Dems biggest problem: recoveries typically take 12+ months to add jobs
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:23:56 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2010 Elections
  Dems biggest problem: recoveries typically take 12+ months to add jobs
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Dems biggest problem: recoveries typically take 12+ months to add jobs  (Read 2306 times)
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 02, 2009, 08:09:54 AM »

going back into the 70's, jobs are  typically not added in the first year of a recovery...so don't expect the job loses to come to an end before June 2010....

This is why I say the GOP will pick up 25+ House seats and 5+ Senate seats - the average american is not going to be better off in Nov 2010 even though the government: spends a lot more, borrows a lot more, and controls a much bigger slice of the economy.

Logged
TeePee4Prez
Flyers2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,480


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 02, 2009, 09:27:34 AM »

going back into the 70's, jobs are  typically not added in the first year of a recovery...so don't expect the job loses to come to an end before June 2010....

This is why I say the GOP will pick up 25+ House seats and 5+ Senate seats - the average american is not going to be better off in Nov 2010 even though the government: spends a lot more, borrows a lot more, and controls a much bigger slice of the economy.



I think the disenchantment with the GOP is too strong for that scenario.  As long as you continue to nominate Michele Bachmann and have Rush Limbaugh as your voice, forget it.  I think people are still blaming the economy more on Bush at this point.
Logged
Vepres
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 02, 2009, 09:37:13 AM »

going back into the 70's, jobs are  typically not added in the first year of a recovery...so don't expect the job loses to come to an end before June 2010....

This is why I say the GOP will pick up 25+ House seats and 5+ Senate seats - the average american is not going to be better off in Nov 2010 even though the government: spends a lot more, borrows a lot more, and controls a much bigger slice of the economy.



I think the disenchantment with the GOP is too strong for that scenario.  As long as you continue to nominate Michele Bachmann and have Rush Limbaugh as your voice, forget it.  I think people are still blaming the economy more on Bush at this point.

Maybe where you live, but I can tell you that there are even some people in Boulder County who disapprove Shocked

I think that since the health care debate began, it's Obama's economy. Most people outside of very liberal areas have forgotten Bush.
Logged
War on Want
Evilmexicandictator
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,643
Uzbekistan


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -8.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 02, 2009, 10:10:34 AM »

By the summer and fall of 2010 the economy will be recovering quite well(oil prices will be a big deal though) and the Democrats will be the ones that will get the credit.
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 03, 2009, 08:29:51 PM »

going back into the 70's, jobs are  typically not added in the first year of a recovery...so don't expect the job loses to come to an end before June 2010....

This is why I say the GOP will pick up 25+ House seats and 5+ Senate seats - the average american is not going to be better off in Nov 2010 even though the government: spends a lot more, borrows a lot more, and controls a much bigger slice of the economy.



The recovery probably started in June, so that would mean the economy will start adding jobs in June 2010, just before the midterm elections. 
Logged
Deldem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: -7.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2009, 08:56:25 PM »

I'm thinking at this point the economy will come back just in time to save the Dems from a crushing defeat in the midterms. I'd say they lose 10-15 seats in the House, and pick up 1-2 in the Senate (Missouri and New Hampshire).
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: September 03, 2009, 09:31:55 PM »

I'm thinking at this point the economy will come back just in time to save the Dems from a crushing defeat in the midterms. I'd say they lose 10-15 seats in the House, and pick up 1-2 in the Senate (Missouri and New Hampshire).

I think they would take that and run with it at this point. 
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: September 03, 2009, 09:42:37 PM »

I'm thinking at this point the economy will come back just in time to save the Dems from a crushing defeat in the midterms. I'd say they lose 10-15 seats in the House, and pick up 1-2 in the Senate (Missouri and New Hampshire).

I think they would take that and run with it at this point. 

Especially when you consider that -under this scenario- they could always recover their losses in 2012...a presidential election year. 
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: September 04, 2009, 09:38:27 AM »

going back into the 70's, jobs are  typically not added in the first year of a recovery...so don't expect the job loses to come to an end before June 2010....

This is why I say the GOP will pick up 25+ House seats and 5+ Senate seats - the average american is not going to be better off in Nov 2010 even though the government: spends a lot more, borrows a lot more, and controls a much bigger slice of the economy.



The recovery probably started in June, so that would mean the economy will start adding jobs in June 2010, just before the midterm elections. 

in 1994, the economy added about 4 million jobs, and Clinton got his head handed to him.
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: September 05, 2009, 09:10:36 PM »

going back into the 70's, jobs are  typically not added in the first year of a recovery...so don't expect the job loses to come to an end before June 2010....

