Either way, according to the economists, it would be difficult to do much worse than George Bush. The respondents give Mr Bush a dismal average of 1.7 on our five-point scale for his economic management. Eighty-two per cent thought Mr Bush’s record was bad or very bad; only 1% thought it was very good.
The Democrats were overwhelmingly negative, but nearly every respondent viewed Mr Bush’s record unfavourably. Half of Republican respondents thought Mr Bush deserves only a 2. “The minimum rating of one severely overestimates the quality of Bush’s economic policies,” says one non-aligned economist.
Examining the candidates in the 2 October Economist.
The Economist surveyed "683 research associates of the National Bureau of Economic Research, America’s premier association of applied academic economists," and found that "eighty per cent of respondents and no fewer than 71% of those who do not cleave to either main party say Mr Obama has a better grasp of economics. Even among Republicans Mr Obama has the edge: 46% versus 23% say Mr Obama has the better grasp of the subject."
via @kellywilliams
2 comments:
maybe people are starting to realize that sending us headlong into an economic crisis might be worse than being involved in a tawdry sex scandal.
Maybe.
Great link! When the economist tells off a candidate for going too far towards a free market, you know it's morning in Murica.
Post a Comment