A bit late in the game, pulling this thread from the bottom of the page, but I noticed something in here that bugs the hell out of me...
Quote:
|
How's it going to look when the economy is booming under Bush the next 4 years?
|
You know what's funny? You right wing bastards keep saying that the president can't be held directly responsible for the current economy, blah, it takes 8 years or so for a president's economic reforms to really take hold, blah, that Clinton was sailing on Reganomics, blah. Guess what?
If Bush does end up with a second term (god forbid), and a booming economy... who will have been president eight years beforehand?
Really, please answer the question. I want to hear you say it.
Please.