<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 2010: More bad numbers for Dems</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/12/2010-more-bad-numbers-for-dems/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/12/2010-more-bad-numbers-for-dems/</link>
	<description>HotAir.com&#039;s Greenroom</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 00:41:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Increasingly Unpopular Barack Obama</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/12/2010-more-bad-numbers-for-dems/comment-page-1/#comment-40689</link>
		<dc:creator>The Increasingly Unpopular Barack Obama</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12469#comment-40689</guid>
		<description>[...] Ed Morissey notes they are inexplicably re-weighting more and more Dems into these polls, such that even as Gallup shows the party gap closing to zero they are at +13/+14% [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Ed Morissey notes they are inexplicably re-weighting more and more Dems into these polls, such that even as Gallup shows the party gap closing to zero they are at +13/+14% [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Token Conservative &#183; Much good political polling news for Republicans</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/12/2010-more-bad-numbers-for-dems/comment-page-1/#comment-40602</link>
		<dc:creator>Token Conservative &#183; Much good political polling news for Republicans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 06:51:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12469#comment-40602</guid>
		<description>[...] at HotAir provides further analysis of that Gallup poll and a similar Pew poll. He notes from the details of the Gallup poll that the superficial preference difference of 4% [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] at HotAir provides further analysis of that Gallup poll and a similar Pew poll. He notes from the details of the Gallup poll that the superficial preference difference of 4% [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: How Do We Stop Our Apparent Slide to Obamaism ? 2010 &#171; Angry Californian</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/12/2010-more-bad-numbers-for-dems/comment-page-1/#comment-40038</link>
		<dc:creator>How Do We Stop Our Apparent Slide to Obamaism ? 2010 &#171; Angry Californian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 08:17:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12469#comment-40038</guid>
		<description>[...] Read: 2010: More bad numbers for Dems [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Read: 2010: More bad numbers for Dems [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GnuBreed</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/12/2010-more-bad-numbers-for-dems/comment-page-1/#comment-40031</link>
		<dc:creator>GnuBreed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 06:27:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12469#comment-40031</guid>
		<description>To see how the job market is, one only has to look in the Sunday want ads section. Over two years, our local paper has declined from six pages of ads to one. The stock market has rallied quite nicely since February, but a good chunk of that could be attributed to the decline of the dollar of nearly 17% YTD. Add to that historically low interest rates, which improves stock dividend payments over T-Bills for rate of return.
 
The commercial real estate market is due to crash soon. The FDIC is about to enter negative cash on hand; Fannie &amp; Freddie need more money from the govt now. This is not a bright upbeat picture likely to improve the employment numbers.
 
I suggest limiting Xmas purchases to make the retail sales picture look lousy (hey, as a side effect you will have more cash!). This will add to the negative outlook and confidence, driving unemployment higher. It is for a good cause as it makes every Dem more vulnerable.
 
Throw the bums out and confidence will come roaring back; Americans are basically optimistic people.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To see how the job market is, one only has to look in the Sunday want ads section. Over two years, our local paper has declined from six pages of ads to one. The stock market has rallied quite nicely since February, but a good chunk of that could be attributed to the decline of the dollar of nearly 17% YTD. Add to that historically low interest rates, which improves stock dividend payments over T-Bills for rate of return.</p>
<p>The commercial real estate market is due to crash soon. The FDIC is about to enter negative cash on hand; Fannie &amp; Freddie need more money from the govt now. This is not a bright upbeat picture likely to improve the employment numbers.</p>
<p>I suggest limiting Xmas purchases to make the retail sales picture look lousy (hey, as a side effect you will have more cash!). This will add to the negative outlook and confidence, driving unemployment higher. It is for a good cause as it makes every Dem more vulnerable.</p>
<p>Throw the bums out and confidence will come roaring back; Americans are basically optimistic people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: milemarker2020</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/12/2010-more-bad-numbers-for-dems/comment-page-1/#comment-39952</link>
		<dc:creator>milemarker2020</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:03:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12469#comment-39952</guid>
		<description>I think that we should be careful not to get too gleeful. The recession officially started in December 2007 according to NBER. Most people would agree that the credit crunch recession started last September. Can we safely say that the recession ended with the growth in GDP (quarter to quarter) that happen this year between the 1st and 2nd quarters? If so then we should be looking at a turnaround in unemployment coming early next year. The real question is how strong will be the employment numbers be (not the rate of unemployment) come next October. If the amount of jobs created per month is robust, let&#039;s say about 200,000 to 300,000 jobs created per month, the Dems may dodge a bullet. They will suffer losses but not nearly as much as would happen under the scenario of 12% unemployment.

