"Any economic gain by a Democratic president was due to his Republican predecessor"

[Lone_Star_Dem]

How do you reply to this argument? I've been hearing it more and more lately as bush's advance into his second term lengthen. I asked one person last night who was complaining about the economy and the size of our debt how he doesn't see it as bush's fault since this is his second term. His reply was, "he's still trying to fix the damage Clinton did." He didn't like Reagonomics, but thought Bush Sr. was responsible for repairing that damage and that Clinton reaped the benefits of his hard work. I tried to explain that Bush Sr. only continued down the same path as Reagan until his last year when he began working with Democrats to raise taxes and decrease our debt, but he wouldn't hear any of it.

[Divide Et Impera]

1. So....

....with that logic, any Democratic President that sees the US go through a recession under his/her watch can look back and blame his/her Republican predecessor?

If it's a cycle they are arrguing, you get credit and you get blame. If good is credited in reverse, so must bad. See if they accept that....

[MannyGoldstein]

2. With The Facts

http://blueworksbetter.com/PresidentsGDPGrowth

[Lone_Star_Dem]

10. Nice site

Thanks for the link. I'll get a lot of use of this one.

[kenny blankenship]

3. Herbert Hoover--collapse, depression, George Herbert Walker Bush--recession

the late Eisenhower years were a recession too.

[Norquist Nemesis]

4. All you can do is reply with two words and a gesture

Whatever Dude. :eyes:

[RubyDuby in GA]

7. I'm with you. Sometimes you just can't reason with someone this stupid

Quickly point out to the idiot how our education system has failed as well when people think that Republicans manage money better than their Dem predecessors.

[Norquist Nemesis]

16. I don't think it's stupidity as much as partisan stubbornness

They just refuse to allow themselves to give any hint of praise to "the enemy". That would be a sign of weakness!

In fact, giving credit where credit is due can strengthen and give one the upper hand. But hey, when you're constantly striving for 51%, then punching those who are not already standing in line behind you keeps creds with your buds, I guess. (sorry for the horrific sentence structure - LOL!)

[Webster Green]

5. "How do you reply to this argument?"..

You mean something short of an aluminum baseball bat, correct?

[Lone_Star_Dem]

12. It's not that I wouldn't like to

But his wife is a sweet lady and a dear friend, even if she has an odd taste for ignorant men.

[porphyrian]

6. Because those levels of growth couldn't occur if republicants didn't fuck things up so much.

Without republicants ruining the economy for all but a few every time they take power, Democratic economic growth would simply be moderate.

[Ganja Ninja]

21. Bingo!

A Democrat following a Democrat isn't going to have as much economic success because he/she won't be starting from the bottom of an economic well.

[Selatius]

8. You need to show him this:

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

That should shut up whoever this person is.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

18. That's another great resource to add to my arsenal

Thank you. I'll be seeing him again in a couple of days and I want to have solid facts to show him.

[Selatius]

32. You can't win without the "arsenal of democracy"

I'm sorry, whenever you said the word, I just had to quote the old slogans left behind from WW2 propaganda flicks. :)

[sandnsea]

9. Nixon-Ford

Carter inherited hyper-inflation. It works the other way around actually. Democrats are always cleaning up the economic mess of Republicans. Reagan reaped the benefits of Carter appointing Volcker.

And JFK cutting taxes? Yeah, because we had gone a long way in paying off WWII and could afford to cut them - the top bracket being 70%.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

20. I forgot to bring up Ford he's an excellent example

To be honest I was shocked by how he was giving Bush Sr. credit while disliking Reagan. That was a first for me.

[Parisle]

11. Confidence

--- Bush Sr held the budget deficit record, until Junior came along. The economy largely operates on confidence, and that was what gave Clinton an edge,.... that, and the fact that Ross Perot had alerted the entire nation to the problem of debt. Clinton's good economic years were due to the rising level of confidence attendant to the serious effort to reduce debt and solve the persistent budget deficit. No matter what W says, budget deficts are not good.

