Obama 48%, Bush 47%

[Brittain33]

Do you ever respond to people's responses to your Obama criticism?

[Brittain33]

Bush in 8 years did staggering damage, but Obama in 2 has done almost as much.

In terms of lifetime un-achievement I think Bush is still ahead, but Obama's single season numbers far exceed Bush's and has been able to do almost as much damage in far less time..

[Brittain33]

At the time of the "stimulus" package's passage, unemployment was at 8.1%.  It is now at 9.5%.  Unless there has been an outbreak of some incredibly virulent and deadly disease that only affects employed people, that graph is mistaken.

How much stimulus spending hit the economy the day the package was signed? How about a week later?

In addition, some jobs were created later (albeit not nearly enough) to offset the smaller number of jobs lost montly in late spring and summer. Certainly nothing like the massive monthly losses seen under the final months of George Bush's term and the time preceding the stimulus bill taking effect.

How many jobs have been lost since March 2009? How does it compare to 8 million?

[Brittain33]

The correct format of this poll should have been:

Are you an idiot or party hack?

Yes 95%
No 5%

This chart is succeeding in unnerving people. I need to do more charts, and larger.

[Brittain33]

Doesn't matter.  The chart says "pre-stimulus" and "post-stimulus."  It doesn't matter if the stimulus worked beyond Paul Krugman's wildest imagination.  It is still factually inaccurate.

It says "stimulus" which means the stimulus taking effect. What point could possibly be made by dating it to its passage when it had no impact on the economy until money was being spent? What would that prove, except to lump some of Bush's residual economic performance into Obama's numbers to make his record look better?

How many jobs have been lost total since the stimulus took effect? What should that second number be? Remember to include the offsetting small gains through July 2010.