Want a Better Economy? History Says Vote Democrat! - Forbes - 2 views
www.forbes.com/...omy-history-says-vote-democrat
barack obama mitt romney campaign economy history romney obama
shared by cody s on 22 Oct 12
- No Cached
-
cody s on 22 Oct 12I think that looking at the historical economical failures and successes of democratic and republican economic policies is a good way to come to a conclusion about which candidate would actually help the economy. The candidates themselves are just spewing rhetoric about tax cuts and the middle class, so this third party analysis of economic growth under Democrats vs. Republicans is really interesting. Check it out.
- ...3 more comments...
-
Jonah Schacter on 22 Oct 12I get what you are saying and agree that this is a good article to look at to see what past parties have done with the economy. If I recall correctly though Professor Potepan said that the president does not have that much power over the economy. Also I do not think this would changed the mind of decided or undecided voters because I think that a lot of average people in the country are going to look at the social issues and where the candidate stands on that subject rather than the economy. This is simply because where someone stands on social issues is a lot easier to understand than issues about the economy.
-
John West on 29 Oct 12I agree that seeing a third party analysis is really informative, and while I can't trust one to be the final word on "what works," I'll be hunting for more like this. What the author said about the party platform mattering in the past is interesting to me, because the priorities of Democrats and Republicans seem so different to me than they were a few decades ago: in that sense, I'm sort of skeptical about how informative a Democrat vs. Republican comparison of economic growth is. Rather, I'm more interested in the particular plans of Obama and Romney, and which specific terms in US history most closely mirror them. I agree with what Jonah is saying about values being a much easier thing to vote off of because it is such an internal question. I'm interested to see how voters can reconcile these really clear-cut moral questions with the obvious priority of the economy in this election.
-
mabel taylor on 30 Oct 12I am also interested in hearing about the economy in this format, where political allegiances are avoided and a clear analysis of both Romney's and Obama's plans is presented. It is really helpful, especially after the issue summaries where we put a lot of trust into what each candidate says on their website and in speeches. But I disagree Jonah that most voters will simply turn away from economic opinions because they are more complicated to understand. Social issues certainly offer a way for undecided voters to understand the morals and general conservative/liberal ideas of a candidate, but this election seems pretty defined by the economy and few people seem like they would ignore it completely.
-
Eli Melrod on 30 Oct 12It is sometimes extremely hard for me to understand the argument for conservative economic philosophies, because while they might seem great paper, have NEVER worked. "Trickle down" economics tend to stagnate the economy, not help it. While I definitely read a lot of liberally biased news sources, I still find that unbiased analysis of economic policy points to liberal policies almost every time. Jonah, if a person is still undecided, I would say they are definitely not going to vote on social issues. If social issues were more important to them than the economy, they would absolutely have already decided who to cast their vote for. It is very clear where the candidates stand on social issues, but is much less clear to the average undecided voter who is "the best candidate to help the economy."
-
Anna Schutte on 09 Nov 12It's great to see the economic facts laid out in this way. I read an article earlier written by two economists who quantified the effect of tax increases on the wealthy and found that tax increases had little effect on job growth or the economy. Again, this article proves that "trickle down" economics isn't based on facts. I wonder why it is so compelling. Of course people would rather believe that independent investment would benefit the economy more than government investment. It's part of the American mythology. The only way to bust a myth is with facts like these.