The largest contributor to the GDP was the category private investment, and most of that is inventory build. If inventories don't sell, they must be liquidated, and virtually every retailer this last earning reportings season noted disappointing final demand and retail sales and projected more of the same going forward. Private investment will then reverse in coming quarters.

The GDP numbers are in fact suspect, as economists from both sides of the political divide argue when the other party is in power. The real GDP number is the nominal GDP adjusted by the GDP deflator, a price index. Constructing and implementing the deflator is not an exact science, and the government has every incentive to fudge the deflator down (reduced transfer payments that are tied to price indexes, lower inflation numbers often translate into lower bond yields and our government is the biggest debtor on the planet, better reported real growth, etc). Hedonic adjustment is a controversial practice that supposedly adjusts the deflator based on quality improvements in goods and services, but which probably flatters the deflator. Finally, the government recently started adding research and development costs to GDP. (In Europe, some countries are debating adding criminal and black market activities to GDP.)

There is no denying that this is the weakest "recovery" in many decades. The improvement in the unemployment rate has been driven primarily by a large drop in the labor force particpation rate. Food stamp participation, on the other hand, is at a record high. Real incomes are still below where they were before the financial crisis, which may explain why so many do not "feel" that there has been a recovery. Multiple quantative easings would have been unnecessary had the recovery been of the usual strength. As so many have noted, most of this recovery's beneficial effects have been concentrated on the wealthiest, in the form of asset price appreciation.

Obamacare, rising tax and regulatory burdens, and ever mounting debt service will continue to retard economic growth. Any decent financial crisis would knock us right back into another severe recession, and probably a depression. It's been almost six years since the last one; gross debt levels are even higher than they were then; the Too Big To Fail financial institutions are even bigger and more concentrated with financial risk; so we are probably due.

When the government controls the collection of statistical data, they can control the release of the statistical data. They release "good" economic news with great fanfare in the MSM, then quietly revise the data down 3 weeks later. At best, the MSM wonks are "surprised" by stats that show how poorly our economy is doing versus the world.
The "walls street fat cats" who are paying $32K apiece to eat BBQ with the golfer-in-chief this weekend are happy to be vilified by BHO as long as they get access to QE money from Fed at nearly zero interest.
The rest of us can just eat cake.
Cheers.

This is after a Q2 revision.

What data do you propose we use? Or are you judging the economy on gut feel?

You make interesting points but without addressing any of the arguments regarding GDP numbers and their calculations. I notice you never address these economic arguments directly. Why not?