Presidents and the Economy
Here’s a interesting little piece from the CSM on the economic effects of presidencies: The economic limits of politics.
The short version, as I have noted before, is: not so much.
elpt
RSS feed for comments on this post.
TrackBack URI
The trackback url for this post is: http://poliblogger.com/wp-trackback.html?p=5075
NOTE: I will delete any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post.
But it’s sure fun to either a) take credit for it e.g. Clinton; or b) beat them up about it e.g. Bush 41, Bush 43.
Comment by Dave Schuler — Sunday, October 24, 2024 @ 8:25 pm
Hoover was a one-termer because he didn’t even pretend to think that he could affect the economy. Same goes for Bush 41. He just let the business cycle do its thing and let the Dems run all over him for his hands-off policy. The truth is, most voters like to hear that the guy at the top is doing some twiddling every now and then.
Personally, I think that the President’s policies concerning taxes and regulation are very important. More important than deficits. It would be nice if people understood where Alan Greenspan and the “Feds” fit into all of this.
Comment by Remy Logan — Sunday, October 24, 2024 @ 10:09 pm