[jsamuel]

13. "That's bullshit and you know it."

Then Reagan did ok because of Carter and GHWB did badly because of Reagan.

[philosophie_en_rose]

14. Translation: "Democrats wouldn't look so good, if Republicans didn't suck so much."

Technically, I agree with the statement that Democratic successes are at least partially due to Republicans. Republican failures.

[tulsakatz]

15. it's the typical GOP reaction.........

...they always blame the other guy first!!

After all, it's easier than accepting blame themselves!!

[ProfessorGAC]

17. There Are Many Published Papers

I've gotten three published in peer reviewed journals that prove the opposite. You really can't refute a nonsense argument, because the sophistication of the proof won't be accepted by someone who has already made up their mind.

I think it's a lost cause.
The Professor

[chaska]

19. That A'hole Trump has said that the economy does better under Dems...

For what it's worth. You can google that, I'm sure.

A boss I had - a none too liberal man - said the same thing several years back.

[LSK]

22. I'm sure glad we are enjoying this GREAT GEORGE WASHINGTON ECONOMY!!!

[left of center]

23. These are the rankings for % growth of the deficit

(1) Reagan
(2) *Bush Jr.
(3) Clinton
(4) Bush Sr.

*Bush Jr. will move ahead of Reagan before he leaves office.

[gratuitous]

24. Short answer as always: Prove it

After all, by the time Clinton left office, we were running budget surpluses, which continued into the first year of Bush's administration. Then Bush went to war, cut taxes, increased spending, and ran up the biggest federal deficits ever seen. Those are the facts, incontrovertible and clear. How does any of that impute to Clinton? Only in the overfevered imaginations of doofuses who make this specious argument.

[sinkingfeeling]

25. Ask them who has added more to the federal debt than all other presidents combined?

[ComerPerro]

26. Consider the recession that ended Bush Sr's presidency

and that came after almost 12 years of Republican politics.

The economy didn't start turning around really until the late nineties.

[tjwash]

27. Rush Limbaugh started that shit years ago.

In the Nineties, right after Bill Clinton raised taxes on the upper 5%. He started by screaming that the raising taxes on the wealthiest and the corporations were going to ruin the country.

After that didn't happen, he screamed that the huge mega-corps just could not bear the tax burdon that they were saddled with at all, and that it would result in the meltdown of jobs in the country.

That didn't happen either, and then the economy actually started to boom for a spell. He finally switched to "this is actually Ronald Reagan's trickle down economics at work; Bill Clinton had nothing to do with it" meme that his dittoheads, sheeple, and kool-aid drinkers have repeated over and over again since then.

Or it just could have been the drugs talking.

[LondonReign2]

28. Ask how long the lag is

Some Repug neighbors tried this line, and I asked how long it took for "wonderful new policies" to fix things. (Given Repubs held the Presidency for 12 years and Clinton for 8, there is no right answer for Repugs).

"Ten Years" was the answer.

"So Reagan caused Bush's recession?"

Rapid backing away from previous statement...

[tritsofme]

29. Its called the business cycle.

Politicians can take steps to tweak it, but there will always be recessions even if the most responsible people controlled fiscal and monetary policy for 50 years.

Pols like to admit this when the economy is in the shitter, but are very quick to take credit for any improvements.

[ck4829]

30. That's not an argument, but ask to provide data

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

31. Ask them to answer these questions:

1. Who gets the credit/blame if there is prosperity during a Democratic administration? (Your OP contains their answer)

2. Who gets credit/blame if there is recession or collapse during a Democratic administration?

3. Who gets credit/blame if there is prosperity during a Republican administration?

4. Who gets credit/blame if there is recession or collapse during a Republican administration?

If there answer is merely that by definition, any prosperity has to be due to Republican policies whether recent or past, and any recession must be due to Democratic policies, recent or past, then they are being intellectually dishonest and have closed their mind, therefore it is not worth your while to "debate" them as there is no debating them, their mind is made up and closed. They have set impossible conditions for any meaningful exchange of ideas to occur.