Wasserman Schultz: Under 'conservative Republican presidents we were losing 750,000 jobs a month'

[onehandle]

Source: Politifact

It’s been nearly eight years since George W. Bush was president, but Democrats still plan to run against him. Certainly, that’s what Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz promised on the eve of the first Democratic presidential debate.

"There are so many people who are focused on making sure we can look at the fact that, when we had a conservative Republican president, we were losing 750,000 jobs a month," Wasserman Schultz said on CNN’s State of the Union Oct. 11, 2015. "We’ve come through that -- 67 straight months of job growth in the private sector. People are no longer losing their homes. That’s the contrast we’ll talk about."

The DNC press office told us that Wasserman Schultz was thinking of President George W. Bush, and that the time period she had in mind were the last few months of his presidency, November through January. President Barack Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, so it’s reasonable to count that month as part of the Bush legacy.

We pulled up the Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers and Wasserman Schultz is on solid ground.

Read more: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/oct/11/debbie-wasserman-schultz/wasserman-schultz-under-conservative-republican-pr/

[Wilms]

1. Wilms: Under Wasserman Schultz we are losing elections. n/t

:

[onehandle]

3. Under right-wing designed gerrymandering of Congressional districts we are losing elections.

That's about to end.

[daleanime]

4. Yeahup.....

Thanks Bernie!

[Wilms]

6. That doesn't help, neither does the DNC.

"Let me be very clear," said Sanders, who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination and caucuses with Democrats in the Senate. "In my view, Democrats will not retain the White House, will not regain the Senate, will not gain the House and will not be successful in dozens of governor’s races unless we run a campaign which generates excitement and momentum and which produces a huge voter turnout."

Sanders made the comments at the DNC's summer meeting in Minneapolis, Minnesota, standing just steps from party officials like DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz. He suggested that his campaign was a model for the kind of "revolution" that Democrats had needed during the 2014 midterm elections, in which Republicans won nearly all close gubernatorial and congressional races and took control over a number of state legislatures.

"The Republicans did not win the midterm election in November," the senator said. "The Democrats lost that election because voter turnout was abysmally low, and millions of working people, minorities and young people gave up on politics as usual and stayed home."

"With all due respect, and I do not mean to insult anyone here, that will not happen with politics as usual," he continued. "The same old, same old will not be successful."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-explains-to-democrats-why-they-lose-elections_55e0bc4ee4b0aec9f35346ff

[Stevepol]

18. There's good evidence for another culprit here.

This cause is a kind of third tier of the present levels of criminal election engineering being practiced by the Repubs all across the country and particularly in the southern Red states. There, there are high levels of voter suppression that show few signs of diminishing any time soon. Then, there is increasing blatant gerymandering, which is increasing everywhere Repubs are in charge.

But at least these tactics are visible and measurable. The third tier of this Repub strategy of gaining complete control of the political machinery at the state level is something that goes constantly under the radar and that is the relentless red "tilt" in the counting of the votes (where results uniformly diverge from the unadjusted poll numbers in a red direction) that is almost certainly related to the programming and administration of the electronic counting of the votes by electronic voting machines supplied by far right organizations like ES&S and Dominion. The results of elections in most states and particularly in southern red states are not subject to audits or checks of any kind. It is, according to any real computer experts (not the hacks employed by the far-right voting machine companies themselves), "trivially easy" to program the vote counting to give any result desired and of course the easiest and least suspicious form of this vote rigging is just to program the machines to tilt the results enough to give results that are uniformly "narrow victories." As noted in the earlier post, in the 2014 midterm elections, "Republicans won nearly all close gubernatorial and congressional races and took control over a number of state legislatures."

What this means is that if the Dems win elections in a particular cycle, the overall result is always less than the polls would suggest it should have been and if the Repubs win, it's always more than polls suggest it should have been. This is just an accepted part of the landscape now and nobody questions it except statisticians who are amazed during every cycle with some of the results that just don't match what would be expected.

Everything that Bernie is saying is true about the loss of interest by the voters due to the failure to address the concerns of the vast majority of voters, and everything that is obviously happening with Repub chicanery and outright cheating BUT the last obstacle is just never addressed. People need to make this a constant chant: VERIFY THE VOTE!! VERIFY THE VOTE!! How? robust, required, random audits (at least 5%) for ALL ELECTIONS. And laws demanding that where there is statistical evidence of unfair vote counting, THE WHOLE ELECTION SHOULD BE RECOUNTED USING WHATEVER PAPER IS THERE TO HAND COUNT.

[dsc]

5. In fairness the election which cost us the House and a bunch of governorships was 2010

and Tim Kaine was chair then. She did pretty well in 2012 (we got a majority of the US House vote but lost due to gerrymandering, gained two Senate seats, and won the Presidency in convincing fashion. 2014 was another matter to be sure but much of the losses then can be attributed to the loss in 2010. The Senate is another matter that was a disaster.

[Wilms]

7. Thanks for the additional detail. n/t

[onecaliberal]

2. And your leadership has us losing elections to people who don't possess the brainpower of a slug.

[Plucketeer]

8. So

less debates makes us look good how??? Show me tangible evidence where DWS has created ONE JOB (not counting someone she might have added to her staff of late) DWS is NOT qualified to be orchestrating the party's aims and efforts. Running against Bush - yeah, I'm thrilled with that strategy. I adimre folks who go down the road - steering while looking in the rear view mirror!

[onehandle]

9. Half the number of candidates than in 2008 = Half the number of debates necessary.

Otherwise, you look like the GOP KKKlown KKKar.

[Plucketeer]

11. So

Less is better. Yeah, who wants to hear all those boring elaborations and explanations. Don't smother us with details - just look pretty and speak plainly. Goshes! I post WAY TOO MUCH to DU!

[Uncle Joe]

15. Your math is off, in 2008 there were eight candidates, today there are five, and they had a total of

of 26 debates in 2008 beginning April 26th 2007, there had already been 18 debates but Hillary thought that wasn't enough and wanted more.

The last debated ended almost a full year later on April 16th and the Democrats won the White House.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_debates,_2008

[nolabels]

10. Under the the DINO's we have traded $24 hr jobs for......

three jobs making $8.00 hr. I am not sure that is the kind compromise / change i was signing up for. We have aggregated our mass media for thing they call internet that can be either a curse or a cure. Our federal government has saw fit empty it's retirement fund (Social Security) to finance weapons to keep the oil shipping lanes safe. And just for good measure they have sought make it possible that ingestable type consumer good manufactures should only police themselves in making things safe.

Mostly these types of things would not have been possible without the help of the DINO's so i give them cheer

[Populist_Prole]

12. Preach it brother

3rd-Way Dems are as bad as the repubs for the working class. I hate the bastards.

[nolabels]

14. Another thing you might notice is when the DINO's are in office and up for re-election....

We are told to hold our nose while we are in that election booth doing those things.

To me, even if they gave me a curtain to pull around why i am doing it, there is still a part of me that knows it isn't right

[truebluegreen]

13. I like this part:

"...that the time period she had in mind were the last few months of his presidency, November through January. President Barack Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, so it’s reasonable to count that month as part of the Bush legacy."


Seems to imply that February--11 days later--would not have been part of "Bush's legacy." Bizarro world.

[Thespian2]

16. DWS

rolling out the best way for Dems to lose...again...

[sadoldgirl]

17. All I can say is that I hope that she loses in 2016! n/t

[Scuba]

19. Debbie's solution is a 3rd Way Democrat who will push the same fiscal policies but is OK with gays.