Mitt Romney likes to claim that because of his experience in the private sector, he "knows how to create jobs". Let's examine this proposition.
First, being the president is a different matter from being the CEO of a private company. There is no evidence whatsoever that success in the latter translates into success in the former.
Second, the GOP position which Romney embraces holds that it is not the public sector that creates jobs, but rather the private sector. Consequently, how does Romney propose that as president he will "create jobs". Romney reminds one of Nixon's claim in 1968 that he had a secret plan to end the war in Vietnam. Claims like this are as bogus as can be.
Third, an examination of Romney's record at Bain Capital casts doubt on the job creation claim. Indeed, Romney has backed off of his original claim that 100,000 jobs were created, and now says "tens of thousands". The reason is that the companies he took over which were successful may have created 100,000 jobs, but the net job creation was much less, due to the many companies which failed under the "leadership" provided by Bain.
Fourth, a much more apt comparison would be Romney's record as governor of Massachusetts. His record of job creation during his governorship ranked him 47th out of the 50 states!! This really gets to the heart of the matter. If Romney's leadership is so great for the economy, why did he rank 47th out of 50? I expect the Obama campaign will hammer at this over and over, as it has already started doing in the battleground states like Ohio.
Numbers and historical linguistics: a match made in heaven?
42 minutes ago