Many people like that commenter don't bother with facts or reality, so the report below would probably be considered nothing more than MSM "false facts." But the inability to face reality is having a terrible effect on people like that commenter, since they are confused by what the polls are revealing at this late period in the presidential campaign.
How, they must wonder, could Mr. Obama be doing so well at this point when everything he's done has been a failure? These sort of people see everything Mr. Obama does as a Marxist Socialist conspiracy to turn America into a welfare state where our children are forced to study Evolution, climate change, and eat healthy food so they are less likely to have to deal with diabetes all their lives. The horror!
That commenter who claimed day after day that President Obama hated and wanted to destroy small businesses, I'm guessing, will never read this; but even if he did, he wouldn't believe it, since it doesn't fit the narrative he's been fed by FAUX NOOZ and Rush Limbaugh:
Obama leads Romney among small biz owners, survey says
Austin Business Journal
Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2012, 7:36am CDTThe economy and job creation is the most important issue in this election for almost half of small business owners polled in a new survey, which also found that President Barack Obama leads Republican challenger Mitt Romney by 47 percent to 39 percent.
The survey of 6,145 small business owners was conducted by the George Washington University School of Political Management and Thumbtack.com, the Business Journals reports.
12 comments:
What an interesting piece of cognitive dissonance.
These small business owners, to whom "The economy and job creation is the most important issue" prefer Obama?
It makes no sense.
Lets strip away all the crypto-marxist crap and simply look at job creation under Obama. It has been dismal, with the "Job Creation" not even keeping pace with population growth. People giving up and dropping out completely from the job market is all that has kept unemployment from shooting into permanent double-digits.
The cognitive dissonance is rampant in the conservative mind:
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Republicans may soon lose a key talking point. According to data released Thursday, President Obama may now be a net job creator.
In the year following Obama's inauguration, the U.S. economy lost about 4.3 million jobs. But new figures released Thursday show 4.4 million jobs have been added back since then.
Those figures are not what one would wish, but not even JC could have done better considering the sabotage worked by the GOP at every single initiative Mr. Obama and his administration proposed.
The GOPers WANTED a crappy jobs recovery. That would be their ticket back to the White House.
They've admitted this again and again.
Despite the GOP's effort to make more Americans suffer to keep Mr. Obama from a second term, some job growth happened.
Imagine how much better our country would be had the GOP been patriotic and thought of struggling American familes instead of their political agenda.
The fact is, jobs were created. And the fact is small businesses trust Mr. Obama more than they trust Mr. Romney.
They can see through the b.s. that have hurt all Americans.
Ask yourself why is it that the polls are where they are this late in the campaing if your claim had any merit to it.
Shaw, I do not dispute this rather significant poll whatsoever. I do maintain that it does not necessarily reflect support for Obama as much as it reflects a lack of support for Mittens. In other words Romney has failed miserably on giving small business owners solid reason why they should rally behind and support him.
Personally I have believed from the beginning the election was his to lose. He is proving to me I was right. His message has been muddled, riddled with missteps and gaffes, and has fallen flat.
I live in a small town relatively speaking and know quite a few small business owners who have little positive to say about Obama. I do not know for who they will ultimately mark their ballet for Nov. 6th. I do know they aren't excited over Romney either.
Republicans it appears have selected another loser. Losing in the area he should be enjoying a comfortable positive margin. Perhaps the debates will change Mittens fortune, but I doubt it.
For some there is Gary Johnson.
Last month we had,
"LONDON, Aug 17 (Reuters) - Twice as many business executives around the world say the global economy will prosper better if incumbent U.S. president Barack Obama wins the next election than if his Republican challenger Mitt Romney does, a poll showed on Friday.
Democrat Obama was chosen by 42.7 percent in the 1,700 respondent poll, compared with 20.5 percent for Romney. The rest said "neither"."
..it is also well-known, if enigmatic, that the stock market
always performs better under Democrat administrations. Could it
be that it takes a businessman to know a businessman....and they don't want another one in the white house?
Shaw, Although I am sure your facts are correct as they always are, there is nothing stated about the makeup of those businesses, location or size. That is like me asking three of my neighbors who they are going to vote for and that is an accurate poll.
