Jobs Report

American Thinker has an essay by Steve Feistein that observes a plummet in the importance of the "Jobs Report" and the "non-farm payroll" numbers that come out monthly.

The Jobs Report had replaced the previously accepted standard measurement of employment strength, the Unemployment Rate. For years, decades even, the Unemployment Rate was the universally recognized measure of the state of the economy’s employment health. The problem for the Democrats, and the mainstream media, was that this well-accepted yardstick of employment didn’t carry sufficiently bad news for the Republican administration. With unemployment numbers consistently in the mid-5%-to-low-6% range for most of his presidency (indisputably excellent by historical standards), the Democrats needed to focus on a number that they could leverage for maximum political gain. The monthly Jobs Report was that number...

Perhaps the most fascinating proof of the transparent, disingenuous nature of the Democrats’ “concern” over jobs creation is that there has been virtually no mention of the monthly jobs number by them since the election. The economy is in very good shape, by any standard. Employment is up, corporate sales and profits are very good, retail sales are excellent, unemployment claims are modest, the stock market has gained over 35% off its post-9/11 lows, and the employment prospects for new graduates are excellent. We’ll look back from the low point of the next inevitable business cycle and think of the period beginning in 2003 as the “good old days.” No amount of negative demagoging by Democratic naysayers can alter that reality.

The Democrats' 2004 campaign playbook called for a repeat of the 1992 strategy that brought Clinton victory over Bush the elder.  Having once started down that path, accusing Bush the younger of presiding over the worst economy since the Great Depression, they had to ride it for all it was worth.  No point now.

Comments

[Scott]

"The Democrats' 2004 campaign playbook called for a repeat of the 1992 strategy that brought Clinton victory over Bush the elder."

That is so true. They Bob Shrummed themselves to death.

[Tom Bowler]

Aha!! Something we agree on!!

[Scott]

Perhaps this is something you've noticed already about blog commenting--it usually only occurs when the commenter feels strongly about a post, which then usually occurs where there is disagreement, not agreement. I read all of your posts so most of the time I'm silently agreeing with what you say!

[Tom Bowler]

I always knew you were a perceptive guy!

[Scott]

lol