This is more like stump rhetoric than a case. Do you have any actual numbers you want to point to to make your case?
What was anemic about it? Let's compare some actual numbers. Heck, easily the biggest Trump's campaign economic claim was bringing back jobs from overseas, something that did not happen and won't be happening either.
This is more like stump rhetoric than a case. Do you have any actual numbers you want to point to to make your case?
Sure, let's review:
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/09/obamas-final-numbers/
- 11.6 million non-farm jobs
- Received unemployment rate at 7.8% (rising to 10% in the first few months during the recession), left office at 4.8%
- Inflation adjusted income of Americans went up by 5.3%
- Corporation profits had record-highs.
- Stocks up an average of 166% in value
I mean, I'm not even a Barry fan, but the economic context that he received, versus what Don received, it's just not even comparable. We're talking getting handed the biggest recession since the great depression vs a booming economy by all measures.
Was it a stellar, spot-less economy? Certainly not, could be improved. But I don't think 'great' is a misnomer, and certainly far from 'anemic', which is what Barry himself received.
tbh, if we're going to talk economy, Dubya also received a booming economy, did his tax cut thing, and then let the banks completely obliterate it. So like I said, Dennison should get credit for not ing it up, at least just yet.
So let's see your numbers that it was anemic. It was your claim, you get to support it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)