Top Menu

Follow Taylor on Twitter

Pres. Bill Clinton: If Republicans Supported Obama, Unemployment Would Be ’7.3 percent instead of the current 8-plus percent’

NOBODY CAN MAKE the case for Democrats and Pres. Obama better than William Jefferson Clinton.

Clinton also outlines what will happen if on Thursday the Supreme Court strikes down Obamacare or any part of the historic legislation. It begins with a backlash against Republicans. I’m more inclined to believe it will set a fire under Pres. Obama, which is needed right now, because we are currently under a mind-numbing march to a November election that so far is about absolutely nothing but buying the presidency.

From the Daily Beast:

In the 51 years since President Kennedy took the oath of office, Republicans have had 28 years in the White house; Democrats have had 23. In the same half century, the economy has produced 66 million private-sector jobs–42 million of them under the Democrats, 24 million under the Republicans. “No one states these facts,” Clinton asserts.

“When President Obama took office, it was four months after we suffered the biggest financial crash since the Great Depression,” he says. “The depth of it continued to persist through the first six or seven months of the president’s term.

“Then he passed his legislation, and it began to have an effect. In the last three or four months, the private sector has produced 4.3 million new jobs. That is 40 percent more than the 2.6 million jobs produced by the private sector in the seven years of the Bush administration before the financial meltdown. That’s another relevant fact that hardly anybody knows.”

By Clinton math, Republicans’ score on job creation since they were given control of the House is negative by 670,000 people. “They refused to back the president in his support for state and local government, and that has allowed 670,000 teachers, police officers, firefighters, and others to be laid off,” Clinton asserts. “If they had supported the president, the unemployment rate would be 7.3 percent instead of the current 8-plus percent.”

, , , , , , , , , ,

19 Responses to Pres. Bill Clinton: If Republicans Supported Obama, Unemployment Would Be ’7.3 percent instead of the current 8-plus percent’

  1. Art Pronin June 26, 2012 at 10:18 am #

    Bill making the sell! Hope your right-if scotus touches aca at all Obama will be super pissed. What about Holder’s contempt vote on thurs also? Do u think that would light a fire under Obama? Bipartisan games are over?!

  2. mjsmith June 26, 2012 at 10:31 am #

    If President Obama supported the Republicans, unemployment would be down even further.

    I also think that Bill CLinton is wrong about the People’s reaction th othe Supreme Court striking down all or some of the “Affordable Care Act”. The vast majority of the USA does not want it. It is obvious that the crazy bill will only drive the cost of health care up and the quality of health care down.

    • Taylor Marsh June 26, 2012 at 11:15 am #

      Well, you are proving one thing, which is that Pres. Obama spent 25% of his first term getting historic legislation passed WITHOUT MAKING SURE THE MARKETING MATCHED THE EFFORTS. That’s on Democrats as well.

      It also proved the back-room deals with Big Pharma & Big Private Insurance was a HORRIFIC miscalculation.

  3. secularhumanizinevoluter June 26, 2012 at 11:16 am #

    1.”If President Obama supported the Republicans, unemployment would be down even further.”

    The abso-fracking-lutely shit house rat (you know, the rats who LIKE it under the shit house!) crazy insanity of this statement is just beyond my ability to even comment on without pissing myself in hysterical laughter!!!!!!

    2.”I also think that Bill CLinton is wrong about the People’s reaction th othe Supreme Court striking down all or some of the “Affordable Care Act”. The vast majority of the USA does not want it.”

    That my Dear is a demonsterable lie.The vast, VAST majority of respondents to the survies either like it or think it DOESN’T GO FAR ENOUGH. You really need to lay off the faux not news and limpwithnoballs…at least if you live in or near Phia. Pa you won’t have to worry about that last one anymore.

    3.” It is obvious that the crazy bill will only drive the cost of health care up and the quality of health care down.”

    Unless they’ve changed the definition of “obvious” it is obvious you are about as in contact with reality as the repugnantklan/teabaggers are….oh wait…I forgot…sorry.

    • PWT June 26, 2012 at 1:26 pm #

      When you lable something a demonstrable lie, you should then demonstrate that it is a lie. For example, you might want to highlight some polls that prove your statement, like this:

      http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law

      or this:

      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html

      Those polls don’t support your statements, so why don’t you try to find some that do. You really must have taken some knock on your head back at those anti-war demonstrations, because it seems that it’s left you unable to make a coherent argument unless it’s to toss out insults using your made-up words and phrases.

      One might wonder what it is that drives your fascination with Rush Limbaugh’s sex life and anatomy, but I just chalk it up to that knock on the head.

      • Cujo359 June 26, 2012 at 2:19 pm #

        Neither of those links break down the question of opposition to the ACA by “too hot:too cold”, or any other way of discriminating why the people who oppose the bill oppose it. I’d say on the question of who didn’t prove jack, you two are about even.

