"43 consecutive months of over 8% unemployment" Right wing media talking point?

[old timey villain]

So I went on facebook yesterday and all of my conservative FB friends were talking about the jobs report, negatively of course. In many of the statuses and posts I saw this factoid. In fact, I've seen this factoid pop up on social media every month this past year. The thing is, I wouldn't expect most of these people to know this figure off the tops of their heads. So is this a talking point that is repeated Ad Nauseum in right wing media like Fox? This is an honest question coming from someone who doesn't watch enough Fox or listen to enough Limbaugh to know for sure.

And if it is, do you think it's effective? Or is it merely affirming the beliefs of the anti Obama crowd?

[Yank2133]

It isn't a lie........but it is a very disingenuous statement.

But seeing how Obama's numbers have been fairly consistent, I don't think it is working. People can be stupid, but they do remember late 2008 and early 2009.

[Adam Griffin]

all of my conservative FB friends

You have conservative friends?!

Seriously, this is a right-wing talking point BUT we have a corresponding one of our own ("twenty/thirty some-odd months of private sector job growth"). We actually splice our indicator out of a broader set of data, so make of it what you will.

[old timey villain]

Never said it was a lie, but it could be disingenuous. Since when is 8% unemployment a bar we set to measure economic strength? If the unemployment rate was 7.1 instead, people would be shouting about 43 consecutive months of over 7% unemployment. I mean, the rate never dropped below 7% during Reagan's entire first term.

Anyway, no one's arguing that the unemployment rate is low, that's for damn sure. But to hear one talking point mentioned over and over again makes me think that there is a concerted effort in right wing media circles to put it in the public's consciousness.

[old timey villain]

all of my conservative FB friends

You have conservative friends?!

Seriously, this is a right-wing talking point BUT we have a corresponding one of our own ("twenty/thirty some-odd months of private sector job growth"). We actually splice our indicator out of a broader set of data, so make of it what you will.

haha, yeah I must admit I have a few. But we rarely talk politics.

Ironically, when Obama said "the private sector is doing fine" he really wasn't too far off base, when you compare that to public sector job growth which has been negative for a long time now.

[J. J.]

It isn't a lie........but it is a very disingenuous statement.

But seeing how Obama's numbers have been fairly consistent, I don't think it is working. People can be stupid, but they do remember late 2008 and early 2009.

Well, it is an accurate statement, and Obama did say that we'd never see it that high, if we did pass the stimulus.

The only real difference, economically, was that we didn't have deflation.  Arguably, that was an economic good.  Politically, you are free to say to your friends, "Obama gave us higher prices."  I don't think that will convince them too much (unless they have good understanding of economics).

[rwoy]

You know ... if you compare Unemployment under Obama to Unemployment under Reagan the #'s are shockingly similar.  When Obama came into office it was 7.8% whereas for Reagan it was 7.5% (and since Republicans blamed Carter in 1980 & 1984 I guess we should blame W Bush).  During Reagan's first term unemployment spiked up past 10% and by early 1984 hadn't gone back down to 7.5%.

So ... based on current Republican logic I guess Ronald Reagan hated America, was terrible for the economy, and should have been voted out of office in 1984.

[Vosem]

Since when is 8% unemployment a bar we set to measure economic strength? If the unemployment rate was 7.1 instead, people would be shouting about 43 consecutive months of over 7% unemployment.

True, but so what?

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

You know ... if you compare Unemployment under Obama to Unemployment under Reagan the #'s are shockingly similar.  When Obama came into office it was 7.8% whereas for Reagan it was 7.5% (and since Republicans blamed Carter in 1980 & 1984 I guess we should blame W Bush).  During Reagan's first term unemployment spiked up past 10 11% and by early 1984 hadn't gone back down to 7.5%.

So ... based on current Republican logic I guess Ronald Reagan hated America, was terrible for the economy, and should have been voted out of office in 1984.

[J. J.]

You know ... if you compare Unemployment under Obama to Unemployment under Reagan the #'s are shockingly similar.  When Obama came into office it was 7.8% whereas for Reagan it was 7.5% (and since Republicans blamed Carter in 1980 & 1984 I guess we should blame W Bush).  During Reagan's first term unemployment spiked up past 10% and by early 1984 hadn't gone back down to 7.5%.

So ... based on current Republican logic I guess Ronald Reagan hated America, was terrible for the economy, and should have been voted out of office in 1984.

There was a major difference.  Inflation, which dropped from 11.8 to 4.3.  

That is where people saw an improvement.  There was a sense that Reagan had made things better.

[milhouse24]

I'm sure all the unemployed Americans are glad Obama has the country on the right track!

[MorningInAmerica]

I mean, the rate never dropped below 7% during Reagan's entire first term.

You know ... if you compare Unemployment under Obama to Unemployment under Reagan the #'s are shockingly similar.  When Obama came into office it was 7.8% whereas for Reagan it was 7.5% (and since Republicans blamed Carter in 1980 & 1984 I guess we should blame W Bush).  During Reagan's first term unemployment spiked up past 10% and by early 1984 hadn't gone back down to 7.5%.

So ... based on current Republican logic I guess Ronald Reagan hated America, was terrible for the economy, and should have been voted out of office in 1984.

The difference between the election year Reagan economy and election year Obama economy is that Reagan had been experiencing a steady drop in unemployment for the last 2 years of his term, starting at a high of 10.8% in December 1982, and dropping pretty much all throughout 1983 and 1984. In the year before the 1984 election alone, unemployment dropped from 8.5 to 7.2%. That's good enough to get you an 18 point landslide, apparently. The Obama unemployment rates have hovered around the low to mid 8% since December 2011.
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet Job growth per month was also a key difference between the 84 Regan economy and 12 Obama economy.