This would make it sound as if President Obama thinks 8% unemployment isn't that bad. So far his campaign has been handling this better than the pundits expected.

that in spite of constant republican blocking they have been addressing the problem, and when he first took office the unemployment was at double digits. They will also say there is a lot more work to do

"Legitimate rape." "Romneycare for women" (which just aired today)

http://embed.crooksandliars.com/v/MjUzMzEtNjA4NDQ?color=C93033

So the "economics" is a non sequitur at this point.

.

... even get interviews anymore. Oh and BTW...


Do you have any idea of what the real, non doctored, chronic unemployment and under-employment numbers actually are?

Is it Obama's fault? Hell no, but it sure isn't a "winning issue" for him.

Both the civilian labor force participation rate, at 63.7 percent, and the employment- population ratio, at 58.4 percent, changed little in July

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

a little over a year ago it was sitting at 46 or so, so it's a great improvement but not something to be touting with fudgy numbers

Obama can claim a recovery. He can insist it's weak because of partisanship and irresponsible Wall Street.

He can point out that Romney represents precisely the problem with the economy.

... would the cutoff be, where he should no longer brag about the ones that are working?

Should a candidate, during the pit of the Great Depression have trumpeted the 75% positive employment rate? Or would he have been ridiculed?

I don't believe the unemployment numbers being reported. I think its higher.

The post was about being positive. I do not know where you all come up with unemployment being higher than what is talked about by the pukes. I will go you one better, maybe the unemployment number is actually less than they say. Read more, one liners is what the pukes use for their ignorant masses. I really do not expect it here but your replies do not lie.