Ron Paul For President in 2008

[Final-Fan]

I think that your numbers are severely flawed. Allow me to explain why. My total for Republican-attributable debt is 3916B to your 3800B, while my D-debt is 7095B to your 7000B; the difference is small. I make no assertions as to whose totals are more accurate. But you divided that total, in the case of Republicans, by 46 "events" (not sure what you mean here), while I divided it by the 83 "thirds" (of FY budget control) that Republicans exercised. 3800 / 46 = 82.61 (not sure how you arrived at 84, except perhaps by dividing in reality by 45) whereas 3916 / 84 = 47.18. Similarly, for the Democrats, you divided 7000 by 68 "events" (again, what does this mean?), while I divided 7094 by 151 "thirds" of FY control. 7000 / 68 = 102.94 (again, not sure how you got 104, unless you actually divided by 67) whereas 7095 / 151 = 46.98. WWII: (7095-2035) / (151-12) = 5060 / 139 = 36.40 In my above post, I (apparently) accidentally subtracted four years instead of twelve thirds from the 151 total. Whoops! My apologies. So, in conclusion, I reaffirm my faith in my methodology (count up the debt by "thirds", then divide by number of "thirds") and register my utter confusion at yours (count up the debt by "thirds" (I presume), then divide by whatever the hell "events" are*). *[edit: In actuality, I had by this point developed a suspicion as to what you counted as "events", which a brief check has just confirmed. You counted an "event" as a FY in which a party had some input on the debt, regardless of whether that was 1/3, 2/3, or 3/3. I remain curious as to what possessed you to do this instead of weighting debt responsibility by degree of budget control, or if nothing else CONSISTENTLY applying the "event" rule instead of only applying it to one-half of your methodology.]