EIGHT YEARS OF BUSH VS. EIGHT YEARS OF OBAMA

[mostpost]

At the end of the Bush Administration unemployment stood at 7.3%.
At the end of the Obama Administration unemploynent was 4.7%.

3,509,000 jobs were created during the Bush Presidency.
9,718,000 jubs were created during the Obama Presidency.

The U6 unemployment rate at the end of Bush's term was 13.6%
At the end of Obama's term it was 9.2%.
(In case you haven't been listening U6 includes those who have stopped looking for work.)

The National Debt increased 76.6% while Bush was president.
The National Debt increased 44% while Obama was president.

There were 4,853 military fatalities during Bush's reign.
There were 2,079 military fatalities during Obama's reign.

3,028 Americans died in Terrorist attacks on American soil under Bush.
146 died in similar attacks under Obama.

14.6% of Americans were uninsured in 2008.
11% were uninsured in 2016.

Housing starts in 2008 were 905,500 units
Housing starts in 2016 were 1,111,800 units.

At the start of 2001 real Median income was $56,571; at the start of 2009 it was $54,998; and it is now $56,516.

At the beginning of 2001 there were 3,332,000 working part time for economic reasons. At the beginning of 2009 that number had increased to 8,046,000. Today that number has dropped to 5,598,000.

OBAMA WINS.

[MONEY]

I didn't vote for either of them.
They were both awful.

[chadk66]

you forgot the numbers on food stamps, out of the work force, etc. etc. and how many workers in the Bush era fell off the unemployment percentage due to various reasons vs the same thing in the Obama era. anybody with a piss ant sized brain understands the unemployment number isn't the actual unemployment number.

[LottaKash]

Originally Posted by MONEY

I didn't vote for either of them.
They were both awful.

16 years of "Dum & Dumber".....and, 24 years of the same, if you throw in the couple trying to mimic Juan and Eva Peron...

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by mostpost

OBAMA WINS.

Yep, you nailed it. The unprecedented Obama era of prosperity is why American voters overwhelming supported "Obama's third term", to be carried on by his surrogate, Hillary Clinton, further implementing Obama's policies and stunning record of economic growth.

[ElKabong]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Yep, you nailed it. The unprecedented Obama era of prosperity is why American voters overwhelming supported "Obama's third term", to be carried on by his surrogate, Hillary Clinton, further implementing Obama's policies and stunning record of economic growth.

Not to mention losing over 1000 local, state, national seats via elections.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by ElKabong

Not to mention losing over 1000 local, state, national seats via elections.

Yup...even Obama himself said at one point that the election was all about his policies. And all of us know how that turned out...except for Mosty.
The Dems are in control in only five states. For the math-challenged libs out there, 10% of the country ain't a majority.

[woodtoo]

Take away California....

[Ocala Mike]

Originally Posted by boxcar

The Dems are in control in only five states. For the math-challenged libs out there, 10% of the country ain't a majority.

I think that's what they call disingenuous. 5/50 is 10%, sure, but what is the population of those five states and how much do those states contribute to the overall economy of the US?

As far as your use of the term majority, the Dem nominee secured that by nearly 3 million votes, so there's that.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Ocala Mike

I think that's what they call disingenuous. 5/50 is 10%, sure, but what is the population of those five states and how much do those states contribute to the overall economy of the US?

As far as your use of the term majority, the Dem nominee secured that by nearly 3 million votes, so there's that.

Are you trying to use logic on Boxcar?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Ocala Mike

I think that's what they call disingenuous. 5/50 is 10%, sure, but what is the population of those five states and how much do those states contribute to the overall economy of the US?

As far as your use of the term majority, the Dem nominee secured that by nearly 3 million votes, so there's that.

Did you fail civics 101? I stand by my statement: 10% of the country since we're a representative republic, a/k/a an INDIRECT democracy. What counts in national elections are the votes of each state that were cast by the residents of those states, not each individual in the country as a whole.

And how much a state contributes to the nation's overall economy is not a legitimate criterion for sovereign statehood.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Are you trying to use logic on Boxcar?

Yeah, he was. I suppose that would entitle him to a participation award?

[RunForTheRoses]

Originally Posted by LottaKash

16 years of "Dum & Dumber".....and, 24 years of the same, if you throw in the couple trying to mimic Juan and Eva Peron...

Yeah I was never a fan of Bush the Lesser or his Pappy Bush the Elder. Remember Shrubya 1 coined the term Voodoo Economics and if you read his lips they weren't very truthful. I don't believe the left wing meme that they wee stupid, they were Yankee Yale grads who were adept at playing the awe shilucks Texas rancher.

[Inner Dirt]

Forgot to add race rioting was up under Obama and people that are nostalgic about the past and missed the 60's South really enjoyed them.

[Greyfox]

Bush, Obama, and Carter are running nose and nose as to who is the worst President in my lifetime.
Why Mostie would start a comparative thread about two losers who've run the National Debt sky high is beyond my comprehension.