I will go out on a limb and say if the employment rate hits 12% or more, that Obama is indeed a one-term president. I frankly can&#039;t imagine the rate of unemployment going that high.  In a strange way, if the rate goes that high I wonder if it doesn&#039;t vindicate the people who suggested the economy was at the precipice last October and would then bolster Obama&#039;s claim that the stimulus kept us from a far greater calamity than what we are experiencing now. Unfortunately for Obama, he so overhyped himself and over promised what he could do to turn things around that he won&#039;t get a pass for inheriting a depression era type recession.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that we should be careful not to get too gleeful. The recession officially started in December 2007 according to NBER. Most people would agree that the credit crunch recession started last September. Can we safely say that the recession ended with the growth in GDP (quarter to quarter) that happen this year between the 1st and 2nd quarters? If so then we should be looking at a turnaround in unemployment coming early next year. The real question is how strong will be the employment numbers be (not the rate of unemployment) come next October. If the amount of jobs created per month is robust, let&#8217;s say about 200,000 to 300,000 jobs created per month, the Dems may dodge a bullet. They will suffer losses but not nearly as much as would happen under the scenario of 12% unemployment.</p>
<p>I will go out on a limb and say if the employment rate hits 12% or more, that Obama is indeed a one-term president. I frankly can&#8217;t imagine the rate of unemployment going that high.  In a strange way, if the rate goes that high I wonder if it doesn&#8217;t vindicate the people who suggested the economy was at the precipice last October and would then bolster Obama&#8217;s claim that the stimulus kept us from a far greater calamity than what we are experiencing now. Unfortunately for Obama, he so overhyped himself and over promised what he could do to turn things around that he won&#8217;t get a pass for inheriting a depression era type recession.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rovin</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/12/2010-more-bad-numbers-for-dems/comment-page-1/#comment-39913</link>
		<dc:creator>Rovin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:30:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12469#comment-39913</guid>
		<description>Here&#039;s a thought.....Obama&#039;s heading to Asia for an economic summit.  I wonder if Obama will ask China for more money using his CRA as a model, since it worked so well here in the U.S. ???

If the Chinese were smart, they&#039;d tell Obama to fill out a loan application, and be sure to list assets not propped up by federal money from their worn-out printing presses.

&lt;em&gt;(perhaps two well-used Greek pillars will have some value) &lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s a thought&#8230;..Obama&#8217;s heading to Asia for an economic summit.  I wonder if Obama will ask China for more money using his CRA as a model, since it worked so well here in the U.S. ???</p>
<p>If the Chinese were smart, they&#8217;d tell Obama to fill out a loan application, and be sure to list assets not propped up by federal money from their worn-out printing presses.</p>
<p><em>(perhaps two well-used Greek pillars will have some value) </em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rovin</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/12/2010-more-bad-numbers-for-dems/comment-page-1/#comment-39912</link>
		<dc:creator>Rovin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:14:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12469#comment-39912</guid>
		<description>The irony is, the lamestream media, who loves to reflect on past perfomances, has totally ignored the fack that shortly before the Democrats took power in &#039;06 unemployment was at 4.5%---(ninety-five percent of this nation WAS working)

If the Democrats had produced this staggering figure, and if a Republican Party had, (in three short years), produced even an 8% unemployment rate, THE MEDIA WOULD BE SCREAMING TO HIGH HEAVEN.  And there would be no reports of &quot;recovery&quot; or an end to a recession.  The &quot;media&quot; and the wall street &quot;reporters&quot; love to use the the phrase, &quot;unemployment is a &quot;lagging indicator&quot; and jobs will come as the economy improves&quot;.  But will it &quot;improve&quot; under this administration&#039;s run-away spending policies?

