, , , , , ,

Roy Blunt tweeted earlier today:

Biden says failing $862B “stimulus” was too small and would have been bigger with more Democrats. The choice is clear on Nov. 2.

Failing stimulus? Guess Roy prefers to ignore the figures from the new Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on the impact of the stimulus on employment and economic growth:

* Raised the level of real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) by between 1.7 percent and 4.2 percent,

* Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.5 percentage points,

* Increased the number of people employed by between 1.2 million and 2.8 million, and

* Increased the number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs by 1.8 million to 4.1 million compared with what those amounts would have been otherwise. …

Or maybe Blunt is agreeing with VP Biden that the stimulus should have been larger?  That would certainly also put him in agreement with economists like Paul Krugman and Nouriel Roubini who are pointing out that the current slowdown in the recovery can be traced to an inadequate stimulus package. Somehow, though, I doubt that our Roy is much swayed by expert opinion, so I think we are left with a nasty little exercise in how to be both dishonest and snide in 140 characters or less.

Blunt is, of course, like the proverbial broken clock that is right twice a day, unequivocally correct that the choice is clear come November. Sadly, though, he seems to be relying on the not unreasonable hope that the Republican effort to obstruct economic progress while muddying public perception will win out. As Paul Krugman observed today:

Since Mr. Obama took office, they [i.e. Republicans] have engaged in relentless obstruction, obviously unworried about how their actions would look or be reported. And it’s working: by blocking Democratic efforts to alleviate the economy’s woes, the G.O.P. is helping its chances of a big victory in November.