In elections, jobless trend matters more than rate (bodes well for Obama)

[Liberal_in_LA]

In elections, jobless trend matters more than rate

WASHINGTON (AP) — Unemployment is higher than it's been going into any election year since World War II.

But history shows that won't necessarily stop President Barack Obama from reclaiming the White House.

In a presidential election year, the unemployment trend can be more important to an incumbent's chances than the unemployment rate.

Going back to 1956 no incumbent president has lost when unemployment fell over the two years leading up to the election. And none has won when it rose.

The picture is similar in the 12 months before presidential elections: Only one of nine incumbent presidents (Gerald Ford in 1976) lost when unemployment fell over that year, and only one (Dwight Eisenhower in 1956) was re-elected when it rose.

Those precedents bode well for Obama. Unemployment was 9.8 percent in November 2010, two years before voters decide whether Obama gets to stay in the White House. It was down to 8.7 percent in November 2011, a year before the vote. It fell to 8.5 percent in December and is expected to fall further by Election Day.

http://news.yahoo.com/elections-jobless-trend-matters-more-rate-160130368.html

[DCBob]

1. I think this is very good point when people argue Obama cant be reelected due to high unemployment.

There was a very similar situation when Reagan was reelected. Here a snippet from the article..

"Obama can take comfort in President Ronald Reagan's experience. In November 1982, the economy was in the last month of a deep recession, and unemployment was 10.8 percent, the highest since the Great Depression. A year later, unemployment was down to 8.5 percent. By November 1984, it was still a relatively high 7.2 percent, but the downward trend was unmistakable. Reagan was re-elected that month in a 59-41 percent landslide."

[ProgressiveEconomist]

2. Thus Rs want to tank the economy by not

extending the 2 percent payroll tax holiday and by not extending long-term unemployment benefits, costing the economy hundreds of thousands of jobs (see below).

I hope President Obama works these issues, along with the rest of his American Jobs Act, into his State Of The Union speech.

According to http://web.epi-data.org/temp727/EPI-TCF_IssueBrief_311.pdf :

No payroll tax holiday would prevent $118 billion in tax relief for 160 million American workers, costing 0.8 percentage points in GDP growth and 972,000 jobs.

No extended unemployment insurance would eliminate $45 billion in spending for necessities by the unemployed, costing 0.4 percentage points in GDP growth and 528,000 jobs.