Bothersidesism attempts to normalize QAnon / Repub economics
[QUOTE=Tiny 12;2768441]I listen to Thom Hartmann on Sirius XM while driving from time to time, as he's the must articulate of the Progressive Democratic Party hack pundits. Actually I listen to him a lot more than all the right of center radio talk show hosts combined. Hartmann's an apologist for Venezuela. Venez fucking uela!
"Deficit Trends" about 2/3rds of the way down the following is a much more balanced breakdown.
[URL]https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/presidents-as-economic-managers[/URL]
The writer, an economist, lambasts the George W. Bush administration for the Iraq war and the effect on the national debt, as he well should.
Otherwise, both parties spend like drunken sailors, and the Democrats are somewhat worse.[/QUOTE]
Typical response to try and normalize and "bothsider" the corrupt and dysfunctional party that is now basically/predominately a QAnon/Repub/Bothersider looney-tunes conspiracy party, hell bent on subverting democracy, the rule of law and The US Constitution.
The "Two Santa Clause" theory clearly has the [b]Repubs[/b], spending like drunken sailors to [b]enrich themselves and their billionaire cronies[/b] and the other party (the Dems) clearly spending money to benefit and stimulate a stagnant and recessive economy, typically decimated and left-for-dead by Repubs, with their ill-fated trickle-down economics.
Yep, your article is just more bothersidesism. But I did like the following quote:
[QUOTE] ... What's more, [b]presidents do not control the business cycle[/b], even if the business cycle plays a part in the outcomes of presidential elections. ...
[URL]https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/presidents-as-economic-managers[/URL][/QUOTE] And yet numbskull Rebubs were all over Biden for the price of gasoline. (...kkkk!)
You have drunk the Koolaid
[QUOTE=Tiny12;2768369]Here's what really happens.
Part 1: A Repub president gets elected. Dems spend 2 years throwing up roadblocks to every bit of legislation the Repubs propose. The Dems point to the "fact" that Repubs haven't gotten anything done (they conveniently forget that Dems were the ones blocking everything). Dems gain a majority of House and-or Senate. Dems spend the next 2 years (or up to 6 more years) complaining about how Repubs want to build a wall and-or want fewer government handouts and-or want to put all the young black men in jail and-or a bunch of other stuff.
Part 2: After 4 (or 8) years, a Dem gets elected president because they have convinced the voters that they know what they're doing re: the economy. Dems have a majority in the House and-or Senate. Dems pass another bunch of voodoo spending bills, largely welfare for corporations and the upper middle class and spend money like drunken sailors. Just look at the 5 trillion in new spending authorized during the first two years of the Biden Administration. Dems are thrown out (after 4 or 8 years) and Repub is elected president and Repubs have control of the House and-or Senate. Repubs pass legislation to cut regulation and taxes that result in the working man actually making some gains instead of falling further and further behind (e.g. 2019). Dems are now pushing harder than ever to spend money like drunken sailors.
Go to Part 1.[/QUOTE]If you believe this, you'd actually have proof. But you don't. As usual.
How about "more votes than the other guy"?
[QUOTE=Tiny12;2768406]Since 1988, two Republicans, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush, have won elections with a majority of the popular vote. And since 1988, two Democrats, Barrack Obama and Joe Biden, won with a majority of the popular vote. Bill Clinton didn't get over 50% either time he ran and won. And George W. Bush didn't get 50% the first time he ran.
I'm not sure whether Donald Trump should be counted as a Republican or a Democrat. He's a Democrat infiltrator of the Republican Party, a former card carrying member of the Democratic Party, and the Democrat's best friend. The Republicans would have won the Senate in 2020 and 2022, and blown out the House in 2022, if not for Trump.[/QUOTE]That shows a different thing, doesn't it?
1988 - Bush 1 received more votes than Dukakis.
1992 - Slick Willie received more votes than Bush 1.
1996 - Slick Willie received more votes than Dole.
2000 - W received FEWER votes than Gore.
2004 - W received more votes than Kerry.
2008 - Obama received more votes than McCain.
2012 - Obama received more votes than Romney.
2016 - Donnie the Dumbass received FEWER votes than Clinton.
2020 - Biden received more votes than Donnie the Dumbass.
The only two Presidents who didn't win the popular vote since 1988 were W and Donnie the Dumbass.
[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_popular_vote_margin[/URL]
No win in 2004 for Bush2 without his winger-rigged 2000 appointment as POTUS
[QUOTE=PVMonger;2768674]That shows a different thing, doesn't it?
1988 - Bush 1 received more votes than Dukakis.
1992 - Slick Willie received more votes than Bush 1.
1996 - Slick Willie received more votes than Dole.
2000 - W received FEWER votes than Gore.