After four years there are a few jobs created. Keep in mind that there are more people going on disability than getting jobs, there are more dropping out of the workforce than getting jobs and there are more part time and underemployed than full time jobs.
I know this doesn't matter and Obama can beat his chest as a jobs creator and all the leftists will march in step.
BTW, were you referring to me?
First of all, skudrunner, the results of the survey conducted are not "my facts." They are the data collected by the people who conducted the survey:
"The survey of 6,145 small business owners was conducted by the George Washington University School of Political Management and Thumbtack.com, the Business Journals reports."
You didn't take the time or effort to read the report which debunks all of your suspicions about the validity of the report:
Business age:
To ensure representativeness of our sample, we also compared the age of firms that responded to our survey with the age of businesses generally. The Small Business Administration reports that 69% of small businesses are at least two years old, and 51% are at least five years old.12 Our sample matches up favorably: 67% are at least two years old, and 48% are at least five years old. The age of our sample businesses was sufficiently close to the age of small businesses generally so as to not warrant a weighting adjustment.
Business size:
According to US Census data, 91.6% of small businesses have between one and five workers.13 Another 3.8% have 6-10 workers, and 4.6% have over 11 workers.14 Our survey respondents followed a very similar distribution: 89.1% had between one and five workers, 6.4% had 6-10 workers, and 4.5% had over 11 workers.15 Given that the proportion of firms in each size category is similar between Census data and our survey results, a weighting adjustment basing on firm size seemed unnecessary.
Swing (Battleground) States
Exactly what constitutes a “swing” state varies over time and among different polls and publications, although some states are consistently included. For example, the Washington Post has denoted eight states as definite “Tossups,” with anther four leaning in one direction while still meriting swing states status.16 The New York Times takes a slightly broader view, adding one additional “leaning” state to those included in the Post.17 We tended towards the stricter end of the spectrum, labeling ten states as swing/battleground states:
The president is not beating his chest about job creation, but he can rightly point out that he stopped the downward trend he inherited and turned it around so that he can truthfully state that jobs were created.
As I told SF, that is not a large number, but just think of what Congress working with President Obama could have done to help put more Americans back to work.
The Republicans stated emphatically that they would do everything they could to make Mr. Obama look like a failure, then people like you and SF come to this blog and blame the president for the GOP's stonewalling every proposal he made.
Was this about you? If the shoe fits, wear it.
I will also remind you that I will continue to delete your comments if all you do is come here and use my blog to bash Mr. Obama.
You tend to do that. Your comment above is an example of bashing and whining without doing the simple job of actually reading how the data for the survey was collected and the facts that were reported from that data:
Small business support President Obama over Mr. Romney.
Certainly, job creation during the last 3 1/2 years of the Obama presidency has been much better than the job creation during the previous 3 1/2 years. That said, however, I must agree with RN, Obama is vulnerable on the economy and the republicans have blown their chances with such a weak candidate. Even many, if not most, republicans don't like Romney.
SF,
It makes no sense because you falsely think the president of the United States can effect employment.
President Obama did not fire 15 million people; and unless he puts the unemployed on government salary (FDR) he cannot hire 15 million people.
Employment is a private business sector problem, they fired the millions of now unemployed, and they are not hiring.
In an area that the president can effect employment (government contracts) the Republiscum party has blocked the jobs bill.
It's not surprising you don't understand. According to your post today all Americans have to do is buy Tony Robbins book and they will be rich.
I got news for you; Tony Robbins (and other get rich motivators) make their money selling their books and speaking fees.
How many millionaires does Robbins claim he created?
How many seats are in the 1%?
Sorry, not everyone can be rich.
Did you read and follow Tony Robbins book? Are you rich? Are you rich because of Tony Robbins? People like Robbins are the "snake oil salesmen" of our day.
Not surprising you are one taken in by their con job.
Not surprising these small business owners expect the president to fix unemployment, when it is the private sector business world that must fix the unemployment mess. They are (as usual) blaming the wrong person for their problem.
To say regulations are causing private business to not hire, or even open a business, is a Republiscum talking point and has no validity in fact.
Until people get a job and money in their pockets to spend, the economy will remain down.
