Hillary Clinton wants Americans to believe the economy does better with a Democratic president than a Republican in the White House — that is simply false.
Unless a president presides over an absolute economic disaster — as did George W. Bush or Herbert Hoover — comparing one with another is tricky business.
So much depends on the circumstances each inherits and the state of the wider global economy.
The best apples to apples comparison is between the rather difficult conditions Presidents Reagan and Obama inherited and how the fortunes of America's families then progressed — with Reagan relying on conservative prescriptions and Mr. Obama on activist government to stimulate growth.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
5 comments:
The only growth we've really seen is in the government sector.
Honestly, while the President makes an impact, we must also acknowledged and pay homage to the generation of entitlement. People in WA state actually asked for lower hours when min wage went up because they stopped qualifying for free bennies at the state's expense.
The sad thing is a president and congress can go so far, but if folks are looking to live on the dole, you can't fix stupid. It's a scientifically proven fact.
Facts don't bear that out, the economy always does worse because Republican presidents run up more debt than Democratic presidents.
3:25
Was that suppose to be sarcasm or are you just stupid? Obama has run up more debt than all the others put together.
Post a Comment