Just as they were about to say job ratings "disappointing", GOP changes it to "we can do better" aft - Polidicks

[QUOTE]The better-than-expected jobs numbers caught congressional Republicans, as well as economists, off guard. [B] They were poised to send out pre-written press releases about the 'disappointing' numbers. But some offices had to take time to adjust those email blasts, two congressional Republican sources told CNN, prompting a noticeable delay.[/B] House Speaker John Boehner and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor emailed out statements 40 minutes after The Labor Department announced the unemployment rate had dipped to 8.3% and the economy had added 243,000 jobs. They normally send out emails almost immediately. [B]Republicans leaders certainly had a common refrain of welcoming the lower than expected unemployment numbers, but House Speaker John Boehner in a release also warned, “[W]e must do better.” [/B] Majority Leader Cantor sounded a more positive note in a statement saying, “[W]e are finally seeing some good news in today’s jobs report.” Cantor added, “These numbers are encouraging, especially for those millions of Americans out of work, but we should aim even higher.” Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus released a statement welcoming the news of lower unemployment but added, “[F]ar too many Americans are still without work. Our economy remains unacceptably weak, and families across the country are still struggling to make ends meet.” Priebus’s statement sent out to media about an hour and a half after the government released the January jobs numbers also called for President Obama to be a one-term president. He usually sends out a statement just minutes after The Labor Department’s monthly jobs report.[/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/03/congressional-republicans-on-jobs-numbers-dont-hit-send-yet/[/url]

This is the biggest problem I see for the republicans in the general election. Campaigning on Obama's poor job creation would have been great if the numbers were low or we were actually losing jobs. But, trying to make the case that, while they themselves call the reports "encouraging", we would be doing even better if it weren't for Obama is a much tougher sell.

[QUOTE=BearsOnFire;34554185]This is the biggest problem I see for the republicans in the general election. Campaigning on Obama's poor job creation would have been great if the numbers were low or we were actually losing jobs. But, trying to make the case that, while they themselves call the reports "encouraging", we would be doing even better if it weren't for Obama is a much tougher sell.[/QUOTE] I agree. Especially when you look at Mitt Romney, who will probably get the nomination. We first got into this mess because of wealthy people wanting more wealth. What sense does it make to elect a CEO of all things after how much they have been demonized, especially since the AIG scandal. What has Mitt Romney done to prove that he's one of the "good guys"? Men like Bill Gates or Warren Buffet.

-snip-

This is what happens when your party objective is not to improve America, but to prevent Obama's re-election. The Republican party is playing a short game, and combined with their terrible economic policies would do more harm to America at this point in time. [editline]5th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;34554564]Mitt Romney was never a CEO and he donates a substantial amount of money to charity[/QUOTE] He was the CEO of Bain Capital.

I wish election campaigns proved to be something other than the world's largest contest of one upmanship between some of the biggest assholes in the world.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;34554564]Mitt Romney was never a CEO and he donates a substantial amount of money to charity[/QUOTE] Donating to charity allows for him to dodge taxes.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;34554564]Mitt Romney was never a CEO and he donates a substantial amount of money to charity[/QUOTE] Oh man that's funny.

[QUOTE=Lone_Star94;34558213]Donating to charity allows for him to dodge taxes.[/QUOTE] How? Sure, you can deduct charitable donations, but that isn't dodging taxes - he still doesn't get the money he donated.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;34554564]Mitt Romney was never a CEO and he donates a substantial amount of money to charity[/QUOTE] I saw a graph of his income versus donations once. He donated about a sixth of his total income, but a third of that went to the Church of Mormon. [editline]5th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Lone_Star94;34558213]Donating to charity allows for him to dodge taxes.[/QUOTE] Yeah, no.

[QUOTE]Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus[/QUOTE] I can't get over how stupid that name sounds

[QUOTE=Habsburg;34561054]I can't get over how stupid that name sounds[/QUOTE] His name sounds like something horrible. Something probably related to santorum or the area it seeps from.

Hey guys, remember when Obama completely and totally destroyed America like he has done/is doing? Yea, neither can they. Also fuck yea 300th post

[QUOTE=Hidole555;34554246]I agree. Especially when you look at Mitt Romney, who will probably get the nomination. We first got into this mess because of wealthy people wanting more wealth. What sense does it make to elect a CEO of all things after how much they have been demonized, especially since the AIG scandal. What has Mitt Romney done to prove that he's one of the "good guys"? Men like Bill Gates or Warren Buffet.[/QUOTE] Gates&Buffet 2012

[QUOTE=willer;34562861]Hey guys, remember when Obama completely and totally destroyed America like he has done/is doing? Yea, neither can they. Also fuck yea 300th post[/QUOTE] He's fucked up my life. I don't want somebody with cancer receiving health care. /sarcasm

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;34554564]Mitt Romney was never a CEO and he donates a substantial amount of money to charity [/QUOTE] and donations are a tax write off

Next thing you know they'll be claiming it was because they took back the House.