Many of the attacks hurled at the president by the Romney campaign are about jobs. They are usually about how badly the president has handled the economy. The Romney campaign has made points
Let’s take a look at these two points and see where those claims actually lead, shall we?
Women have lost a total of 693,000 jobs since the month before President Obama took office. How he is responsible for January 2009 when he took the oath of office during the third week of that month is beyond me, but let us leave that alone. He’s made to be responsible for it by the Romney campaign.
At first glance, it would seem pretty damning stuff, except that it’s wrong. First off, the numbers are wrong. From February 2009 to March 2012, the latest month information is available, the following is true: the unemployment rate for women in the United States is .5 percent higher than it was when the president took office. It sits at 7.7 percent, fully 1.2 percent lower than the unemployment rate for men, and 7/10ths of 1 percent lower than the national unemployment rate.
No one is saying things are rosy by any stretch of the imagination, but to say that the president has been the “worst” for women workers is disingenuous at best. The Romney campaign pulls a similar trick with youth unemployment. Mitt and his men paint a bleak picture of the jobs situation for today’s youth, being out of work at a 2 to 1 ratio in comparison with the entirety of the workforce. What they do not point out is that the 2 to 1 ratio has existed since at least 2002.
The under-25 work force has always been out of work at a 2 to 1 ratio in comparison to the entirety of the workforce. The Romney campaign has been trying to pull the wool over our eyes with subtle manipulations of the numbers. I won’t let him get away with it.