Unemployment comes in at 8.1% but . . . . . no sitting president has been re-elected with an unemployment rate of 7.2 or higher since FDR.

After four years of failed domestic policies, it has come down to this:  "Its all about the stinking headline"

Post script to this article:  169,000 people lost their jobs in April while only 115,000 jobs were created but the unemployment rate went down.  How can this be?  This post tries to answer this question.  

Yesterday and for several days leading up to Friday's job report,  FoxNews was forecasting 177,000 new jobs created in April.  March came in at a disappointing 120,000 (jobs created) and most predictive indicators gave us a similar report for April,  so, I was puzzled by the Fox report of the past several days.  Why so high?  Perhaps Fox decided to go with the Administration's forecast,  I don't know,  but I did not believe the forecast for a minute.  Understand that in the face of bad news,  the framing of related news headlines is the single most critical first response for any Administration.

In this case,  a week long headline that reads, "Experts expect 177,000 jobs created, on average,  throughout the coming summer months,"  makes for a positive news cycle for the Administration.  Never mind reality.   Reality gives us a terrible April report . . . . . . .   115,000 jobs created.  (By contrast,  "April"  in 2011 saw a jobs increase of 251,000.  Big difference).

Understanding that I am little more than an educated hick carpenter,  retired after 30 years of pounding nails and a political blogger since 2007,  I am telling you that 115,000 jobs created is not enough to bump the unemployment rate.  Over the last several years,  my observation tells me that 153,000 is the number that moves the employment/unemployment rate a tenth of a point either up or down.    But,  mysteriously,  the rate fell from 8.2 to 8.1 percent on the "strength" of just 115,000 jobs created, or so goes the Administration's claim.

The fact is this:  unemployment percentages fell a tenth of a point on the strength of 522,000 people leaving the workforce,  no longer being counted against the "unemployment totals." In addition,  CNBC tells us that 169,000 people lost their jobs in the month of April.  With this,  you now how unemployment can go down when more people lost their jobs than were put back to work.  

And that brings us back to the "headline issue" I mentioned, above.  It is all about the headlines.  You should know that the latest mantra coming from the parroting press and its master,  the Obama Administration,  includes these words: "No president has been re-elected with an unemployment rating of 8% or more."  That is a headline that started making the rounds about a month ago.  And it is does not picture the full truth.  Indeed,  the headline is true,  but,  "8%" is not the predictor . . . . . . . . 7.2% is.  If you need confirmation on this,  as if I could be wrong (!!??),  you have this reference and comment:

No president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt has been re-elected when the unemployment rate has stood at more than 7.2 percent.

This little statistic gets cited, over and over again, when analysts pontificate about the politics of jobs and joblessness. And about President Barack Obama’s chances for re-election come November.  (MassLive.com)  

Like I said,  it is all about the headlines.  Just wait until we "break through the 8 percent barrier."  You will hear a blizzard of media reports touting the success of Obama's policies without regard to the actual truth of the matter and the real barrier . . . . . .   7.2 percent.

End notes:

Fact:   unemployment methodology used by the Department of Labor is NOT a tabulation of reported first time “paid outs” from local unemployment offices.  Rather,  it is the result of a national household survey taken by phone.  Can it be manipulated?  Of course.   The reason Gallup and others differ in their reporting results is simply because their phone surveys include differing demographics and questions stated in different terms.                                   

A net of 2 million folks left the workforce over the course of the past 12 months, and are no longer counted into the unemployment totals.  They are ignored.  They do not exist for reporting concerns.

522,000 folks left the job market in April,  alone. 88.4 million Americans are not be counted into the unemployment picture.  Again,  for the sake of reporting,  they do not exist.

The participation rate contrasted to the total potential workforce (those over the age of 16) is the lowest in 30 years,  63.6 percent.

Update:  if we used the very same methodolgy as was used in the beginning of 2009,  Obama Administration numbers all,  the actual unemployment rate would be 10.8%.