Job Creation Under Democratic Presidents Roughly Double That Of GOP: Report

Democrats sure know how to create jobs, if recent history is any indication.

Since John F. Kennedy was elected president in 1961, job growth under Democratic presidents has outnumbered that under Republicans by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis. During that period, non-government payrolls grew by almost 42 million jobs under Democratic presidents, compared to 24 million when a Republican party member was in power.

The pattern seems to be holding true under President Obama. During the first three years and two months of his presidency, the country hasn't lost nearly as many jobs as during that same first period of his predecessor, according to an analysis from left-leaning and Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman. In April, the total number of private sector jobs finally surpassed that which existed when Obama took office in January 2009, according to the Bloomberg Government report.

Obama's re-election is far from guaranteed. No U.S. president has won re-election since World War II with an unemployment rate above 6 percent on Election Day, with the sole exception of Ronald Reagan, who faced a jobless rate of 7.2 percent on Election Day 1984, according to a separate Bloomberg report.

Even that's significantly lower than the 8.1 percent unemployment rate the nation is struggling with today. And while the jobless rate did fall in April, that decline was in part due to job-seekers giving up their search and dropping out of the workforce.

Additionally, the rich have actually snapped up a greater share of wealth under Obama than under George W. Bush, further boosting the income gap. Wall Street firms had also reaped more profits under Obama as of November than under the entirety of the Bush presidency.

Earlier on HuffPost:

Comments

[wanabe5601]

02:14 PM on 09/07/2012

Bush lost so many manufacturing jobs during his first term that he had his cabinet check to see if he could reclassify fast food works as manufacturing jobs. Along with striping overtime laws on the grounds that they were “to hard for businesses to understand”

[sailka]

03:06 PM on 09/06/2012

Reagan and GWBush Shipped USA jobs overseas, as well as USA Companies; Democratic Presidents initiate new USA jobs, opposite of Romney/GOP policies.

[AnthropologistAmongApes]

05:09 PM on 08/19/2012

This fact is because under republican control greed liquidates the social contract. The right comes out from under its rocks and simply cashes in instead of investing in the commons.

[msamm70]

04:18 AM on 08/17/2012

", the country hasn't lost nearly as many jobs as during that same first period of his predecessor, according to an analysis from left-leaning and Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman. In April, the total number of private sector jobs finally surpassed that which existed when Obama took office in January 2009, according to the Bloomberg Government report." And this is acceptable to the American public why?? Left leaning, 3 and 1/2 years later?? He still has NO BUDGET and has out spent every president TO DATE COMBINED! You bet he won't be re-elected. I would sooner vote ole Jimmy Carter back in

[JWal196665]

11:17 PM on 09/07/2012

Actually you are wrong President Obama has had the lowest spending rate since Dwight D Eisenhower, President Obama's spending rate is 1.4%, GW Bush's spending rater was 35.0%. You really need to do your research and get your facts straight.

[msamm70]

01:11 AM on 09/08/2012

My facts are straight!   
6/14/2012 @ 3:42PM |476,451 viewsPresident Obama: The Biggest Government Spender In World History1) http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush2)http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/06/14/president-obama-the-biggest-government-spender-in-world-history/

[WhoKnows45]

05:56 PM on 07/09/2012

[knighttt65]

04:20 AM on 05/25/2012

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

[knighttt65]

04:25 AM on 05/25/2012

it isnt going down ...it is people who can work, stop looking and drop off the books ..its people we educated, taking less employemnt (under employed) so now they get counted or aka dropped if you stop looking .. for honestly can say this is a GREAT JOB market!! (If so you lie ) And if you want to include foodstamps ...why are 20 yr old able bodied workers, being given foodstamps, if there is no emplyment problem! In My days you had to have a dependent and no able bodied male would ever qulify for food stamps!! users and abusers!! thats why you vote like sheep!!!

[notwaff]

12:16 PM on 05/16/2012

----------

looking at BLS report "Civilian Employment (Seasonally Adjusted) - LNS12000000"
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?bls

the number of employed for Obama years:
142187 - Jan 2009
141865 - Apr 2012
individual employment went DOWN by 322 thousand

For Bush years:
135701 - Jan 2002
146397 - Jan 2008
individual employment went UP by over 10 million

----------

[Sandy Bachman]

12:31 AM on 07/17/2012

Obama didn't take office until January 2009. You kind of forgot to include Bush's dramatic job loss throughout 2008. But hey, that's how you guys roll. Conveniently neglecting to post the real facts.

[notwaff]

12:07 PM on 05/16/2012

over a 5 year window during the Bush administration, 10 million were added to the ranks of the employed.

Today it would be great to see an extra 10 million employed, along with the record setting 4.5% unemployment and record setting GDP growth.

.

