So is this new jobs report good news for President Obama? Short answer: Meh.

Barack Obama will try to use it to change the narrative after his debate debacle, but while not bad it is not all that good either.

First of all there is some skepticism of the timing of the report and manipulation of the numbers...

Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can't debate so change numbers
— Jack Welch (@jack_welch) October 5, 2012

Even Joe Scarborough questions it.

CNBC explains the numbers:

"When you look at the payrolls numbers, they are bumping along where we have been around this 100,000 level, which is not enough to consistently reduce the unemployment rate," said Lee Ferridge, head of macro strategy for North America at State Street Global Markets. "The overall message is one of plodding along. It's OK, it's not disastrous, but it's nowhere near where the Fed wants it to be."

Update:
Ed Morrissey explains... 

In today’s case, the establishment survey showed a result that corresponds closely to other economic trends and that doesn’t deviate much from the intraseries trend.  The household survey, from which the jobless rate is derived, showed a very large deviation from its own trending and from the growth data in the economy.  The last time we had that many added in the household survey, the GDP growth rate was around 9%, and it’s currently 1.5%.

That’s why people who understand data and surveys look skeptically at the result of the household survey.  It doesn’t mean a conspiracy is in place; it does strongly suggest that this month’s sample of 60,000 households threw an outlier, especially when compared with the establishment survey and other economic data.  If so, it will likely correct itself in the next report.  That’s not “trutherism” or denial, but straightforward data analysis.

It is time to try something new...
David Brooks is a friggin tool...