Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Post of the Week!
Search Politics
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Post of the Week!
Search Politics


Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (2) |
Post New
Author: intercst   😊 😞
Number: of 48467 
Subject: Fact Checking Clinton's Wild Job Creation Cla
Date: 08/22/2024 10:31 PM
Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 3
{{ Former President Bill Clinton highlighted the jobs created in the US “since the end of the Cold War in 1989,” noting that of the 51 million jobs added, 50 million of those were created during Democratic administrations.



“Since the end of the Cold War in 1989, America has created about 51 million new jobs. I swear, I checked this three times; even I couldn’t believe it. What’s the score? Democrats 50, Republicans 1,” he said during his remarks at the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday.



Facts First: Clinton’s claim is true, although aspects such as timing, rounding, and large-scale national crises influence the math.

{{ snip }}

Al Franken told a joke some years ago about the job creation during both Bush Administrations. It went something like this.

"Al Franken: "I was a math major in college, so I'm always interested in looking at the data. And when I projected the two Bush Administration job creation records all the way back to the founding of the Republic, it showed that if a Bush had been President during that whole period of time, no American would have worked {comedic pause} ever."

intercst

Print the post


Author: ptheland   😊 😞
Number: of 48467 
Subject: Re: Fact Checking Clinton's Wild Job Creation Cla
Date: 08/22/2024 10:51 PM
Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 5
Facts First: Clinton’s claim is true, although aspects such as timing, rounding, and large-scale national crises influence the math.

Fair enough. Both Bushes had a recession during their Presidencies. I'd say it's reasonable to let them share some blame for that. After all, they had been in office for a while at point. (Bush the elder got hit with a recession about half way through his term. The recovery was still in progress as he left office. Bush the lesser ended his term as the banks were melting down.)

The pandemic is a slightly different issue. Hard to blame that on the President. (The response is his, but the fact that it happened isn't.) Even if you hold employment steady at the peak just before the pandemic, that would change the score to something like 11 to 40. Still a pretty bad rout by any measure.

--Peter

Print the post


Post New
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (2) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds