Skip to comments.Why does Romney allow Obama to say he took over the worst Economy since the Great Depression?
Posted on 10/11/2012 5:31:00 AM PDT by STJPII
Just heard Biden's debate coach, former Sen. Kaufman, tell MSNBC that BHO took over the worst economy Since the Great Depression?
Well, I'm 50 and I remember Reagan taking over gas lines, 20% interest rates and 10% unemployment. It bugs me that we don't counter that argument.
It bugs the heck out of me too. Interest rates, inflation, gas lines, unemployment . . . MUCH WORSE than what Obama “inherited” from Pelosi and Reid.
GOP should have countered this LOUD & LONG.
And yes, Reagan turned it around contrary to what Bill Clinton said nobody could have turned this one around which wasn’t nearly as bad.
Must be a Democrat thing, Clinton used the same excuse when he took office.
People my age or older have to remember that. Yet, I’ve never seen anyone shoot down this lie.
We have shot it down here form time to time but obviously not enough.
I’m right with you on that. It was worse then...not that it is great now! Both times due to freakin’ Keynesian liberal idiots.
Saying you inherited Bush’s mess is one thing. But saying you inherited a mess of biblical proportion is quite another. Seems to me we could have an effective argument to shoot this down because (1.) it’s false, numbers much worse for Reagan and (2.) BHO is asking people to believe something they isn’t true because,like me, they lived through it.
It's the same Mantra Clinton used, "It's the Economy Stupid".
Only I, like you, remember double digit inflation, double digit mortgage rates and double digit unemployment in 1980, the reign of Jimmy Carter.
Reagan corrected that!
Think of trying to respond to the exhaust nozzle of a jet engine.
The good thing is that Romney has a wealth of material left to use in the debates. He's like a kid picking up candy after a pinata is smashed every time Obama/Biden open their mouths.
TARP was terrible policy. If we’re having to defend TARP to get Romney in, then we’ve already lost.
"That was our line in 1992!" Carville reminded us.
The answer is simple. The GOP doesn’t want to, and shouldn’t, get into a detailed discussion trying to convince people that the Bush economy didn’t suck as bad as Obama says it did. That’s a losing argument. The facts don’t matter. Bush is a poison pill in politics. Nothing but time can change that.
This web site is known for its accuracy, we do not lower ourselves to our opponents level of sloppiness.
The unemployment rate when Reagan took office was 7.2%, not 10%. The rate rose while Reagan allowed Volcker to continue his policy of wringing inflation out of the economy. Reagan sacrificed the first two years of his term to do what was right for the long run of the country. And he paid a price in the ‘82 congressional races.
Thank G*d for his two terms but let’s be accurate. The Reagan legacy lives on because he did the right thing, not the expedient thing. Something this loser in the White House never understood, and never will.
I remember those days also. Bought my first house at a 17% interest rate. Gas stations were all closed or had long lines. Getting a job was nearly impossible then if you didn’t already have one.
I remember that was when my father got laid off from a defense contractor after 20 years (Martin Marietta). He didn’t collect unemployment or get food-stamps and welfare. He worked at a still-open gas station cleaning toilets.
Oh, btw, I’m getting laid off from a defense contractor for the 3rd time in a year next Thursday (L-3 Communications). That is after being employed for 33 years at Northcrap Grumman up until last October. But I’ll take being wacked again if it means Obama gets his pink slip too. Gas station here i come!
Now that's a great visual!! LOL
I agree it is too late too little. They should have never even allowed this narrative to start with is my issue.
Because, politically, it’s not a good idea for a guy with $200+ million to utter to the electorate the equivalent of “it’s not that bad” if he needs their votes.
Politically it’s a bit wiser to suggest this is a time to think critically and abandon the guy who’s been unable for four years to fix things.
Just my take
the big lies about Bush’s record continue to go unchallenged as Mitt “apologizes” for citing heroes and any other stupid rope-a-dope crises David the Red-Axelrod orchestrates to keep him on the defensive
I remember qualifying for a 14% VA interest rate Jimmy Carter mortgage and feeling grateful I got one at all because conventional mortgages were 17%
Of course, in those days, we actually had some Democrats who cared more about their country than their owners-- people like Phil Gramm and Scoop Jackson.
Romney should say something along the lines of “Mr. President, I know you were a little young and coked up in 1981, so let me tell you, the economy you inherited was many factors better than the economy Jimmy Carter passed along to Ronald Reagan. Amazingly enough, he was able to turn that economy around in just a few years and didn’t spend us into oblivion in the process.”
Well, I think in terms of strategy you don’t want to engage in a way that makes the debate about arguing over whether Bush had the worst economy or not.
While it is one of many untruths, tackling an untruth takes the conversation down a new path, and I’m not sure this election needs to be about 2008. It needs to be about 2012. Just like Clinton didn’t focus on Dukakis vs Bush 41...he focused on Bush 41 and the economy like a laser.
yes that was when I just started voting and Phil Gramm was my rep from Arlington TX. He wasn’t “that” bad back then. And I believe Jim Wright was also that era from over in Fort Worth. I don’t know IF he is still alive . . . last I heard he was teaching a political science course over at TCU.
The worst part of this lie is that they’ve now taken to calling it the Great Recession.
I think Paul Ryan is chomping at the bit to hear Biden bring that up tonight - Ryan will crush that one out of the park........
Exactly! Its just more create a lie and repeat it we have a 1:1 correlation between when the dems took over Congress and things went to hell.
That's not what is going on here.Of course tarp was a joke. It was a huge con and Bush was conned into doing it,IMHO, signing off on it. As I recall many dems were for it as well. The key thing here is that most of the 786 billion was paid back! They have no argument!
Opinions differ.The only reason Bush was sold down the road is that he didn’t fight back and we didn’t fight back hard enough for him.Its never too late.ONce again, all they have going for them is creating a lie repeating it and getting the DBM to repeat it until it is acknowledged as true,but its not.
Sheesh, it hasn’t been paid back. Arguing for TARP and against Obama’s spending is a loser. Just argue that TARP and the reckless spending of Obama are one and the same.
Romney only needs to point out the facts, that the problems began when the RATs took control of congress in January ‘07. By his inauguration in January ‘09, Obama found himself presiding over a major decline and subsequently worsened it with his policies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.