Republican arguments tend to come down to this:
Demonkkkrat arguments tend to come down to, as Reagan put it, "know[ing] so much that isn't so".
the data taken as a whole
You aren't taking "the data" as a whole. That's the problem here. I'll describe it for you in a minute.
looks really terrible for them,
Projection.
so they attempt "yeah but" arguments, where people are urged to disqualify the data based on a series of special pleadings.
Nah. I will rather be attempting, and succeeding at, a "you are ignoring [this] [this] and [this], thus your conclusion is erroneous" argument.
So, for example, the fact is Trump presided over the worst year in American history for job destruction, and Biden presided over the best year for job creation (at least in terms of raw job count), yet we're told Trump's failure was due to Democratic policy (or "Demonkkkrat" if one is arguing the point with an complete imbecile.)
Trump did not fail. His policies were creating a welcoming environment that led to job growth until Demonkkkrat governor covid tyranny policies created an unwelcoming environment that led to job destruction.
People should keep this in mind, while voting: if you want good results, vote Democrat. If you want a lot of whining about why bad results shouldn't be blamed on Republicans, vote Republican. For me, it's an easy choice.
The truth is precisely the opposite of what you just said here.
So skyrocketing gas prices are a "good result"? Skyrocketing energy prices are too? What about skyrocketing food prices? Stagflation is a "good result"? Increased violence in Demonkkkrat cities is a "good result"? Increased homelessness in Demonkkkrat cities is a "good result"??
The Demonkkkrat Party sounds rather destructive to me... That's why I vote for Republicans, specifically preferring and voting in the primaries for the conservatives within the Party.
Also, "job jumping" would tend to LOWER these numbers, not raise them. This isn't a count of how many people are hired. It's a count of the net change in total job count. So, if you worked one job in period A and another in period B, you wouldn't alter the count at all between those two. The only way you'd impact it is to drive the count for period B lower if it happened to measure at the moment you were "mid jump" (i.e., after your last day at the first job and before your first day at the second). Some people who job hop arrange to have a couple weeks to recharge before starting at their new position, so to the extent we have more job-hopping, that results in what economists call "frictional unemployment," which actually drives down the job count a bit.
This is where you "know so much that isn't so" via ignoring other relevant data and events (aka not looking at "the whole picture").
Let's take a look at the April 2022 employment numbers (Source: BLS) as an example. In that release, it is stated that 428,000 jobs were added in April 2022. Good news, right??!! People are getting back to work!! Yay!!!!
Wait a minute... Simultaneous to that, the reported number of people employed DROPPED by 363,000, the labor participation rate DROPPED 0.2% from the prior month, and the unemployment rate remained steady. So, what's happening here?? How does one reconcile this?
--- Job jumping. There are other factors involved, yes, but job jumping is a major one (especially given how high Demflation is right now).
