Via Krugman, this chart illustrates Mitt's problem when it comes to the economy

[ProSense]

Economic Fundamentals and the Election

<...>

Here’s a comparison I haven’t seen made: the unemployment rate in Ohio under two administrations:



Unemployment was still very high in Ohio at this time in the Reagan years. But it was coming down, and most people blamed the previous administration for the surge in unemployment that had occurred before.

And you could say exactly the same thing this time around, with the added twist that much of the good news can be attributed to the auto bailout that Obama carried out in the face of frantic GOP opposition.

Now, national sentiment matters too, and Obama obviously can’t run a campaign on boosterism. But the key point is that the economic background isn’t that bad for him politically; it’s good enough, in particular, for him to try to turn this into a “choice” election that his opponent clearly wasn’t ready for.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/economic-fundamentals-and-the-election/

[ProSense]

1. Kick! n/t

[MissMarple]

2. Now there you go with those facty things.

[ProSense]

3. There are differences,

but one thing is clear: The efforts by the Obama administration set the country on a path to recovery.

Snapshot last four recessions


Consecutive job losses August 1981 to December 1982: 17 months, -2.8 million jobs.


Job losses/weak gains April 1990 to September 1992: 30 months, -723,000 jobs


Job losses/weak gains June 2000 to December 2003: 43 months -1.6 million jobs.


Consecutive job losses February 2008 to February 2010: 25 months, -8.8 million jobs

Years can be pluged in here: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth

This was the worst recession in 70 years, and Republican obstruction is not helping.

[MissMarple]

5. I love facty things, but this might do better in good reads or politics 2012

[ProSense]

4. Another! n/t