Mitt Romney Mocks Barack Obama’s Latest Ridiculous Comments on the Economy with “It Worked” Ad … It Did Not Work, Latest GDP 1.5%
IT DID NOT FORK, IT EPICALLY FAILED!!!
Mitt Romney slams Barack Obama on his latest laughable and ridiculous statement that his polices have “worked” in the following political ad. As posted at Mitt Romney.com, the GOP presidential candidate questions how “it could have worked” if the unemployment rate has been above 8% for 41 straight months, if millions of Americans are on food stamps and millions of Americans are struggling to make ends meet. How could it possibly have worked?
The toughest question was whether he could say that no one in the White A few nights ago at a fundraiser, President Obama proudly proclaimed that his economic plan had “worked.”
Tell that to the millions of Americans now on food stamps.
Tell that to the millions of Americans struggling to make ends meet.
No Mr. President, it did not work.
The Gateway Pundit has the full text to the ad.
Barack, it worked? How about that anemic 1.5% GDP? It is obvious the economy is headed in the wrong direction. Exactly how is Obama going to raise taxes in the face of an economy going backwards? Barack Obama, it not only did not worked, it epically failed!!!
Gross domestic product expanded at a 1.5 percent annual rate between April and June, the weakest pace of growth since the third quarter of 2011, the Commerce Department said on Friday. Consensus estimates forecast growth at a 1.3 percent pace.
First-quarter growth was revised up to a 2.0 percent pace from the previously reported 1.9 percent. Output for the fourth quarter was raised to a 4.1 percent rate from 3.0 percent.
Posted July 27, 2012 by Scared Monkeys
2012 Elections, Barack Obama, Economy, Epic Fail, GDP, Obamanation, Obamanomics, Presidential Election, Recession, You Tube - VIDEO | 13 comments
If you liked this post, you may also like these:
13 Responses to “Mitt Romney Mocks Barack Obama’s Latest Ridiculous Comments on the Economy with “It Worked” Ad … It Did Not Work, Latest GDP 1.5%”
Leave a Reply
Here is a more robust quote from the Obama speech:
“I’m running because I believe you can’t reduce the deficit — which is a serious problem, we’ve got to deal with it — but we can’t reduce it without asking folks like me who have been incredibly blessed to give up the tax cuts that we’ve been getting for a decade. (Applause.) I’ll cut out government spending that’s not working, that we can’t afford, but I’m also going to ask anybody making over $250,000 a year to go back to the tax rates they were paying under Bill Clinton, back when our economy created 23 million new jobs — (applause) — the biggest budget surplus in history and everybody did well.
Just like we’ve tried their plan, we tried our plan — and it worked. That’s the difference. (Applause.) That’s the choice in this election.”
The phrase “our plan . . . it worked” is a reference to the prior remarks shown above, discussing his plan to improve the economy. The context of Obama’s words need to be honored; otherwise the meaning can be distorted.
SM: LOL, ROTFLMAO … Because Obama has so fixed that deficit. The is the trillion $ Prez. It was Obama in 2009 that said you do not raise taxes in a recession. Like the economy is any better than a recession.
Barack Obama wishes he was Bill Clinton, Obama couldn’t hold his ‘Big Mac’.
Clinton lost badly in the midterm election and he went more to the center, worked with Republicans and won a 2nd term. Obama lost hysterically in the midterm election and this fool doubled down and went further to the Left. Every one says the election will be close, i see it that it will not be as close as many think. Obama will lose by 4 to 6%. You do not fail as bad as Obama has, go against the will of the people and fail on your promises and expect to be reelected.
I thing that there is a typo, I believe that unemployment has bee above 8% for 41 MONTHS not weeks. Using his logic, he did not create that number,he is not capable of doing it on his own, government democrats in the House and Senate made this devistating performance possible!
SM: Obama owns it especially when he said that the $787 billion stimulus would keep unemployment under 8%. Or can “We the People” not trust what Obama says? The Obamamessiah also said that if he did not fix the economy in 3 years then this is going to be a one year proposition.
Obama has fixed nothing, the economy is actually now getting worse.
@1:I don’t understand; neither Obama’s speech quote nor my words claimed anything about fixing the deficit; which you make reference to.
As I see it, “Taxes” is not a very specific term. As a single word, it has little meaning, as an individuals taxes are each affected differently based on their specific income and situation.
I’m not sure there would be clear agreement on what to call a tax code change where sometimes taxes increased and sometimes they decreased (or even were unchanged), depending on each person. How should this be described: were taxes raised or lowered?