        • PWT June 26, 2012 at 2:59 pm #

          If you bothered to click through to some of the individual polls, for example, at Real Clear Politics, the Reuter/Ipsos poll, you would have seen that the “too hot or too cold” question was asked and answered with the minority thinking that it does not go far enough, (37/54, 33/60 and then 22/68). Is that the kind of proof that you had in mind? So, initially, I was only demonstrating the correctness of the statement, “The vast majority of the USA does not want it”, which the links seem to prove. Then, there was the “too hot or too cold” qualifier, which the Reuters poll disproved. All the while, neither you nor sech bother to provide any link to anything to back up your statements.

          Winning!

          • Cujo359 June 26, 2012 at 3:57 pm #

            If you’d bothered to put those in your links instead of the meaningless ones, I wouldn’t have been in a position to have to guess at which ones you were discussing.

            Being lazy-minded isn’t winning.

          • secularhumanizinevoluter June 26, 2012 at 6:58 pm #

            “Winning”

            Sortta like the kid who just got his widdle butt paddled on the play ground picking up his ball and walking away yelling back I WON and starting to run.

      • secularhumanizinevoluter June 26, 2012 at 6:47 pm #

        http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/independents-oppose-healthcare-law/2012/06/24/id/443279

        “A good portion of the opposition to the healthcare law is because Americans want more reform, not less of it.”

        “The poll found that a large number of Americans – including about one-third of Republicans and independents who disagree with the law – oppose it because it does not go far enough to fix healthcare.”

        There’s the link, and that’s reuters, not some right wingnut polling source like rasmussen or RCP and there are the money shots.
        When you add together the numbers who support it or don’t because it doesn’t go far enough it demonstrates the lie that a majority of Americans don’t want National Health Care.

        • PWT June 27, 2012 at 11:36 am #

          If you’d read my response to Cujo, you’d have seen that I refereenced a Reuters/Ipsos poll to show the same result, though 1/3 thought that the law didn’t go far enough, 2/3 rejected it on other grounds. So, even though you finally found some data related to your point, it disproves rather than proves your point that, “The vast, VAST majority of respondents to the survies either like it or think it DOESN’T GO FAR ENOUGH”. Also, the polls that are found at RCP, if you’d bothered to look, are not single quesiton online polls, the least reliable, like the one that you sighted, they are the more standard phone interview polls that ask several questions and are taken at different time periods to show a trend. The trens, as demonstrated by the Reuters numbers that I posted, is decidedly negative, thus disproving your point; again.

      • secularhumanizinevoluter June 26, 2012 at 6:56 pm #

        “You really must have taken some knock on your head back at those anti-war demonstrations, because it seems that it’s left you unable to make a coherent argument unless it’s to toss out insults using your made-up words and phrases.”

        It appears to be quite the issue with you that you never had the strength of character to stand up and put yourself in any chance of physical harm defending your beliefs.

        “One might wonder what it is that drives your fascination with Rush Limbaugh’s sex life and anatomy, but I just chalk it up to that knock on the head.”

        Fascination? Being aware of the facts, public domain facts pointing out the rank hypocrisy of a pro war draft dodging, anti drug throw em in jail convicted drug addict,vocal defender of misoginistic, homophobic,racist wingnut family values, three time divorced(with NO children) defender of “traditional marriage is fascination? I’d judt call it seeing a pig and saying…it’s a pig.

        • PWT June 27, 2012 at 11:39 am #

          No, the thing about your continual references to Mr. Limbaugh are pointless. Just because a person holds some conservative beliefs, doesn’t mean that they’re a ditto-head. I’ve never listened to Mr. Limbaugh’s show, I don’t watch Fox News. Most people don’t. He’s an entertainer, by the way, his goal is to make money for himself.

  4. Ramsgate June 26, 2012 at 12:38 pm #

    If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
    Only naive and pusillanimous Democrats live in this dream and make-believe world hoping Republicans will support Democrats and Democratic Presidents. Those days are over. And Bill Clinton, more than anyone else should know that and stop talking such rubbish.

    Thing is Democrats never learn.

  5. StrideHyde June 26, 2012 at 1:49 pm #

    The vast majority of people don’t understand the ACA and thus follow the narrative, whether generated on the left or the right, that they are against it. Taylor is right, the White House did a monumentally poor job of explaining it to the public. So much for the “eloquent communicator.”

    • Lake Lady June 26, 2012 at 3:15 pm #

      Exactly stridehyde~ I don’t think the polls measure anything more than who won the propaganda war. The Obama administration did not even field an army.

      I am looking forward to a book on the topic. Why the Obama WH gave up the debate on health care? What could they have been thinking?

      • lynnette June 26, 2012 at 6:33 pm #

        I agree, Lake Lady.

      • jinbaltimore June 26, 2012 at 7:22 pm #

        Is it at all possible, that they didn’t give up…that they, you know, just might be, um…ineffective? I mean I know Obama allegedly ran a brilliant campaign and all of that in 08, but where has the evidence of savvy from his team been hiding since the election?

  6. fairmindedindependent June 26, 2012 at 7:28 pm #

    Bill Clinton was a awesome President. Our economy was good and things were great until George Bush came in and it was over and it seems President Obama seems to be going in the same path. This is making the rounds today, Missouri Senator Claira McCaskill is also skipping the Democratic National Convention.

.... a writer is someone who takes the universal whore of language
and turns her into a virgin again.  ~ erica jong