E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
In an effort to bolster his sagging poll numbers with female voters, Mitt Romney and his campaign have made this new charge: that women have accounted for 92 percent of the job losses since President Obama took office.
Here’s what Romney said yesterday while campaigning in Delaware:
"There's been some talk about a war on women. The real war on women has been waged by the Obama administration's failure on the economy. Do you know what percentage of job losses during the Obama years of have been casualties of women losing jobs as opposed to men? Do you know how many women, what percent of the job losses were women? 92.3 percent of the job losses during the Obama years have been women who've lost those jobs."
The Romney campaign also held a conference call making this same point. "The number of unemployed women has increased by nearly a million under Barack Obama," surrogate Bay Buchanan said. "Ninety-two percent of the jobs lost since he took office are women."
But First Read contacted the Bureau of Labor Statistics to get to the bottom of this 92 percent charge. The conclusion: The Romney campaign’s figures don’t tell the whole story.
The campaign, in a research document circulated yesterday and on its website, said the numbers come from the “Current Employment Statistics” database at BLS. The document notes that there was a net change of -740,000 nonfarm payroll jobs from January 2009 to March 2012 -- and that women accounted for 683,000 of those jobs.
That is accurate, according to BLS. But Brian Davidson, an economist at BLS, told First Read: “The math they use is correct; the terminology is completely wrong.”
Davidson noted that women actually make up a larger share of the workforce now than they did in Jan. 2008 before the financial meltdown, and since January 2009, it is a statistically insignificant change.
In January 2008, women made up 48.8 percent of the workforce; in January 2009, 49.5 percent; now 49.3 percent.
“Do we still have the same amount of women workers relative to men in the ‘net-change’? Yes we do,” Davidson said.
He added, “It’s like trying to pull a bunny out of a hat, but there’s no bunny inside.”
Independent fact-checkers like Politifact and the Washington Post’s Fact Checker also took on the claim.
Giving the claim a “Mostly False,” Politifact called it “misleading”: “We found that though the numbers are accurate, their reading of them isn’t.”
“One could reasonably argue that January 2009 employment figures are more a result of President George W. Bush’s policies, at least as far as any president can be blamed or credited for private-sector hiring,” Politifact wrote. “We reached out to Gary Steinberg, spokesman for the BLS, for his take on the claim. He pointed out that women’s job losses are high for that period of time because millions of men had already lost their jobs. Women were next. … [I]f you count all those jobs lost beginning in 2007, women account for just 39.7 percent of the total. … There is a small amount of truth to the claim, but it ignores critical facts that would give a different impression.”
The Washington Post’s fact checker, Glenn Kessler, begins this way: “[W]e frown on the somewhat arbitrary dividing line of measuring jobs statistics by presidential terms. It is a common journalistic — and political — metric. But restarting the employment clock from the moment the president takes the oath of office doesn’t tell you much about a his performance, especially since it takes time for the new president’s policies to take effect.”
In fact, he writes, “[T]here is less to this stat than meets the eye. … If you start the data in February, then the overall job loss is just 16,000 jobs—while women lost 484,000 jobs. … How could women lose more jobs than the overall total? It’s a function of the dates one picks.”
And notably: “[T]he picture becomes clearer if you start running the data from the date the recession began — December 2007. With that starting point, the total decline in jobs was just over 5 million, with women accounting for nearly 1.8 million of those jobs. Now look what happens when we just look at the past year, March 2011 to March 2012. Men gained nearly 1.9 million jobs while women gained 635,000 jobs.”
*** CORRECTION *** An earlier version of this post noted that the Romney campaign used numbers from January 2009. The campaign has reached out to First Read and notes that it used January 2009 as a "baseline."
"We use January 2009 as the baseline, which means the first month of losses charged to Obama is the decline in February vs. January," said campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul.
*** UPDATE *** Saul also passes along a letter written by its policy director, Lanhee Chen, to dispute the Politifact story (and "Mostly False" rating) that attempted a fact check on a Tweet by Saul referencing the numbers. Chen accuses Politifact of a "failure to focus on the appropriate context."
"First, why should it matter that men had already lost millions of jobs?" Chen wrote. "Was it now women’s 'turn'? Is this part of the President’s conception of “fairness” that he talks about so frequently? If the data showed the opposite (i.e. that women had been disproportionately hurt prior to the President taking office), we imagine you would have used that as an indictment of Ms. Saul by arguing that the trend was inherent to the recession and predated the President."
Chen concluded, "In summary, your piece confirms Ms. Saul’s claim as accurate, and then relies on a direct contradiction with a prior Politifact piece and incorrect claims from two publicly acknowledged Obama supporters (including one Administration official!) as the basis for rating it “Mostly False.” I hope you will agree that this rating was inappropriate and that the piece does not reflect the journalistic standards to which your organization intends to hold itself. Please retract the piece and issue a correction as soon as possible."
