« People of the Screen | Main | Mission Accomplished? »

Bush Latest GOPer to Show Democrats Better for the Economy


“If you want to live like a Republican, vote Democratic.”
-Harry Truman made that statement generations ago, and it appears now that there is much proof behind it. Former president George W. Bush (who was, interestingly enough, our nation’s first MBA president) presided over the worst eight year economic performance in modern American history. His administration was marked by a recession that began two months after he entered office and took another downturn in his final year of office. The last president to preside while the stock market did worse was Herbert Hoover during the Great Depression. Overall, our nation is counting on Barrack Obama to get us out of this, and time will tell whether he is able to or not. But is it possible that being a Democrat, Barrack Obama will automatically have a better command of our economy than would another Republican, such as George Bush? This article sites plentiful evidence that that could be the case.
Poll after poll has showed that when the American public divides up the chores of running this country, they tend to think of the economy and stock market as Republican domain, while there is a tendency delegate “softer” issues, like the environment, to the Democrats. Contrary to this, however, much evidence has been shown which illustrates that it is the Democrats who are the ones more adept at managing our economy.
Perhaps the most interesting piece of evidence I’ve come across regarded the stock market; Imagine you had to invest in the stock market under either Democratic or Republican administrations exclusively for the past 40 years. If you had invested under Republican presidents only, an investment of 10,000 in the S&P stock market would have grown to 11,733. (As of October) Under strictly Democratic administrations, however, your 10,000 would have ballooned into 300,671 dollars. (Also as of October) The average annualized return under Republican presidents is 0.4%, though in fairness, it would be 4.7% discounting Herbert Hoover’s presidency during the Great Depression. Under Democrats, however, the average annualized return is 8.9%. Which basically blows both .4% and 4.7% out of the water. I also find it very interesting that most of the 20th century “bear” markets have taken place under Republican administrations; from the stock market crash of 1929, to the early 1970’s oil stock, to the 1987 correction and finally to the current stall under George W. Bush.
Interestingly, the superior performance of Democratic presidents has been shown to not be specific to the stock market, either. According to findings in 2006 by Elliot Parker at The University of Nevada, Democratic administrations have done better than Republican ones when it comes to;
Unemployment- 5.2% to 6%
Job creation- .4% decrease in unemployment vs. a .3% increase
Gross Domestic Product growth rate- 4.2% vs. 2.9%
With this evidence considered, I have to question why on earth Democrats appear to be so much better at handling the economy? I doubt the entire reason is anything so simple as regulated vs. regulation free policies, or any single ideology of the Democratic party, though I suppose those factors definitely should at least be considered. After looking at the evidence which shows the economy so strongly favors Democrats, I wish it were shared with more people, and made into common knowledge by the public. It’s not that I believe that the Republican party deserves embarrassment, or that I believe everyone will begin voting Democrat because of this or even believe this to be true, however this evidence needs to be put forth and examined, because perhaps if we are able to figure out why this trend has taken place, we can eventually find the best ways to run our economy. Whether you’re red, blue, green, or anything else, having a strong and healthy economy is in all of our best interests.
I found this article not only very informative, but also supported by ample evidence. Because it had so much in the way of evidence and sources, I don’t think it deserves to be written off as some sort of propaganda. Even if the article was written by a staunch Democratic supporter, I think we should take the facts and figures and let the history speak for itself; The Republicans are a group known for wanting to be judged by history, after all.
The only thing I felt the author was lacking in this article was a possible explanation for why this might be, though perhaps the answers are just unknown at this point. That’s why I believe it’s so crucial that we figure out what’s really going on so that maybe we can possibly zero in on just what really works and what doesn’t for our economy. I know people have different ideologies and often take them very seriously (I know I do mine) however, I think that for the most part, Americans are all in this together, and we all have the common goal of being prosperous.


*Bush Latest GOPer to Show Democrats Better for the Economy*
http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001367.htm
*Bulls, Bear, Donkeys and Elephants*
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/10/14/opinion/20081014_OPCHART.html

*Kudlow Rewrites History, Blames Dow's Slide on Democrats *
http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001207.htm

*Parker, Elliot. (2006) Does the Party in Power Matter for Economic Performance? UNR Economics Working Paper Series
Working Paper No. 06-008 Retrieved February 28th, 2009.
http://www.business.unr.edu/econ/wp/papers/UNRECONWP06008.pdf*