When Bush was president 200,000 new jobs was considered anemic as it didn't cover the rise in working age adults.
When Bush was president, the USA gained 3 million jobs. Sounds like a lot, but that amounts to 93,750 jobs a quarter over his 8 years. 200,000 would have been on average a GOOD report for him.
Now, with a greater population 187k is considered great. A sign that the economy is truly booming.
Obama has added somewhere in the (very rough) neighborhood of 10 million jobs during his term. Considering he was handed a economy that was *losing* jobs and took a few months to turn around, doing 3-4 times better than Bush in the same amount of time isn't too shabby. You can see where the talk around these jobs numbers would be a bit more positive, even for cherry-picked reports that happened to have the roughly same number for that month.
Also, this is not exactly the same USA it was in 2008. The Baby Boomers are starting to retire now, (2016-1947 = 69 years). So the labor force is not growing like it was back then. There are some who argue it is now shrinking. So 200k new jobs for a quarter now would be more like 400k back in 2008.
Still, I have not heard anybody use the word "booming". Economists will actually tell you that you don't want "booming" because that has a nasty tendency to be paired with a bust (and inflation). What you'd like to see is sustained moderate growth. That way WHEN the next recession happens after that (they happen), it shouldn't be too horrible, because it doesn't have so much over-exuberance to correct for. Roller-coasters need to stay in the amusement parks.