Leave a Comment:
It's what i have been saying all along. That mr grover, the gop, & the rushbo have a credibility problem. I mean they just outright lie a lot. Sometimes they may not know better. Take sarah. Sometimes people say she doesn't understand her answer. Then they say she didn't understand the question. The bottom line. Puppets will say anything.
It really seems like the Republicans are trying to lose on purpose...
...but about 40% of Americans are too stupid to let them!
What do you expect from this Republican corporate puppet! He doesn't know any better, he only know what the corrupt corporates tell him to say!
ETCH-A-SKETCH doesn't know women or the poor! Corrupt corporates are his soul!
And he damn sure doesn't know the 99% American People & their desires!
Why is anyone surprised just how flagrantly a liar DimMitt actually is? I mean after all Jesus said it's OK to lie as long as the ends justify the means. :)
Here's a statistic that will drive you Dumbocrats nuts!
After 7 days in office Obama had an overall approval rating of 66% compared to GW at 57%
After 1170 days in office Obama has an overall approval rating of 47% compared to GW at 52%.
So in the same time it took ole GW to lose 5% approval Obama lost 19%. As a matter of fact the last time Obama had a higher approval rating than ole GW was in 2009. I'm sure it has nothing to do with his propensity to lie and mislead the American people though (wink, wink).
It's okay to come to grips with losing. Your socialistic ideals for this country will have to wait a little longer. hehehe
November 2012 - the end of an error.
Polls never matter, I bet you disappear in November.
Ha Ha Harl60! That's what all you Dumbocrats say when the polls aren't in your favor but when they are in your favor you're the first ones to spout about what they say. Typical liberal hypocrisy.
By the way, I'm not going anywhere. If Obama does miraculously get reelected I'll be here to point out his continued lies and broken promises. Not that it will do any good. You, and those like you, would rather stick your head in the ground and ignore what he's doing than admit you were wrong in supporting him.
November 2012 - the end of an error.
No it's what Republicans say, but I'll be looking forward to your continued point outs after Obama is elected.
BTW I support all our Presidents, cause I support America! Besides, your no fan of Obama, so what do you care if he lies or breaks promises? Ha Ha..really?
Harl, you are correct. Polls don't matter. They will all show Obama ahead until November 7th win Romney wins in an 'upset landslide'.
So Just When are you going to POST a Poll ? So far all I see is opinions from you . Stating your Opinion is a good thing . Trying to ACT like you have some NEW Information and then Just stating your Opinion , Ranks right UP there with Posting links to a Blog site . LMAO At U .
"...until November 7th win Romney wins in an 'upset landslide'."
That has overshot "wishful thinking" and landed squarely in "psychopathic delusions."
The latest polls showing President Obama's continued lead over the GOP's losers:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html
Ah, Barak, you have indeed "united" us as promised-(looking at the posts herein) you have indeed established a Presidency of transparency. You've managed to divide this nation on Race, Income, Gender, and Class; and its completely transparent. What a wonderful legacy to leave. The more people you can put on the receiving end of a government check, the more votes you get/buy- sad to think how many define THAT as the American dream.
Bush united the country - of course, it was at the unemployment office but who cares.
You forget that the Republicans had a big hand in the divide.
You people sure have your Borg mentality and speak down pat. As always, with the left, it's someone else's fault (why don't you blame Nixon for crying out loud) and you all are, subsequently, "victims", that's why you people all look for the government to bail you out. You have no self-sufficiency or initiative.
oneman, just stating the truth about the divide. Now as far as your statement oneman, you are part of the problem, "you people" you mean you Americans don't you? Cause we all are. You are so full of something, not sure what, but to make a statement about divide and then be divisive in your reply calling fellow Americans, "you people", showing your dividing comment speaks volumes of your hypocrisy and mentality. Apparently your feel your above other Americans in some way, I'm sure your legacy will be meaningless and forgotten.
Once again, Romney demonstrates he will do almost anything to acquire power. He truly lacks integrity and is willing to distort the facts to become President. For some people to think he will be the best person to enhance our economy is incredible. If he is elected President, they will be in for a big surprise.
He will continue to cut taxes, especially for the rich and those unelectable corporate governments known as corporations, plus deregulate Wall Street That is the very prescription which had Bush and the Republicans drive us into the Great Recession in the first place. And they still offer us that same recipe. Also since he supports Ryan's budget, he will increase our deficit, and obliterate Medicare and Social Security. None of these measures will reduce the number one problem in America, namely: the inequality of wealth distribution in our country which is the prime factor for producing unemployment in our country in the first place. It will only exacerbate it.
