Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

McCain Thinks We're Better Off Than We Were 8 Years Ago - But Worse Off Than We Were 4 Years Ago (Huh?)

August 05, 2008 3:11 PM

Sen. John McCain's new TV ad (watch HERE) asserts that "Washington's broken. John McCain knows it. We're worse off than we were four years ago."

But the Obama camp notes that this is a somewhat different note than the one Sen. McCain sang during the primaries. The CNN debate January 30 (watch HERE) featured the following exchange:

"Are Americans better off than they were eight years ago?" asked CNN's Anderson Cooper.

"I think you could argue that Americans overall are better off, because we have had a pretty good prosperous time, with low unemployment and low inflation and a lot of good things have happened," McCain said. "A lot of jobs have been created."

"But let's have some straight talk," McCain continued. "Things are tough right now. Americans are uncertain about this housing crisis. Americans are uncertain about the economy, as we see the stock market bounce up and down, but more importantly, the economy particularly in some parts of the country, state of Michigan, Governor Romney and I campaigned, not to my success, I might add, and other parts of the country are probably better off."

"But I think what we're trying to do to fix this economy is important," McCain said. "We've got to address the housing, subprime housing problem. We need to, obviously, have this package go through the Congress as quickly as possible. We need to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, which I voted for twice to do so. I think we need to eliminate the alternate minimum tax that sits out there and challenges 25 million American families."

Observed Cooper: "It sounds like that we're not better off is what you're saying."

"Pardon me?" asked McCain.

"It sounds like you're saying we're not better off," repeated Cooper.

"I think we are better off overall if you look at the entire eight-year period, when you look at the millions of jobs that have been created, the improvement in the economy, et cetera," McCain said.

Can one think that we're currently better off than we were eight years ago, during the Bill Clinton presidency, but worse off than we were four years ago, during the Bush presidency?

Does that make any sense?

McCain is basically arguing that things were best in 2004, are worse than that now in 2008, but were the absolute worst in 2000.

Our unemployment rate is currently 5.7%. That's higher, worse, than it was four years ago -- 5.4%. But it's also worse than it was eight years ago: 4.1%.

Our inflation rate was 5.02% in June of this year.

That's worse than it was four years ago -- in August 2004, the rate was 2.65%. But it's also worse than it was eight years ago. In August 2000, the inflation rate was 3.41%.

ABC News Polling Director Gary Langer points out that in the ABC News Consumer Comfort Index, Americans' ratings of the national economy, the buying climate and their personal finances all are drastically worse than either four or eight years ago.

Housing on the other hand seemed great four years ago...but the housing market has since collapsed, as Dan Arnall in ABC News' Business Unit points out. So four years ago the economy was propped up by that tent pole. And the bubble burst, to mix metaphors. To be fair, Clinton benefited from the tech bubble in 2000 as Bush did in 2004.

In any case, there are any number of economic matrices by which to measure this. I eagerly await the McCain campaign's explanation.

- jpt

August 5, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (102)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

A lot has changed since January 30th. Home foreclosures are up, unemployment is up, gas prices are up, etc. People are far less optimistic now that they were in January.

All of which adds up to bad news for Obama who ought to be leading by double digits simply by grace of being a Democrat.

Posted by: marylou | Aug 6, 2008 2:02:28 PM

The more McCain talks the more I am convinced he is simply a confused old man who forgets what he is saying mid-sentence many times....The man as a war veteran should be honored. The man as a politician is simply un-inspiring.

Posted by: indy_voter | Aug 6, 2008 12:35:34 PM

We're better off than the Clinton tech stock market crash and the bear markets of the late 1990s. We're better off to not have to listen to the indescretions of the last DEM president and his administration. However, many Americans are now earning less than 8 years ago, many have no retirement, many lost lives or loved ones in wars, many good tech jobs are still going off-shore. We are on the decline. Obama has no solutions and would make things much worse for most Americans. It was the Democrat years that set us up for terrorist attacks, the terrorist planning was taking place in the airports under Clinton's watch, and he didn't get the word out about the threats or these attacks might have been stopped. McCain is the lesser of two evils and because of his military background, he is more trustworthy when he commits to get us out of the middle east wars.

Posted by: Jilly | Aug 6, 2008 9:43:32 AM

McCain graduated 894/899 out of his class. He was smarter than 5 people.
He crashed an airplane 5 separate times as a pilot.
McCain's grandfather/father were both admirals thus giving preferential treatment to McCain allowing him to continue to fly until he crashed again in Hanoi.

Obama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School and became the President of the Harvard Law Review, a coveted and highly prestigious position.

Obama grew up middle class and never crashed an airplane. He served his country by organizing in poor communities.

It's time to pick the smartest and brightest to lead our nation America.

Posted by: Iraq Vet | Aug 6, 2008 12:31:58 AM

John McCain can not be trusted, he is nothing more then a empty suit who happens to have 26 years in the Senate. Just goes to prove just because you have many years of service, that does not mean you are fit to be the next President of the United States. Their is always some out their smarter and more qualified to represent all Americans. That Person is Sen. Barack Obama next President of the United States. P.U.M.A for Obama08 and Obama/Clinton 2012.