[famullar]

05:01 PM on 05/10/2012

When you have nothing to say you say nothing but only in a daze you speak , spit out the wrong comment only to know that , oops was that my father, my mother I spike about while the reporters have packed gone laughing their heads off. I have said politics is dirty and getting dirtier daily and the leaders we are lost tribe. “Read on Mr. Obama sent out an e-mail appeal to his supporters labelled “Marriage” that asked for campaign donations following an interview on Wednesday in which he revealed his personal beliefs about the divisive social issue. “I believe that in the eyes of the law, all Americans should be treated equally. And where states enact same-sex marriage, no federal act should invalidate them,” Mr. Obama wrote. “If you agree, you can stand up with me here. the ad shows Mr. Romney saying. “And I don’t favour civil unions if they are identical to marriage other than by name.” Conservative social activists and groups that oppose same-sex marriage have been vocal in their disdain for Mr. Obama’s announcement.Would you expect this from an Englishman or an American man I mean pure British and pure American? No. I wonder, We are still looking for some cash and economy to become better. With this it will take ages. I am a Muslim. I would never say this. I thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA

[stephan67]

03:16 AM on 05/10/2012

Yes ,the Republicans are job cutters . Just like Romney.

[AC Guts]

12:26 AM on 05/10/2012

There is a strange lack of conservative defense here. Where did they all go?

[bucksim]

01:05 AM on 05/10/2012

busy with resume

[Molly D]

01:16 AM on 05/10/2012

Zing.

[notwaff]

11:32 PM on 05/09/2012

.....

before the global financial meltdown, Bush policies had created 10 million jobs in 5 years, hitting record setting lows in unemployment and recording setting GDP growth. It would be great to see some of that now but we're not supposed to recognize that on HP

.

[Molly D]

01:46 AM on 05/10/2012

...Before the financial meltdown, Hoover policies had created what he called, and promised to deliver going forward, "permanent prosperity."

Speculative prosperity which collapses in disaster and world economic smashup ought not to be lauded in hindsight. Not in the same way it is lauded before you know what's really happening. If you want to credit Bush with anything, do it for manning up and being wiser when his second 911 hit, and doing the right things. His party will surely never credit him so.

Anyway you know and I know Bush didn't have any "policies" except getting revenge on some helpless fall guy Islamic country. He let Rove and Cheney run ours, and Greenspan took care of the speculators... er, markets.

[Bienville]

11:07 AM on 05/10/2012

That is a ridiculous revision of history.

According to statistics available on the BLS website:
In Bush's first 3 years, there were 24 months of negative jobs growth, totalling over 3 million lost jobs.
Bush's 56 months of positive jobs growth totalled only 8.6 million new jobs - nearly 1.5 million fewer than you reported.
In Bush's last 3 years, there were 15 months of negative jobs growth, totalling over 4.5 million lost jobs.
The net new jobs during Bush's 8 years was less than 1.1 million.
Comparing Bush to other presidents: Reagan hit 1.1 million in a single month once and would have tallied 1.1 million in less that 7 months of his average. He totalled nearly 16 million jobs in 8 years. Clinton hit 500 thousand once and hit 400 thousand many times and would have tallied 1.1 million in less than 5 average months. He totalled over 23 million jobs in 8 years.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth

It's entirely possible that Bush's policies caused, accelerated and exacerbated the global meltdown. That is a much longer debate.

[notwaff]

01:04 PM on 05/16/2012

For Bush years, employed civilians
135701 - Jan 2002
146397 - Jan 2008
individual employment went up by over 10 million

the financial meltdown was decades in the making

[builderman55]

09:26 PM on 05/09/2012

The Republicans keep bulldozing more and more money to the 1% while the Democrats keep trying to keep everyone else gainfully employed...

[webwzrd]

08:32 PM on 05/09/2012

I have been making this point for years. The whole notion that Republicans are better on either the economy or national security is a HUGE hoax that is not supported by historical fact.

With the notable exception of the present, which inherited the worst economy since the LAST Republican Great Depression, every single Dem presidency has seen higher job growth and GDP, with lower deficits than every single Republican presidency. Obama is apparently on track to continue that trend. Republicans have also presided over the start more and longer recessions than Democrats, and are credited for making the Great Depression much worse than it should have been.

The only Americans who have ALWAYS benefited from Republican presidencies are the richest Americans, and income inequality has ALWAYS increased under them. In contrast, the middle class has grown more under Democratic administrations.

[Bienville]

11:14 AM on 05/10/2012

That hotbed of pinko propaganda, Forbes magazine printed an article some years ago.

Forbes ranked the best president for prosperity was Clinton, followed by Johnson, Kennedy, Reagan, Ford, Carter, Truman, Nixon, Eisenhower and Bush41. Notice how the Democrats are distibuted in the top of the list and the Republicans are in the bottom. After Bush43 left office, I tried to add his numbers to this list to see how he would fare under the same methodology. Guess what? Dead last in nearly every category; only his dad was lower when he wasn't.

http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/20/cx_da_0720presidents.html

[KeyopsBack]

07:40 PM on 05/09/2012

Republicans= damn good liars.