Yep I've said over the past six months that once it settled in as a Mitt versus GOP conservatives battle that Mitt is what I call unseemly cat!!! Meaning he will say, do, or try anything to be President of the United States for just 4 years!!! Then after those 4 years he'll walk away about 10 billion dollars richer and not care if he wins or loses in 2016!!!
There are three kinds of lies. Lies. Damn Lies, and statistics. - Mark Twain
Put statistics in the hands of a politician and you have a whopper of a lie. - Me.
I think this will work for some people. FOX will be all over this and won’t care if it is a distortion. And, most republicans are not so good at math.
Once again MSNBC gets the story wrong and has to issue a correction! Mr. Chen mentioned the journalistic standards of MSNBC but doesn't he know that MSNBC can't even spell journalistic standards? They, as well as Obama, the rest of the liberal media, and 99% of liberals actually live by the old saying, "Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story."
Liberals - what a mess of people you are!
November 2012 - the end of an error.
yawn, this story is correct. Romney's 'claim' is inane. Cherrypicking statistics and then "proving" something is somewhere between stupid, deceptive, and an outright lie.
Now, if obama had instituted a specific policy that was clearly anti-woman in terms of employment, and then the statistics following that policy action supported it, then it would make sense to talk about obama's 'war on women".
But of course the claim by romney is nothing like that process..its a 'truth' in search of facts..lol.
RightToChoose You are absolutely Right !
If you read the end of the article it states in the last year only 25% of the jobs filled were by woman 1.9 million for men 635,000 for women. That is disproportionate amount given that women are more than 50% of the population and equal in their share of the labor force.
Wow, Romney is so full of crap I can smell him from here. What does either George W. Bush or President Obama have to do with private sector job losses? If anything it's Romney's friends in high places that have let all these people go from their jobs so they can have a bigger profit.
We've come to expect this kind of propagandist, self-serving spin from the GOP and it's pundits.
Whatever you do,...do NOT take this guy at his word.
Check the facts.
The GOP are snake-oil salesmen.
in fairness, both parties are ready to pounce on anything and try to spin it. Pay no attention to anything that comes from either party without indepedent, and intelligent, verification.
Your right Vermont, and we do seconds ater the Republican's make a statement we look it up on the Internet and than tell the truth
Somebody tell this moron and his owner Carl Rove that they can't lie, we can get the truth in seconds on the INTERNET. WE KNOW EVERY LIE AND STATEMENT YOU EVER MADE YOU FOOL
You must have a problem with your internet or you are searching for the wrong person as I think you mean Karl Rove.
Same bald little pig
And the truth is? Seems this anti-Republican stated several times that Romney's figures were accurate, but you bought into the belief that he is lying if he doesn't talk about other figures. Maybe you should re-read the article, I see it as a dismal attempt to discredit Romney by confirming the accuracy of his statement. And you bought into that hook, line and sinker and now are calling an "accurate" statement a lie. Hmmmm.
Domenico Montanaro, Deputy Political Editor, NBC News is a cover Obama’s ass reporter. If he would have been honest and did some investigative reporting about Obama, the country would be better off. Obama ruined the USA and NBC is up his butt.
yes, no doubt its all nbc's fault. There are no other reporters, and the republicans had no interest either.
lol.
you need a drink try vodka or gin
Well, at least he was honest enough to state (several times) that the facts Romney quoted were accurate, but then somehow wants everyone to believe that because Romney didn't talk about other facts, he was being dishonest. Wow, that's a stretch for even the uninformed to buy, yet they are buying it.
At this point, is it a surprise to anyone who is paying attention that a Republican was caught lying, or at best seriously distorting the facts, to try to get votes?
I was not surprised in the least. It is the only chance they have.
Jon,
What is your feeling on the President going around the country talking about the Buffet Tax when the proof is the tax will only raise $4 billion a year and that Mr. Buffet will not pay extra as capital gains are not included.
Did you even read the article? It confirms the statement several times, but says because Romney didn't talk about those that are still employed, he is lying. Horrible logic.
Media Matter's hit squad is revving uo its engines. This is the beginning of a long line of smear Romney attack articles. Here is what will happen. Every day until Nov 7th the liberal media will serve up anti-Morman, anti-Free Enterprise, race-card, wealth-card, pro-socialist propaganda on TV, Net, print, and every form of media. All the polls will show Obama ahead. Then, unless the election is rigged, Romney will win in a landslide. The media will blame it on last minute voters, low turn-out, or excuse they can come up with. This is exactly what happened when Reagan beat Carter.