Posted by: Orlando B. Fremont Ohio | Aug 5, 2008 10:48:47 PM

With McCain, we'll have a seamless transition from the Bush administration. This is a good thing, eh?

Posted by: Rick_VT | Aug 5, 2008 10:46:50 PM

Straight Talking in Circles

Posted by: The Retrospectivist | Aug 5, 2008 10:10:34 PM

In 2004, McCain's family had received HUGE taxcuts. He thinks ‘America’ was better of 4 years ago than 8 years because HE was.

He thinks he is America

Posted by: Willem van Oranje | Aug 5, 2008 8:56:59 PM

Before we conclude we need more oil everyone should read Senator Ron Wyden's investigative report titled"The Oil Industry, Gas Supply and Refinery Capacity: More than meets the eye"
This report suggests the Oil industry has done all it can to reduce supplyand increase demand for gasoline. The way this is done is to curtail or shut down refinery operations which creates shortages of refined gasoline without really effecting the supply of crude oil.
This sin't the only report which says this. See the November 17, 2007 article in the Arab News which says much the same thing. Both document are online and are available to all who want to know the truth which we are not being told by either candidate for President.

Posted by: Chucklwillswidow | Aug 5, 2008 8:29:07 PM

Dictionary definition of "maverick"--

A person who REFUSES TO ABIDE BY THE POLICIES OR VIEWS OF A GROUP.

When this "group" happens to be the American people, it is a hideous thing to call yourself.

Obama 08

Posted by: Desmond | Aug 5, 2008 7:45:16 PM

"John McCain is an adorable pathetic Pillsbury Doughboy."

Not really, he's more like the creepy old man who offers to have his wife dance topless and brag that he made a video with Paris Hilton.

Posted by: Mike | Aug 5, 2008 7:34:51 PM

Kerry was never up 13 points on Bush. I'll give you Dukakis up by 17 points on Bush 1 but both the 2000 and 2004 races were much closer and changed but not as much as what occurred in 1988 or for that matter in 1980.You can check Real Clear Politics for a pretty good analysis as well as other sites. And again those that don't check the facts--the Democrats didn't take control of both houses until after the 2006 election and even then they didn't have a veto proof majority or 60 votes to really get things done in the Senate. Bush is still the decider who needs to be derided for his failures in both foreign policy, respect of individual rights and deficit disaster, among other shortcomings.

Posted by: bhciapol | Aug 5, 2008 6:34:01 PM

I don't get the punchline here. This guy is truly an idiot!

Posted by: Pat | Aug 5, 2008 6:29:19 PM

John McCain is an adorable pathetic Pillsbury Doughboy.

Posted by: FilmMD | Aug 5, 2008 6:25:49 PM

The man can't even figure out the logic behind a simple chronology - we sure as heck don't want him as President!! Obama will eat McSame alive if they debate.

Posted by: SickofGOPcorruption | Aug 5, 2008 6:17:55 PM

This is another reason why McCain is not qualified. He is a very ignorant man, who will do nothing to help the middle class with the economy, but be an ignorant fool. OBAMA O8

Posted by: Matt | Aug 5, 2008 6:15:17 PM

"I don't think anybody really thinks the polls mean much at this stage; but I'm still pretty sure it is better to be ahead than behind." Posted by: jock59801

Well Jock, the latest Rasmussen poll shows that McCain is actually ahead. I realize this is just ONE poll, however, in every OTHER poll, Obama appears to be going down. He is not increasing his lead, he is decreasing it. McCain is going up.

I've also noticed Nancy Pelosi continues to "postpone" the vote on oil drilling.

If you're right about McCain losing the election and the Democrats increasing their hold on Congress next fall, then I'm sure Pelosi would have no trouble having her party vote on the oil drilling issue right now. The majority of the public is against more oil drilling, right Jock?

If the Democrats were to vote their conscience and put their foot down and say "no drilling, we need to be concerned about global warming", the public would cheer them on and their campaigns next fall would not be in danger.

.... Then why does Nancy Pelosi not want a vote on the issue?

Posted by: jfm125 | Aug 5, 2008 6:09:07 PM

Do you really think politicians have any idea what the rest of America deals with? They are so insulated from the hardships of life that their brain can not possibly relate to everyday people.

Posted by: j | Aug 5, 2008 6:07:15 PM

McLame is all hot air above and oil down below. He can no more get us out of this economic mess than he could get us out of a closet. Dementia is setting in. All you have to do is listen to him talk about foreign affairs (wrought with mistakes) and silly ideas on the economy. Is this the best the repubs have? What a sorry state for them, indeed.

Posted by: truthbetold | Aug 5, 2008 5:47:10 PM

How the heck would he know???

Posted by: Hopeless | Aug 5, 2008 5:45:02 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS