Republican Presidencies led to recessions, larger deficits; Democratic Presidencies led prosperity

[UCmeNdc]

Republican Presidencies have led to recessions and larger deficits; Democratic Presidencies have led to growth, job gains and lower annual deficits. In short, the Democratic approach to the economy over the past generation has worked. The Republican approach hasn't. And this dramatic difference becomes even more pronounced when one considers the how shockingly wrong the GOP's bet the house predictions of the failure of both the 1993 Clinton budget and the "job-killing" ACA have been.

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/11/10/1448387/-The-800-pound-donkey-in-the-GOP-debate?detail=email

[Agnosticsherbet]

1. It fascinates me that the general public believes the exact opposite.

It says something about the success Republicans have had with propaganda, and about the American acceptance of conservative ideology.

[tabasco]

2. I'm baffled that this is not the topic of every Democratic campaign ad

How is it possible that repukes are STILL touting "trickle down economics" and "tax cuts for the rich?"

[Johonny]

3. I always find it unbelievable that anyone thinks: cutting taxes, removing the FED, ending banking

regulations, ending funding to medicare, ending social security, ending food stamps, closing the department of education, going back on the gold standart, fighting foreign wars, etc... basically the entire Republican package would be great boon to the US economy.

The entire GOP package sold to GOP voters if put into practice would cause a Global recession and likely end the American economy as we know it and replace it with a third world economy which would take years to recover from. The old standard was GOP candidates tossed out those idea to attract their foolish base. These days the base IS their candidates.

[merrily]

4. Remind me what Gramm, Leach, Bliley and the Commodities Futures Financial Services Act led to.