Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The numbers don't lie. Over the last 50 years, Republican presidents have been bad for job growth.
Republicans controlled 2/3 of government in the 1990's when there was growth and a PROJECTED budget surplus. The Democrats took over 2/3 of government with the 2006 elections and have held that or at times even had total control since and well, look at the results. Housing bust, financial bust and the worst economic recovery in 70 years. So your point is again?
Could have something to do with all the bailouts, which were not done by the prior administration.
Wow...TARP was not done by President Bush...were you not alive in 2008 when he said we had to bail out all the banks w/ TARP, and also additionally AIG???
You're flat out stupid if you don't think Bush did the bailouts...the only thing Obama bailed out was the Auto Industry (after Bush did once too), and he saved it and saved a million jobs.
Wow...TARP was not done by President Bush...were you not alive in 2008 when he said we had to bail out all the banks w/ TARP, and also additionally AIG???
You're flat out stupid if you don't think Bush did the bailouts...the only thing Obama bailed out was the Auto Industry (after Bush did once too), and he saved it and saved a million jobs.
Now this is frightening. This is what they mean when they speak of the low information voter.
And if your argument is accurate, then George W. is to blame for whatever problems we've had since Obama took office.
No, you must understand, it only applies when a good economy may be attributed to a Republican, not a poor one.
I suppose the recession under George HW Bush is not attributable to Reagan, either. Good economies from Republican presidents skip a generation, or something like that.
Correlation does not prove causation, particularly when many actions in the political arena take years to bear fruit. We also have a Congress which has a bit to do with policies and budgets.
Of course, that won't stop you from drawing causal relationships between a whole host of actions by Obama and the economy, despite the fact that no reputable economist would ever assert such causations.
Wow...TARP was not done by President Bush...were you not alive in 2008 when he said we had to bail out all the banks w/ TARP, and also additionally AIG???
You're flat out stupid if you don't think Bush did the bailouts...the only thing Obama bailed out was the Auto Industry (after Bush did once too), and he saved it and saved a million jobs.
I thought Dems liked bail outs and TARP. By the way the car companies came back only because the government bought millions of cars from them. Government motors, remember? Bet those cars are sitting in lots all over the country behind empty government buildings with no one using them. The cars or the buildings. You need to watch Greta Von Susteren sometime and see how our government wastes all kinds of things and sends the bill to the tax payer.
There are ways to hide government waste and they are experts doing it.
Of course, that won't stop you from drawing causal relationships between a whole host of actions by Obama and the economy, despite the fact that no reputable economist would ever assert such causations.
I haven't done much of that. It is a damn good thing cap and trade did not go through. The Republican's saved Obama there. I will point out specific programs or economic policies that damage the economy. Our 16 trillion dollar deficit and unfunded liabilities need to be addressed sooner, not later.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.