassophere (thanks Joe, I really like that word) has gone.
I believe the point is that there’s lunacy on both sides, but thanks for playing.
Oh, and it’s a good thing that the unemployment numbers made everyone forget about the debate.
Nothing about how FOX News runs the Republican party. How Bush stole two elections. How the government knew about 9/11. About how the Iraq invasion was planned from day one. How Bush was having an affair with Rice. How Bush Sr. was really sad that Jeb wasn’t President. How Cheney really ran everything. How Bush faked documents to trick all the Democrats into supporting the Iraq invasion at the start.
Is CNN covering these hearings at all? I should know, but I’ve given up. Shep has been on it for twenty minutes, and I’m sure there was much prior. At this particular moment, I really couldn’t give a good damn about Romney’s position on abortion.