since way back after WWII it's proven
The presentation compares how the economy has performed by various measures under Democratic and Republican administrations, going back to 1989. That means that it fairly compares 16 years of Democratic presidencies (Clinton and Obama) to 16 (almost) years of Republican presidencies (Bush, Bush, and Trump). It uses official government numbers, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and so forth. There’s no cooking of any numbers. It’s just the facts.
And the facts are that it’s not even close. The economy does better—far better—when we have Democratic presidents. In terms of job creation, median income, health care, and yep, even the stock market, the economy does better—the American people do better—under Democratic presidents. By a mile.
The deck consists of about 15 slides, but I’ll walk you through just six so you get the idea. Let’s start with job creation under each president:
So you see that Clinton is the king here, but Obama is a respectable second. Both Bushes have anemic numbers, and Trump’s are a disaster.
As you can see, it’s devastatingly lopsided. And even if you erase the pandemic-related job losses and give Trump his pre-virus 6.9 million, it would still be Democrats 34 million, Republican 11 million.
Republicans reading this may be thinking, “How convenient, he left out Reagan.” OK. Let’s put him in. In fact, let’s go back to 1961. Bill Clinton did this, you might recall, in his speech to the Democratic convention in Charlotte in 2012, which to me is the greatest convention speech of all time. He said:
“You see, we [Democrats] believe that ‘we’re all in this together’ is a far better philosophy than ‘you’re on your own.’ It is. So who’s right? Well, since 1961, for 52 years now, the Republicans have held the White House 28 years, the Democrats, 24. In those 52 years, our private economy has produced 66 million private sector jobs. So what’s the job score? Republicans, 24 million; Democrats, 42 (million).”
By the end of Obama’s second term, when it was 28 years apiece, 9 million new jobs had been created, so the score was 51 million to 24 million. More than double. Indeed, all this goes back even farther than 1961. Political scientist Larry Bartels showed in his 2012 book Unequal Democracythat since World War II, by a range of measures, the economy has done better under Democrats—overall, much, much better.
There goes that theory. Clinton of course erased the deficit and gave us a surplus, which Dubya wiped out with two big tax cuts. Obama inherited a disaster from him but lowered the deficit over time, and Trump was already making the deficit worse before the virus hit because of his tax cut.
Well, OK then, says our conservative—the stock market! We’re the party of Wall Street! Surely the Dow does better when we’re in charge. Um… Slide 4:
As you can see, up impressively under Obama and (especially) Clinton, up somewhat under Trump, and actually down under both Bushes (these are inflation-adjusted amounts, by the way).
Finally, let’s take a quick look at health care. This is one area in which a majority of people might expect that Democrats have delivered better than Republicans. That majority would be correct:
The rate of non-elderly uninsured has increased under all three GOP presidents but decreased under the Democrats, quite spectacularly under Obama.
There’s more in the full presentation. The unemployment rate? Down under Clinton and Obama, up under the Republicans (here, too, Trump would blame the virus, but as I argued above, part of the blame is his).
Counting the jobs created while a person is president is as close as we can get. And I’d argue that a pattern that goes back to 1988—or 1961, or 1945—surely tells us something. I can guarantee you that if the numbers were reversed, Republicans would be arguing that the methodology was sound.
So it’s a slam dunk. But here’s the question: Why doesn’t America know this? Why haven’t the Democratic Party and their big donors slapped some of these numbers on at least one billboard in every county in America? Why did one Democrat discuss this once in a major speech instead of every Democrat discussing it in every speech?
see full article here https://www.thedailybeast.com/everyo...rat?ref=scroll
GOD I loved Clinton playing a sax gettiing a BJ and still our country prospered
i fear the 2024 election i know the stupid public will put some j o republican in office and bye bye all the increases the elderly got under Biden even tho it aint thousands in ssi it's like an extra $1000 a year or more
The presentation compares how the economy has performed by various measures under Democratic and Republican administrations, going back to 1989. That means that it fairly compares 16 years of Democratic presidencies (Clinton and Obama) to 16 (almost) years of Republican presidencies (Bush, Bush, and Trump). It uses official government numbers, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and so forth. There’s no cooking of any numbers. It’s just the facts.
And the facts are that it’s not even close. The economy does better—far better—when we have Democratic presidents. In terms of job creation, median income, health care, and yep, even the stock market, the economy does better—the American people do better—under Democratic presidents. By a mile.
The deck consists of about 15 slides, but I’ll walk you through just six so you get the idea. Let’s start with job creation under each president:
So you see that Clinton is the king here, but Obama is a respectable second. Both Bushes have anemic numbers, and Trump’s are a disaster.
As you can see, it’s devastatingly lopsided. And even if you erase the pandemic-related job losses and give Trump his pre-virus 6.9 million, it would still be Democrats 34 million, Republican 11 million.
Republicans reading this may be thinking, “How convenient, he left out Reagan.” OK. Let’s put him in. In fact, let’s go back to 1961. Bill Clinton did this, you might recall, in his speech to the Democratic convention in Charlotte in 2012, which to me is the greatest convention speech of all time. He said:
“You see, we [Democrats] believe that ‘we’re all in this together’ is a far better philosophy than ‘you’re on your own.’ It is. So who’s right? Well, since 1961, for 52 years now, the Republicans have held the White House 28 years, the Democrats, 24. In those 52 years, our private economy has produced 66 million private sector jobs. So what’s the job score? Republicans, 24 million; Democrats, 42 (million).”
By the end of Obama’s second term, when it was 28 years apiece, 9 million new jobs had been created, so the score was 51 million to 24 million. More than double. Indeed, all this goes back even farther than 1961. Political scientist Larry Bartels showed in his 2012 book Unequal Democracythat since World War II, by a range of measures, the economy has done better under Democrats—overall, much, much better.
There goes that theory. Clinton of course erased the deficit and gave us a surplus, which Dubya wiped out with two big tax cuts. Obama inherited a disaster from him but lowered the deficit over time, and Trump was already making the deficit worse before the virus hit because of his tax cut.
Well, OK then, says our conservative—the stock market! We’re the party of Wall Street! Surely the Dow does better when we’re in charge. Um… Slide 4:
As you can see, up impressively under Obama and (especially) Clinton, up somewhat under Trump, and actually down under both Bushes (these are inflation-adjusted amounts, by the way).
Finally, let’s take a quick look at health care. This is one area in which a majority of people might expect that Democrats have delivered better than Republicans. That majority would be correct:
The rate of non-elderly uninsured has increased under all three GOP presidents but decreased under the Democrats, quite spectacularly under Obama.
There’s more in the full presentation. The unemployment rate? Down under Clinton and Obama, up under the Republicans (here, too, Trump would blame the virus, but as I argued above, part of the blame is his).
Counting the jobs created while a person is president is as close as we can get. And I’d argue that a pattern that goes back to 1988—or 1961, or 1945—surely tells us something. I can guarantee you that if the numbers were reversed, Republicans would be arguing that the methodology was sound.
So it’s a slam dunk. But here’s the question: Why doesn’t America know this? Why haven’t the Democratic Party and their big donors slapped some of these numbers on at least one billboard in every county in America? Why did one Democrat discuss this once in a major speech instead of every Democrat discussing it in every speech?
see full article here https://www.thedailybeast.com/everyo...rat?ref=scroll
GOD I loved Clinton playing a sax gettiing a BJ and still our country prospered
i fear the 2024 election i know the stupid public will put some j o republican in office and bye bye all the increases the elderly got under Biden even tho it aint thousands in ssi it's like an extra $1000 a year or more
.