Mike Thompson by Mike Thompson

Mike Thompson

Recommended

Comments (13) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. DrCanuck

    DrCanuck said, 8 months ago

    Uh….is this a good or bad thing, Mike?

  2. d_legendary1

    d_legendary1 said, 8 months ago

    Its below 8% so I call that progress.

  3. sw10mm

    sw10mm said, 8 months ago

    Hoping a 7.8 will pull his fat out of the fire? Wishful thinking.

  4. dtroutma

    dtroutma said, 8 months ago

    A tad over or under 8%, it’s still bad, but a joke. The REAL joke is that Republicans spent two+years making that a “magic number”, and now that it’s gone down, using the same calculations as always, their “strategy” is 98/8% blowing in the wind.

  5. onguard

    onguard said, 8 months ago

    The Real number is $4, as in Gas. Bye, Bye…Obama…..$4.50 in California…..Obama is in Cal. Is it now in Play?

  6. dtroutma

    dtroutma said, 8 months ago

    $8.57 a gallon for gas in New Zealand. Even though the companies (like the one “W” ran?) totally set any price they want for gas in the U.S.. The “refinery fire” joke, and the “the power went down for an hour” (My sister lives across from THAT refinery, and has for 50 years, it barely “burped”.) excuses for raising prices is criminal activity that would make any Mafia don smile.

  7. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, 8 months ago

    http://nation.foxnews.com/food-stamps/2012/10/08/number-americans-food-stamps-hits-another-record-high

    http://nation.foxnews.com/unemployment/2012/10/08/watch-chilling-ad-dinner-table

    Good Job Barry. You finally got the number back to where it was when you took office. To bad you did it by reducing the number of jobs available and not counting the people that are off unemployment benefits or just plain tried of looking for a job that does not exist.

    114K part time jobs does not a recovery make.

  8. DrCanuck

    DrCanuck said, 8 months ago

    @Bruce4671

    ^ Have you started drinking again or something?

  9. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, 8 months ago

    That may explain the debate performance. He was over at the Bureau of Labor Statistics cooking the books. Can’t be everywhere you know.

  10. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, 8 months ago

    @DrCanuck

    I’m way off my meds dude.

  11. ansonia

    ansonia said, 7 months ago

    What a coincidence!!!

    No encumbent has ever won an election with a number below 8%. And now just weeks before the election we have 7.8%!!!

    Amazing!

    Well not so much when you know that not ALL of the unemployed were counted.

  12. ansonia

    ansonia said, 7 months ago

    Oops. I meant “above” 8%.

  13. Dredpiraterobt$

    Dredpiraterobt$ said, 7 months ago

    @ansonia

    “What a coincidence!!!
    .
    No encumbent has ever won an election with a number [above] 8%”

    .
    What? Is 8% a magic number or something?
    .
    No it is not. Nor does the 8.2% or the 7.8%
    relate to any other “President’s unemployment numbers” All previouse presidents only counted people as unemployed for the first 13 weeks and after that they “fell off the unemployment rolls” because they supposedly “stopped looking for work” but perhaps you can tell the world, ansonia, when you are unemployed, and you are beyond your benefits period, after you apply for a job, to whom do you report that activity?
    .
    While you are collecting unemployment benefits you report to the unemployment office and tell them that you “was lookin when they saw you leanin up against a post!” But once they stop giving you money, they don’t want to see you any more.
    .
    Do you follow why the Republican talking point is bogus?

  14. Refresh Comments.