The history of American economics (1950-1970) proves that tax levels (above 70% then) have little to do with economic growth (the greatest in history up to that time) even though Republiscums claim otherwise.
If tax cuts alone would create jobs, we would be swimming in jobs.
During Clinton's term America created 22 million jobs, even though Clinton raised taxes.
Americas promise is equal opportunity, not guaranteed wealth.
Despite what Republiscums say, the 99% who do not make it to the 1% club, does not mean those 99% are lazy, or expect government to secure their wealth.
A strong middle class is the key to a better life for all, not creating super wealth for 99%.
That middle class has been destroyed by low, falling, stagnant wages, yet, record profits for corporations. Corporations are not fairly sharing those profits with their workers.
In 1970 the 1% owned 7% of Americas wealth. Today the 1% own 25% of America's wealth. That is not only redistribution of wealth, but the slow death of a strong middle class.
FDR did put millions on the federal payroll; and unemployment went from 25% to 9%. It worked. It was temporary. It's not factual to say (Republiscums say) that WW II ended the depression. The depression was over well before WW II.
If we could put 15 million on federal salary (temporarily) it would work again, but try that in today's political atmosphere.
Cutting taxes while we have a 16 trillion dollar debt, is fantasy.
Like Bush cutting taxes when we only had a 7 trillion dollar debt. All it did was build the debt to 11 trillion.
Private investors are not investing in start ups. The SBA is still (Obama doubled their budget) a great source for start up money.
Obama has made the employment improvements hat republican want. Private employment is UP, and public employment is DOWN. Now, they are just arguing quantity. Well, tough shit! Maybe you should do something to help!
Well said, Jerry Critter. But they won't help unless or until they believe doing so will help them politically. For the past three and a half years Republicans have believed, and behaved, the opposite, doing everything in their power to confound efforts to improve the economy and create jobs.
I did a post awhile back on a small-biz group's poll indicating a definite preference for a Republican over Obama. I included a long list of things the Obama administration has done to help small businesses start up and grow. Everything from multiple tax breaks to streamlining of paperwork.
It's gratifying to see some indication that reality might be having a stronger influence on the nation's small-biz folks than Fox and the rest of the right-wing noise machine.
BTW, I like that small item from Krugman — the guy Obama should have chosen to be his No. 1 economic adviser. Time and events have proven Krugman correct at every turn. Ireland is only one of several countries that have tried to fight fire with gasoline only to get burned. It's not that there isn't plenty of historical precedent pointing the way to what works, and away from what doesn't.
"The Republicans stated emphatically that they would do everything they could to make Mr. Obama look like a failure"
Even for you this is stretching it. The Republicans said they didn't want him to be a two term president not a failure. I am sure when it was Bush V Algore the democrats felt the same way about Bush.
The think tank study varies from the NFIB, those are the people who own the businesses.
Regardless of what studies show, Obama will be back for another term. He has good handlers who avoid issues and twist the truth better than Romney. The statement that Romney would have let the auto industry fail while Obama saved the auto industry is a great piece of fiction. Romney suggested the auto companies file bankruptcy to reorganize, Obama gave them 60 billion and then forced them into bankruptcy, same result just cost the taxpayer a lot more money.
Steve has it right, the president does not create jobs but he can sure create a favorable environment.
skudrunner: "Even for you this is stretching it. The Republicans said they didn't want him to be a two term president not a failure."
Bullpuckey. You have a selective memory.
Rush Limbaugh, before whom weak-kneed Republican pols quaked, said he hoped Mr. Obama failed--before Mr. Obama took his oath of office.
When you write stuff like that, skudrunner, I ignore the rest, because you're dishonest.
And it's not Mr. Obama's handlers, although that excuse will help you face the reality you wish to ignore. Mr. Obama looks like he'll be re-elected because the American people don't like what the GOP has to offer--more of the same that got us in this mess. More tax cuts for the wealthiest, more war mongering [Iran], more anti-women troglodytes who want government involved in women's personal choices, more bullpuckey from failed policies. Policies that Ryan can't even explain.
You can blame everyone but the people who are responsible for the rejection if it makes you feel warm and fuzzy. But that isn't the truth.
And you can't handle the truth.
Post a Comment