bouzane said:
Kasz216 said:
I'd guess because republicans have traditionally gotten us out of dicey economic times.
The last 6 or so recessions have stopped under Republicans outside the most recent one, though despite being "technically" over I doubt many people feel it's actually over.
Reagan fixed Carters mess.
Bush Senior had a recession that he stopped after the cold war ending caused spending in that regard to fall apart. (Who's debt crisis was actually quite like the crisis today.)
Hell, even before the Sub Prime Mortgage crisis happened, Bush Junior got us out of the .com crash/9/11.
Nixon even got us out of a recession i believe.
So really... the reason people would think that is recent historical precedent. For a lot of people alive, practically any recession they've experienced as been "fixed" by a republican.
|
About Reagan, isn't it easy to fix the economy when you spend your way out of it? The man tripled the nation's debt. Although, let's not kid ourselves. Unemployment rose to over 10% in 1982 before it started to recede. Reagan didn't fix America's economic woes, falling oil prices did. Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. were all miserable failures from an economic standpoint, racking up trillions of debt that will eventually threaten the nation's very existence. The only half way competent economist to run the country in the last 30+ years was Bill Clinton.
|
Not really, you can spend your way out of a recession but there will always be a kick back.
Which is why Bush had to clean up after Cold War spending dried up.
I was talking about perceptions though, which this is the general perception... not that Reagan did fix anything.
As for Clinton, he argueably set up the financial crisis we're currently in now. (It's actually hard to argue he didn't... people either blame the Banking Modernization act, or expanded Subprime morgages, which both happened under his watch, and he was for both.)
The reason Clinton didn't run up deficits? PAYGO was passed by Bush Senior and he had rapidly rising tax revenue increases from the boom being created. He and congress really couldn't have if they tried.
Bush Senior was really the only good "economic" president... he had a huge deficit, but that was largely due to democrats refusing to cut spending to meet the giant drop in revenue even though Bush Senior was elected specifically to "Not raise taxes."
Then Bush gave in anyway, and raised taxes... got spending cuts... and everything was fine without keynsian stimulus.