2004 - W received more votes than Kerry.
2008 - Obama received more votes than McCain.
2012 - Obama received more votes than Romney.
2016 - Donnie the Dumbass received FEWER votes than Clinton.
2020 - Biden received more votes than Donnie the Dumbass.
The only two Presidents who didn't win the popular vote since 1988 were W and Donnie the Dumbass.
[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_popular_vote_margin[/URL][/QUOTE]It likely would have been a straight 8 for 8 losers on actual votes for the Repubs if W hadn't been awarded the presidency in 2000 by a winger-rigged SCOTUS stopping the count in Florida in a panic before his dwindling 535 vote lead evaporated. It was only because of his colossal National Security negligence and hundreds of lies to bamboozle us into 3 wrong-headed quagmire wars during his winger SCOTUS-appointed term that he was able to squeak out a narrow win for his 2nd run as a "Wartime President".
Those were two of the worst individual presidential term results of all time on the basis of National Security and the economy. Surpassed on horrific results only by Trump's one term.
Evidently you forgot 2008
[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2770253]Dems good, Republicans bad huh? Where we do send you your copy of 1984? How much of the federal budget is not earmarked for nonpartisan entitlements? 10%? 20%? Yeesh.
Oh yeah, how about some facts to go along with this? Tapping the SPR? Letting Venezuela produce more oil? Begging the Saudis to produce more after condemning them as monsters? Pissing off American oil companies by saying you are going to put them out of business?
I actually looked into the STEO at the EIA website after you posted this. The most amazing part was seeing Russia. The war was the catalyst for higher prices, and despite all the USA and European blubbering about boycotting Russian crude, their production is not down by one iota. China is just now getting out of Covid lockdown, and they are the #2 consumer of oil. On top of that, prices on diesel are still sky high. Yeah, prices are down on gasoline and except for draining the SPR, what does Biden have to do with that?
Apparently, American oil producers are gearing up to produce like nuts in 2023 which is great news. I am not sure if it is the Republicans controlling the house or Biden privately telling them to go ahead. Yeah, for all your bullshit talk about Republicans kissing corporate America's ass, the oil companies have been killing it under Biden.
I like Obama's policies where oil companies produced like crazy got oil and gasoline prices down and made less money than they are now. With Biden, oil production has barely moved, prices are up, and oil companies are making record profits. So which president's oil policies do you prefer, Spidy, Biden's or Obama's?
Does your head explode with anything outside of Republicans bad, Democrats good?
So just to be clear, I wanted Biden to go back to Obama's policies, and your sorry ass had to bring up Republicans. Gee, I wonder why that is.[/QUOTE]When Bush 2 was in office in 2008, gasoline hit $4 per gallon. Repubs went on every talk show they could find to say that the president was not responsible for the price of gasoline. In fact, only a fool would believe that once COVID (virtually) ended, that we wouldn't see massive inflation due to demand outpacing supply and the COVID-related supply chain issues. And what happened? Massive inflation! Inflation would have happened regardless of who was in the White House. Inflation would have happened if (God forbid) the US would have elected Donnie the Dumbass again.
But, with the Repubs in control of the House, we can get ready for 2 years of angertainment from them. They'll investigate every Democrat whose name they can spell (and with tRUMPettes leading the way, I expect a lot of misspellings {like the moron who called for Donnie the Dumbass to implement 'Marshall Law' they'll try to impeach President Biden because he stutters sometimes, they'll shut down the Government over some cockamamie BS or another and then blame the Dems for failing to go along with their cockamamie BS.
But here's the thing. You Repubs bay at the moon over "Dems good, Repubs bad" as it that's all there is to it. It isn't. Repubs have done a few things right (like the Interstate Highway system) and lots of stuff wrong (China tariffs, "trickle-down economics", tax cuts for the rich). Dems have done lots of stuff right (Social Security, Civil Rights act, GI Bill, the Affordable Care Act) and some stuff wrong (the Affordable Care Act). But, in general, Dems want America to get better while Repubs want America to stay the same.
The demographics of America are changing. America is becoming less white, less homophobic, less xenophobic and less misogynistic. But instead of embracing that inevitability, Repubs are pandering to their mostly-white and mostly-older and mostly-non-college-degreed base and telling them to be afraid of anybody who isn't white, anybody who is LGBTQ+ and anybody who is an immigrant. It reminds me of several lines from the movie "The American President" where the President holds a press conference and talks about his opponent. "he is interested in two things, and two things only: making you afraid of it, and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections. You gather a group of middle-aged, middle-class, middle-income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character. " If you've never seen the movie, here's the link. I suggest that you watch it over-and-over again until you understand what he's saying. [URL]https://www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSpeeches/moviespeechtheamericanpresident.html[/URL].