More good economic news.

[Norlamand]

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/031211/nyth120_1.html

Predictions of course, but it does seem that the recession GWB inherited is turning around. Any opinions on how this is likely to effect the 2004 elections? Is it possible the good economy could make up for the "quagmire" in Iraq?

 

[Bozo Erectus]

If Clinton wasnt responsible for the biggest economic boom in US history, dont see how Bush can take credit for the current blip.

 

[The Yankee]

Just projections. We will see how this will all play out in the coming year, and how it will affect the voters, the Democratic nominee, the next administration moves, and of course, seeing what goes on in Iraq and/or Afghanistan or elsewhere.

I still think it's far too early to judge for next November.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

Excellent news, Norlamund. If only stockbrokers were the only voters.

The vast majority of voters will not vote based on the latest gdp growth numbers. President Reagan's good old question will still apply to this election. We'll see if these wonderful recoveries can trickle down to the people that actually matter fast enough to get Mr Bush re-elected.

EDIT: Dumb Pothead, there's a simple economic rule in politics. Every boom is due to a Republican president. Doesn't matter if he was four, ten, or twenty years ago - however far back you have to reach is how far is acceptable.

Pretty soon cons like Norla will be reminding us that the economic boom in the Clinton years was really all due to G.W. Bush's imminent election.

 

[Norlamand]

Originally posted by Pontiuth Pilate
Excellent news, Norlamund. If only stockbrokers were the only voters.

The vast majority of voters will not vote based on the latest gdp growth numbers. President Reagan's good old question will still apply to this election. We'll see if these wonderful recoveries can trickle down to the people that actually matter fast enough to get Mr Bush re-elected.

EDIT: Dumb Pothead, there's a simple economic rule in politics. Every boom is due to a Republican president. Doesn't matter if he was four, ten, or twenty years ago - however far back you have to reach is how far is acceptable.

Pretty soon cons like Norla will be reminding us that the economic boom in the Clinton years was really all due to G.W. Bush's imminent election.

Silly boy, you still believe that the "people" still determine the outcome of elections? Did Florida and California teach you nothing? I look forward to 4 more years of GWB and even more so to him thrashing Howie Dean in November.

@DP, I don't think either of them can really claim that they were the sole reason for the economic conditions, but they both can be expected to as true politicians.

 

[The Yankee]

Stupid people! Democracy's for the chosen! All hail our Emperor!:

 

[Norlamand]

Shhhhh! We aren't ready to annouce that just yet!

 

[The Yankee]

Oh......well in that case.....who's up for some democracy? People-based style!

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

Silly boy, you still believe that the "people" still determine the outcome of elections? Did Florida and California teach you nothing?

To some extent I agree. Between bucketloads of cash, charismatic mouthpieces, and Diebold voting machines, the Neoconservatives certainly have an advantage.

 

[The Yankee]

Now if only the portfolio I have saved to keep track of things were real....I'd be making some decent return on the "investment." But since it's just a project portfolio leftover from high school Economics back in April, I just forgot to delete it and it's showing me what I would have gotten based on $25,000 o' investment.

I seem to have done better than the market growth since April.

I still think there are too many factors, even in the economic subject, to wonder about the election right now.

And how did Pontiuth know the people were expecting GWB back in 1998? They had just enough wonderful memories of Reagan and Bush to keep steady until salivating over the prospect of another Republican president sometime in the next 700 years. Lincoln and TR as well as a dash of Eisenhower and Ford should get some credit too. Wow....so who's gonna win the Super Bowl, Pontiuth?

 

[Norlamand]

Originally posted by Pontiuth Pilate
Silly boy, you still believe that the "people" still determine the outcome of elections? Did Florida and California teach you nothing?

To some extent I agree. Between bucketloads of cash, charismatic mouthpieces, and Diebold voting machines, the Neoconservatives certainly have an advantage.

I'd call it a dead heat. What with the bucketloads of cash, charismatic mouthpieces and tax funded governmental handouts to buy the masses the Democrats have a fairly effective machine as well.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

Ah, now WHO's saying the votes of the masses count?

Touche, my Gopper friend

Wow....so who's gonna win the Super Bowl, Pontiuth?

I don't know which team will win, but I do know that Richard Milhous Nixon will get the credit

 

[onejayhawk]

Originally posted by Pontiuth Pilate
Between bucketloads of cash, charismatic mouthpieces, and Diebold voting machines, the Neoconservatives certainly have an advantage.

That's rich coming from the a supporter of the genuine, never to be equalled, epitome of charasmatic mouthpieces: Bill Clinton.

Originally posted by Dumb pothead
If Clinton wasnt responsible for the biggest economic boom in US history, dont see how Bush can take credit for the current blip.

Quite right. Neither should get credit, or blame. The only really significant thing a President has done in the last generation is fix the money supply problems. And Reagan did that with a Carter appointee. It was IMO Carter's highest achievement as President. The rest is seasonal fluctuations.

Overall this is just one more part of a pattern that has been unfolding for several quarters now. The economy has been working its way through a long upward push, and is finally building some speed.

J