In a nutshell, all I was trying to describe was that Obama was truly discussing his (future) plan, and the fact that this plan worked during Clinton’s term.
SM: You cannot even compare the economies from Clinton to the present one. Clinton was in the midts of a .com bubble, Obama is in the midst of a failed Obama jobs recovery. Even Bill Clinton said that taxes should not be raised. That was before he was “Cory Bookered” by Obama.
He is a novel concept, do you know how you raise $’s to pay down the debt ans its not raising taxes. You make it possible for business to flourish, you lower corporate taxes that makes jobs come back to the US rather than run overseas away from high taxes. You stop all the ridiculous govt regulations that restrict business. You allow an energy policy that creates independence from the Middle East and is a true all of the above strategy, not a BS green one. This would create jobs in the private sector and subsequent secondary jobs.
Raising taxes is not a jobs strategy, is an economic killer.
The GDP rate of growth is just another “made-up” figure to feed to the people.
Barry could not run hot dog or a lemonade stand without help from the government. His whole life, as little as we know, has been to live off the efforts of others.
I intended #2 to be a little sarcastic by implying that he would try to use this to wiggle out of his failure saying he did not build it. If he did this he would be throwing his fellow ds undre the bus.
He is going from being super arrogant to incredibly ridiculous. And, a note to his supporters: When someone urges you to take food stamps but you don’t need them, don’t believe he’s your friend. He just wants to wear down your defenses and make you weak!
Even if you “need” food stamps, no one should be out there advertising (especially in Spanish) to get you to take them. I remember a time where the unemployment office advised me that if I would quit my part time job, I’d get $40 more a month by being on the government dole. I chose to stay with the part-time employment and build up my employment history, thereby foregoing forcing others to support me and my child.
“When someone urges you to take food stamps but you don’t need them . . . ”
That’s an interesting concept; any reality to it?
“The GDP rate of growth is just another “made-up” figure to feed to the people”
Based on this idea, how can you decide who to trust? BTW, who do you trust?
“Even if you “need” food stamps, no one should be out there advertising (especially in Spanish) to get you to take them.”
1) Why not? How can anyone use the available and needed services if they aren’t aware of them? Are all PSA’s inherently evil and stealing our freedom?
2) Why do you want to discriminate against Spanish speaking people? Would this even be legal?
SM: I think the question would be that if you are a citizen of the United States, you best be able to speak English. Why would the PSA have to only be in Spanish if not to pander to illegals? Why is the PSA not in Italian, French, Chinese, German, Polish, Russian, Japanese or any other language of those that would come to the US? Hmm?
So by your illogical logic, all of these other folks would be discriminated against, but not Mexicans.
I never said only Spanish, so those comments based on that do not apply. I also never said not in any other language, so those comments also do not apply.
My words were clear, and there was no illogical logic. BTW, I also never mentioned Mexicans.
SM: The point was the PSA’s were in Spanish, no other language.
Since you responded to me, I feel I need to clear things up.
AFAIK, no one in this thread ever said that Spanish was the only language, or references external data that says that. “Especially in Spanish”, as Kata said, is not the same as “only in Spanish”.
I wanted to share some insight on the UE figures from early 2009, since the topic was raised previously above (#2). I apologize for a delayed response, but I needed time to find the details from over 3 years ago.
According to the BLS, the 2009 monthly UE numbers for Jan / Feb / Mar were 7.8% / 8.%3 / 8.7% respectively. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (stimulus) became law on Feb. 17, 2009.
The UE rate on that day was somewhere between 8.3% and 8.7%; lets say 8.5%.
As I recall, I’ve never heard someone explain how this law was going to keep UE below 8% when on the day it passed the rate was already higher. Clearly, the economy was in a much steeper decline than anyone had predicted or anticipated. IMO, once we had actually passed this law, it was a non-starter to discuss that this law was going to keep UE below 8%, since that mark was already passed.
A more reasonable discussion might center around the affect of this law on the UE rate, or perhaps what the rate might have done in the absence of this law. I suggest the BLS figures can help with those discussions a great deal.
There is also the so-called “bikini graph”, which shows the steep decline in private sector job growth beginning in early 2008, peaking (negatively) one year later, and then rapidly turning around by May 2009, reaching positive growth in March 2010.
Something must have caused the remarkable reversal of the coming bottomless pit of job losses that began with the 2007 recession. I wonder what was happening in early 2009 that could have altered this ongoing job growth decline? Coincidentally, this was when the stimulus was just getting under way. Hmmm; could there be a connection?