Redstate

Isn't there also some evidence from recent history to suggest that we can expect an upward revision in a month or so? "Ooops, did I say payrolls are down 4,000? I meant they're up 56,000. My bad."

Every single month in the leadup to the 2000 election, the initial reports would be MORE favorable, only to have to be revised downward a couple of months later.

In the leadup to the 2004 election, the expectations would always be high, only to be "unexpectedly" lower, and then again, to be revised upward a couple of months later when the actual figures came in.

Sure seems like bureaucracies lean left!

Come on, how long have Republicans been crowing about our awesome GDP growth (all due to Bush's tax cuts, of course), only to have GDP growth numbers revised down months or years later?

According to current BEA numbers, GDP grown has been totally mediocre under Bush, but Republicans are still excited about our awesome economy.

economy take off, huh! Especially after the tech bubble and 911. And upping cap gains rates might have wiped out poverty (defined as having only one house, two cars car and cable tv) for the first time in the history of Earth!

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

GDP growth was better under Clinton than under Bush. Labor participation was better under Clinton than under Bush. Clinton consistently shrank the deficit, Bush has not.

Please continue to throw up your oh no, 70% tax rate! strawman and your tech bubble! 9/11! excuses, though. As though anyone wants to raise taxes that high or we've never had recessions or disasters before.

correction killing inflation and tax rate cuts. Clinton did a good job, esp after the Gingrich whuppin'. Bush has done a good job, esp given the tech bubble and 911. Another major factor in the 90's was the efficuency born of technology advances.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

Did you notice that June just got revised from +132k to +69k?
Did you notice that July just got revised from +92k to +68k?
That info got lost in the negative 4k instead of 100k shock.

Something like 64k manufacturing/construction jobs got lost. When we need something like 150k per month just to keep up with population growth even no net change is really a loss.

What "run" would that be?

A run of mediocre GDP growth? Under Bush, the best year (2004) had GDP growth of 3.6%. Under Clinton, we had 6 years better than that. Under Bush I, we had two years that were pretty close. Under Reagan, we had 4 years that were better and 2 years that were very close.

Or was it a run of mediocre job growth? Our labor force participation rate is down under 66% from a high of over 67% at the end of Clinton's term.

Or was the it the run of record deficits and debt?

There are so many "runs" to choose from, you are certainly right that our economy needs to take a breath.

than under Bush, and I'm just curious if you attribute the difference to any of the policies of either administration?

There are so many things that go into the economy, that is probably impossible to answer. I would say that it is possible that uncertainly over the war and over high deficits had some impact, and that these were things over which Bush had a significant amount of control.