Don't buy this crap America. And to the military: when Obama refuses to leave the White House because of some contrived national emergency and declares martial law, remove him by force before we have to.
ROMNEY 2012 & 2016
backfire
I bet that you thought" STAR WARS" was real also.
Seriously, RightToChoose? Blaming the credit downgrade on Obama is about the most absurd claim I've ever seen. Do you at all recall the facts surrounding that incident? Do you recall how it was the wild intractability and ideology of the REPUBLICANS in Senate that nearly caused US default? Do you recall that Obama caved in repeatedly to the Republican demands, and they still wouldn't budge on their ideology? That is absolutely mindblowing that you want to pin that on Obama.
Same goes for unemployment, as you apparently don't recognize that the unemployment rate is a TRENDING statistic. Unemployment peaked at above 10% right at the beginning of Clinton's first presidency, and then trended down throughout both of his terms until it bottomed at under 4% just before Bush took office for his first term. Then under Bush, the rate trended back up to above 6% in June of 2003. From there, it trended steadily down to a bottom of 4.4 in May of 2007. At that point, in Bush's 7th year as president, it began a VERY dramatic upward trend to 7.3 percent by the time Bush left office. That's a 66% increase in the unemployment rate during the last year and a half of Bush's presidency, and that is a very, very dramatic trend that (I trust is obvious) has nothing to do with Obama. Trends, by definition, tend to continue until something happens to change them, and this one did just that for the first 10 months of Obama's presidency. But blaming Obama because a trend that started under Bush merely continued is absurd--there is no possible way for a president to reverse an upward unemployment trend in 4 or 5 months. By the time those 4 or 5 months had passed, unemployment was at 9.5%--a staggering 113% increase that can only be blamed on Bush--there is simply no possible way to pin that on Obama. Over the next 5 months (the first time anybody could make any arguable connection to Obama's policies), it only went up .5% further to a peak of 10%, and then it started trending down, which it has done very consistently since then. To ignore the dramatic trend that started under Bush and continued under the early part of Obama's term, and simply take a snapshot of the last day of Bush's term is ridiculous in the extreme.
The rest of your claims are about things over which the president doesn't control, or issues of subjective opinion (that you pretend are objective facts), or fluff campaign promises that weren't met, or wild conspiracies that you toss out like they're proven facts ("back room deals and behind the scenes bribery"? Seriously?).
Come on.
It's an old trick Romney learned from McCain. They love to use that BLS. Looking at the data can be very confusing and will must likely make you give up unless it's explained. Good chance you won't fact check.
Here is a link to factcheck.org where it talk about the President distorting facts on the Ryan budget.
http://factcheck.org/2012/04/fall-preview-obama-vs-romney-and-ryan/
This is politics and both parties are guilty of it which is a shame for us voters.
Mitt Romney already made it clear he doesn't care about women or the laws and programs in place to protect them. He should have thought about that long before Santorum spouted his strange beliefs about how husbands and wives or couples should live and pro-create all while other Republican governors and state legislatures were trying to use high tech trans-vaginal ultrasounds and other ridiculous tests and means to stop women from having abortions or getting mammograms, pap tests and other needed screenings and medications. He might have also honored the fact that freedom of choice has been around a long time and changing laws that women fought so hard to have won't go away lightly. Roe vs. Wade is legal and women, their families and their doctors can make educated decisions. Mitt Romney also should have defended Sandra Flock (sp?) and her right to testify in Congress, something the GOP senators would not allow. Now Mitt Romney is trying to blame HIS problem with women on President Obama - also saying the Democrats have waged a war against women. Sorry it's a little late to say or do anything to help yourself Mitt. Women already know what you are about and who and what you will protect.
HORRIBLE article. Several times it confirms the numbers of the comment about job loss was correct, but then goes into a barrage of comments about other figures not related to jobs lost. If I say that my house is blue, it doesn't mean that I am lying because my 3 neighbor's houses are red.
Don't look now writer, but your bias is showing.
Mitt has demonstrated that he will say whatever it takes to win the GOP nomination and the election.
The Etck a Sketch comment is just the smoking gun on what everyone already knew as fact.
So we all know that job losses in the first month of Obama taking office are beyond his control....Romney would like those intellectually challanged to think that a president can effect change in a month.......
But of course Mitt has offered no plan on what HE himself would do to effect unemployment.....Except tax breaks for the rich.
Fact is that after 6 months in office Obama and America have enjoyed quarter over quarter job growth........Albeit not fast enough..........But far better than what was left by the last president.
Sorry Mitt, educated people don't buy what you sell currently.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwhKuunp8D8&feature=player_embedded
Vote early & vote often....Chicago style:
https://www.theprojectveritas.com/civicrm/contribute/transact?reset=1&id=97