This is why I say the GOP will pick up 25+ House seats and 5+ Senate seats - the average american is not going to be better off in Nov 2010 even though the government: spends a lot more, borrows a lot more, and controls a much bigger slice of the economy.



The recovery probably started in June, so that would mean the economy will start adding jobs in June 2010, just before the midterm elections. 

in 1994, the economy added about 4 million jobs, and Clinton got his head handed to him.

That is true.  And the economy lost jobs in 2002 and Bush gained seats. 
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2009, 08:50:12 AM »

going back into the 70's, jobs are  typically not added in the first year of a recovery...so don't expect the job loses to come to an end before June 2010....

This is why I say the GOP will pick up 25+ House seats and 5+ Senate seats - the average american is not going to be better off in Nov 2010 even though the government: spends a lot more, borrows a lot more, and controls a much bigger slice of the economy.



The recovery probably started in June, so that would mean the economy will start adding jobs in June 2010, just before the midterm elections. 

in 1994, the economy added about 4 million jobs, and Clinton got his head handed to him.

That is true.  And the economy lost jobs in 2002 and Bush gained seats. 
which pretty much pwns the whole premise for this thread.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: September 06, 2009, 10:51:46 PM »

going back into the 70's, jobs are  typically not added in the first year of a recovery...so don't expect the job loses to come to an end before June 2010....

This is why I say the GOP will pick up 25+ House seats and 5+ Senate seats - the average american is not going to be better off in Nov 2010 even though the government: spends a lot more, borrows a lot more, and controls a much bigger slice of the economy.



The recovery probably started in June, so that would mean the economy will start adding jobs in June 2010, just before the midterm elections. 

in 1994, the economy added about 4 million jobs, and Clinton got his head handed to him.

That is true.  And the economy lost jobs in 2002 and Bush gained seats. 
which pretty much pwns the whole premise for this thread.

War and perceived immediate threats to human life will always trump the economy as an issue.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,803


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: September 06, 2009, 11:00:11 PM »

Well, Angela Merkel is popular despite the crappy economy in Germany. Sarkozy is still popular and Berlusconi would be if not for non economy related crap. Jennifer Granholm was reelected in 2006 despite the Michigan economy already sucking because people were even more afraid of that Amway guy. The UK economy wasn't so hot in 1992. So I mean, the economy is not insurmountable. If the other side doesn't have a program and you can convince them that you're more competent, or that you're on their side while the other side is controlled by fat cats, you can still come out ahead.
Logged
War on Want
Evilmexicandictator
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,643
Uzbekistan


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -8.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: September 06, 2009, 11:15:40 PM »
« Edited: September 06, 2009, 11:17:27 PM by Karma Police »

Well, Angela Merkel is popular despite the crappy economy in Germany. Sarkozy is still popular and Berlusconi would be if not for non economy related crap. Jennifer Granholm was reelected in 2006 despite the Michigan economy already sucking because people were even more afraid of that Amway guy. The UK economy wasn't so hot in 1992. So I mean, the economy is not insurmountable. If the other side doesn't have a program and you can convince them that you're more competent, or that you're on their side while the other side is controlled by fat cats, you can still come out ahead.
Don't forget the popularity of Zapatero in Spain, with ridiculous unemployment rates they are having right now. Yeah though an incumbent victory with a terrible economy is very possible, just as an opposition victory with a good economy is very possible.
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: September 07, 2009, 11:36:58 PM »

going back into the 70's, jobs are  typically not added in the first year of a recovery...so don't expect the job loses to come to an end before June 2010....

This is why I say the GOP will pick up 25+ House seats and 5+ Senate seats - the average american is not going to be better off in Nov 2010 even though the government: spends a lot more, borrows a lot more, and controls a much bigger slice of the economy.



The recovery probably started in June, so that would mean the economy will start adding jobs in June 2010, just before the midterm elections. 

in 1994, the economy added about 4 million jobs, and Clinton got his head handed to him.

That is true.  And the economy lost jobs in 2002 and Bush gained seats. 
which pretty much pwns the whole premise for this thread.

9/11 trumped everything, but Obama would most likely NOT be seen as a strong national defense advocate if we were attacked again.  In fact, another 9/11, especially if it were to happen after 2009, would pretty much end the Obama presidency. 

Iraq is going to fall apart as Obama withdraws troops; Afghanistan is a basket case that can never be rehabilitated, Pakistan is shaky…if Obama is going to profit politically from another 9/11, then it probably has to happen very soon.  Otherwise, another attack would be viewed in the context of Obama’s apology tour, the failures of Iraq, Afghanistan, appeasement of the Iranians, etc, etc, etc.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.046 seconds with 12 queries.