So repugs cooked the books on unemployment figures but...

[brush]

where are all the news show hosts on MSNBC, CNN and all the non-cable, MSM channels correcting their wholesale broadcasting of the doctored figures yesterday?

They should be calling out such blatant, obviously intentional lies which make trump look better—if 13.3% unemployment is somehow better.

[stopbush]

1. A lie gets halfway around the world...

[Hoyt]

2. They all said it, even financial news groups explained the problem.

It wasn’t hidden, heck it’s right in the report for anyone to read. The 13.3% is consistent with last month’s methodology, and indicates a bit of improvement.

Question is, will it last and will Congress extend special unemployment benefits past July?

[ProfessorGAC]

3. It's On Page One

On top of what you wrote, it's standard procedure to omit assignable causes to better compare data over time.
They give the exact omitted value and the unadjusted rate right on the same page with the adjusted number. They're clearly not trying to hide anything or cook the books
The bigger issue that dems need to blast is that after redacting COVID caused unemployed, the UE number is 13%!!!
In October 2016, it was 3.5%.
9.5% of workers no longer have a job, that had one 4 years ago.
"Are you better off now..."

[brush]

8. But the big message that got out was that the rate was lower...

because trump's re-opening policies were working when in fact the rate was actually higher than it was last month.

[ProfessorGAC]

9. That's Not Book Cooking

That's lazy journalism and good salesmanship by the Rs.
We need to get better about punchy retorts and get the lazy media to bite our hook.
We're consistently fishing with no bait!
It's appallingly obvious that dem ideas are better for working folks, but Rs still win.
They should be a marginalized minority, but dems need to stop getting into the weeds, go light on details, attack, and refute in pithy memorable ways.
This UE down thing could have been neutered by simply, as a chorus, saying "But, it's still 13%, and four years ago it was 3.5%". But, we're worrying about book cooking and hidden (not) data. Not just here at DU, either.
IT'S STILL 13%. NO TIME FOR A VICTORY LAP.
Geez, republicans have Luntz. We can find someone more talented than him!

[brush]

10. But it wasn't 13%, it's 16%. If the 13% message gets out...

and trump tweets it (and he did) that it's so much lower than predicted to his millions of twitter followers, it's the same as cooking the books in his favor.

[ProfessorGAC]

13. His Followers Weren't Voting D Anyway

We need to sell to the swing voter that "Whether it's 13 or really 16%, it's nothing to brag about. It was 3.5% when Obama left office."
No the cult won't believe either, but swing voters can be sold that bragging about 13% is stupid when just 4 years ago it was 3.5.
Don't focus on the numbers.
Focus on the message that 13% unemployment rate is terrible.

[DrToast]

16. No, the rate was not higher last month

If you want to use the adjusted figure, then it went from 19.7% to 16.3%.

If you want to use the unadjusted figure, then it went from 14.7% to 13.3%.

Either way, it went down.

[brush]

4. They all said what? All the shows I watched trumpeted the...

13.3% figure and how trump was tweeting the great news and the economy was now a skyrocket.

None of them I saw said the real figure was 16+% and not the 3% lower figure—at least nowhere near as loudly and prominently as they broadcast the lower figure first. The message got out as the repugs wanted, the figure was much lower because of trump's push to re-open the economy. Thus, trump was right again.

[Hoyt]

5. Every news I watched were all over it. There have been at least 7 threads here on it.

People know 13% Isn’t good, nor is 16%. Some don’t care, but the difference between 16 and 13 isn’t much in this context.

[brush]

6. IMO it's quite a difference as 16% was a worsening from last month's...

Last edited Sat Jun 6, 2020, 06:43 PM - Edit history (1)

figures while 13% was an "improvement" that trump and the repugs could laud and say that his re-opening policies are saving the economy.

We can't let up on them and allow their lies to be messaged loudly and clearly but the real figures a whispered after thought. And since when is a 3% difference in unemployment not much since it represents hundreds of thousands of people still out of work?

[Hoyt]

11. Sorry, but I think you are comparing the wrong things.

“In April, the BLS said the real unemployment rate was likely about 19.7 percent, not 14.7 percent. Economists said the big takeaway is that it's hard to collect real-time data during a pandemic and that while the unemployment rate remains high — likely more than 16 percent — it has declined a little from April.“

https://www.google.com/search?q=unemployment+rate+in+april&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari

But, one month doesn’t mean a lot. Hope it continues going down, but I’m not counting on it.

[brush]

12. It's still not 13%, which is the message that got out.

[Blue_true]

15. Let just keep our eyes on the ball.

As we go toward Election Day, Trump is going to have decent and bad news. I believe that at the end of that, enough American voters will conclude that they can't take four more years of this insanity, and Biden will be elected our next President.

Let's just focus on our plans and execute on them.

[Cha]

7. Don Winslow tweet on it..

Link to tweet

[uponit7771]

17. +1, this is the 3rd month for that "error" too. BLS is full of shit

[C_U_L8R]

14. Wall Street is being played for suckers... or conspirators.