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Without massive federal spending reductions taxes must and will rise.&lt;/strong&gt; When they rise, more unemployment will result. How can the Dems not understand that simple fact? Do we need food riots before they get it? The small businessperson has gone Galt, as the idiot wind will sweep all the Democrats before it, and the future will be very difficult.

MTF on November 12, 2009 at 7:57 AM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

As MTF mentions above, we are on a downward spiral for further unemployment and the Democrats just don&#039;t get it.  Enormous deficit spending and increasing the national debt will send this false market---phony federal supplied cash infusion---crashing.  Lagging indicators indeed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The irony is, the lamestream media, who loves to reflect on past perfomances, has totally ignored the fack that shortly before the Democrats took power in &#8217;06 unemployment was at 4.5%&#8212;(ninety-five percent of this nation WAS working)</p>
<p>If the Democrats had produced this staggering figure, and if a Republican Party had, (in three short years), produced even an 8% unemployment rate, THE MEDIA WOULD BE SCREAMING TO HIGH HEAVEN.  And there would be no reports of &#8220;recovery&#8221; or an end to a recession.  The &#8220;media&#8221; and the wall street &#8220;reporters&#8221; love to use the the phrase, &#8220;unemployment is a &#8220;lagging indicator&#8221; and jobs will come as the economy improves&#8221;.  But will it &#8220;improve&#8221; under this administration&#8217;s run-away spending policies?</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Without massive federal spending reductions taxes must and will rise.</strong> When they rise, more unemployment will result. How can the Dems not understand that simple fact? Do we need food riots before they get it? The small businessperson has gone Galt, as the idiot wind will sweep all the Democrats before it, and the future will be very difficult.</p>
<p>MTF on November 12, 2009 at 7:57 AM</p></blockquote>
<p>As MTF mentions above, we are on a downward spiral for further unemployment and the Democrats just don&#8217;t get it.  Enormous deficit spending and increasing the national debt will send this false market&#8212;phony federal supplied cash infusion&#8212;crashing.  Lagging indicators indeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MTF</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/11/12/2010-more-bad-numbers-for-dems/comment-page-1/#comment-39907</link>
		<dc:creator>MTF</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 12:57:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=12469#comment-39907</guid>
		<description>Unemployment as high as Rosenberg forecasts may be a political disaster for the Democrats, but it will certainly be civic disaster for America.  Those are huge numbers, 12% unemployment or more, and unrest beyond simple politics could be in store.  

How will the Congress and administration react to that, remembering that &quot;no crisis should go unused&quot;, or whatever Rhambo said after the financial crash. Will we see restrictions on free speech and the right to assemble?  

Without massive federal spending reductions taxes must and will rise.  When they rise, more unemployment will result.  How can the Dems not understand that simple fact?  Do we need food riots before they get it?  The small businessperson has gone Galt, as the idiot wind will sweep all the Democrats before it, and the future will be very difficult.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unemployment as high as Rosenberg forecasts may be a political disaster for the Democrats, but it will certainly be civic disaster for America.  Those are huge numbers, 12% unemployment or more, and unrest beyond simple politics could be in store.  </p>
<p>How will the Congress and administration react to that, remembering that &#8220;no crisis should go unused&#8221;, or whatever Rhambo said after the financial crash. Will we see restrictions on free speech and the right to assemble?  </p>
<p>Without massive federal spending reductions taxes must and will rise.  When they rise, more unemployment will result.  How can the Dems not understand that simple fact?  Do we need food riots before they get it?  The small businessperson has gone Galt, as the idiot wind will sweep all the Democrats before it, and the future will be very difficult.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
