Unemployment rate in 1980 was 7.1 percent

[bigdarryl]

If unemployment rates mean so much as we are being told than that means Jimmy Carter should have beaten Reagan.This is what Allan Lictman has been saying about Obamas reelection.That the pundits are dead wrong to just focus on the unemployment rate

[SlimJimmy]

1. Why should Carter have beaten Reagan? A 7.1% unemployment rate would seem to suggest the

opposite. I'm not following your logic here.

[NYC Liberal]

2. Well, depends on whether that was up or down from what it was in 1977.

Someone can find the numbers but, if it went from 10.5% to 7.1%, that's really good; if it went from 4.5% to 7.1%, not so much.

[SlimJimmy]

3. Not a huge change from 77-80 It looks like they returned to their 1977 level.

1977-08-01 7.0
1977-09-01 6.8
1977-10-01 6.8
1977-11-01 6.8
1977-12-01 6.4
1978-01-01 6.4
1978-02-01 6.3
1978-03-01 6.3
1978-04-01 6.1
1978-05-01 6.0
1978-06-01 5.9
1978-07-01 6.2
1978-08-01 5.9
1978-09-01 6.0
1978-10-01 5.8
1978-11-01 5.9
1978-12-01 6.0
1979-01-01 5.9
1979-02-01 5.9
1979-03-01 5.8
1979-04-01 5.8
1979-05-01 5.6
1979-06-01 5.7
1979-07-01 5.7
1979-08-01 6.0
1979-09-01 5.9
1979-10-01 6.0
1979-11-01 5.9
1979-12-01 6.0
1980-01-01 6.3
1980-02-01 6.3
1980-03-01 6.3
1980-04-01 6.9
1980-05-01 7.5
1980-06-01 7.6
1980-07-01 7.8
1980

[Igel]

4. You have it backwards.

Presidents with unemployment rates over 8% almost always lose.

There's no claim that presidents with unemployment rates under 8% almost always win.

More things matter than just unemployment rates.

[WI_DEM]

5. The professor is wrong about that. If the economy were better Obama would be 15-points ahead in

every poll. The only thing that has been hanging over Obama is the economy--including a slowly rising unemployment rate. During the recession Unemployment hit more than 10% and Obama had gotten it down to about 8% and now it's starting to creep up and job creation has not been robust, though the 165,000 created last month wasn't bad--we need several months of that and better to see real improvement in unemployment.

Obama has a challenger who is unlikable. He has ended a war and begun to end another. He has accomplished some good things legislatively. So what is it that keeps Romney in the game if it's not the economy?????

[S_E_Fudd]

6. Lichtmans Keys

Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.
Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.
Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.
Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.
Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
Long term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.
Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.
Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.
Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.
Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.
Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.
Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.


If 5 or fewer are false the incumbent wins...right no nor more than three of these are False...