Are you kidding?
Z,
You're a little new to this game; but in '92 (when you were 14), the Dems, under the instruction of Paul Begala, James Carville, and George Stephanopolous, learned an important thing. If you tell the American public we're in the "worst economy in 50 years" (don't laugh -- they actually said that in 1991/92) often enough, they'll believe it. It doesn't matter that it is an out and out lie, if you say the economy is bad long enough and loud enough, the people will believe it. The converse is also true; if you tell the people the economy is great (even if it isn't that great) they'll believe it is.
So, in '91/92 up until the election, we had the Dems telling us how bad the economy is -- worst in 50 years. In spite of the fact we were in a fairly decent recovery from a NORMAL BUSINESS CYCLE slowdown.
Then, mysteriously, ALMOST MAGICALLY, at the end of January, 1993, the economy began a recovery. For 8 long years, the economy not only recovered, but turned into the healthiest, strongest economy and economic expansion in history. It was great.
But then, again as if by magic, in January of 2001, we overnight went back to the worst economy in 50 years. The "strongest economic expansion in history", it seems, was not as strong as we thought; the huge surpluses, as it turned out, didn't materialize (nevermind, though, congress went ahead and spent those "surpluses").
Even though business cycles ebb and flow, always have, and always will, it does seem the high and low points, at least according to the Democrats, coincide eerily with the dates of presidential elections. It is almost as if, as if, the high and low points were timed PERFECTLY...
Hmmm.. Wonder how that happens? |
