05 October 2012

Mitt who? On the "jobs report"

I am not so much pro-Obama - I actually am not registered as a Democrat - as I am anti-Republican. So here is how I interpret this graphic, lifted from The New York Times today.

First, and most importantly, it suggests that fewer people are jobless this month than last. Indeed, the unemployment rate is south of 8% for the first time since 2009. We can worry about whether the jobs are "good" ones or otherwise, but the trajectory is surely encouraging. That is the good news and it is important independently of the campaign.

Second, this news should distract attention from the horse-race preoccupation with who "won" the debate Wednesday evening. The common wisdom is that Romney did.  The employment figures today should pretty much render that discussion moot. Look where Republican policies left us. Then look at the record under Obama. Even if we think he could've done a better job, experience suggests there is zero reason to think that Romeny/Ryan will do so. Even if he seems less stiff and weaselly than you thought, voting for Romney on grounds of economic policy is indefensible.

Finally, the downside of this shift in attention is that it will provide less reason for the press to explore the plethora of lies and bullshit Romney offered up Wednesday night - [1] [2] [3] [4], etcetera . . . In other words Romney only appeared less weaselly the other evening. It is important not to let that message get lost in the jobs uptick.

Labels: , , , , , ,


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home