You can not seriously expect progressive nationalists to be swayed by a prediction market.
Markets are the problem, not the solution. International markets -- that is, trade -- are bad. Domestic markets -- that is, Wall Street -- are corrupt and controlled by oligarchs.
All will be better if only we just get rid of them.
Markets are the problem, not the solution. International markets -- that is, trade -- are bad. Domestic markets -- that is, Wall Street -- are corrupt and controlled by oligarchs.
All will be better if only we just get rid of them.
3
It is good to dream and hope for the best. Yet one must be prepared for disappointment and willing to accept that because one fervently wishes something to be true will not make it so. A surprise is possible but the odds are that Hillary will be the nominee. It would be a betrayal of what Sanders stands for if any of his supporters end up sitting out the election because he did not succeed. Thrust or not, the choice between Hillary and Trump is stark. Trump is the anti-Sanders, a promoter of discord appealing to the basest human instincts. Anything that facilitates his election is shameful. A Trump presidency will be hard to live down.
4
it's worth noting that Sanders won Michigan by a razor-thin margin. Since the democrats use proportional representation to allocate delegates, not winner-take all, a virtual tie in Michigan plus an overwhelming win for Clinton in Mississippi is advantageous to Clinton, the Bernie headlines notwithstanding.
When you're ahead, as Clinton is, you win by achieving a tie... and then, she still won most of the delegates from Mississippi. Taking her proportionally closer to the nomination.
Folks who write the newspaper headlines don't get math -
When you're ahead, as Clinton is, you win by achieving a tie... and then, she still won most of the delegates from Mississippi. Taking her proportionally closer to the nomination.
Folks who write the newspaper headlines don't get math -
1
The prediction markets no doubt got burned (no pun intended) on Michigan, since the only real information they have to go on is the polls. But the prediction markets on the nomination result really just reflect how challenging it will be for Sanders to close the delegate gap. That's a reality, and I think it's important to consider that Clinton has received substantially more of the popular vote so far -- 4.9 million compared to 3.3 million for Sanders. The difference is more than a million greater than the amount by which Gore exceeded Bush in 2000. Let's give both candidates their due, but let's not ask journalists to tell us something false, such as "Bernie poised to overtake Clinton!" Or even "Bernie closes the gap!", since the gap in fact widened on March 8. That said, if Bernie manages to get half the delegates (or more) on March 15, he will be on target to tie Clinton, since these are not his ideal states demographically (he 'ought' get less than half of the delegates, disregarding the actual polls). That would be a repeat of Michigan, and then the story really changes. So everyone get out there and vote for your candidate!
1
The predictions markets are biased against Bernie, just like the corporate media!!!! (Sarcasm.)
3
I am completely over this campaign. It is boring. It is soul sucking and because the math won't change to make the position change--it is pointless. Sanders has abandoned selling positions like college for all and income inequality to things I could not care less about but make for good dinner table topics--like getting money out of politics.
If Senator Sanders were elected to President, Speaker of the House and Pope he wouldn't have the authority to change the things he has promised. I feel at this point we are in the middle of the movie Groundhog day reliving a good and bad news cycle. Clinton will win the nomination. And it is evident Sanders does not know it. Given his aversion to details---I am not surprised he hasn't looked at the numbers too hard. But I blame the Clinton campaign--they muddled their message in the end. Learn to speak more clearly and let people know what you mean. Had she done so it would have made the difference. You had people going to the voting booth thinking Senator Sanders voted for the bailout that ultimately helped the state--he had not. He voted for an earlier bill that went nowhere.
If Senator Sanders were elected to President, Speaker of the House and Pope he wouldn't have the authority to change the things he has promised. I feel at this point we are in the middle of the movie Groundhog day reliving a good and bad news cycle. Clinton will win the nomination. And it is evident Sanders does not know it. Given his aversion to details---I am not surprised he hasn't looked at the numbers too hard. But I blame the Clinton campaign--they muddled their message in the end. Learn to speak more clearly and let people know what you mean. Had she done so it would have made the difference. You had people going to the voting booth thinking Senator Sanders voted for the bailout that ultimately helped the state--he had not. He voted for an earlier bill that went nowhere.
6
My money is still on Senator Sanders. Headed over to his site right now to put my money where my mouth is.
16
I wish I could take that bet.
3
If Sanders were a more conventional politician, he’d already be peeling off some of the superdelegates with promises for them in his administration. It’s a question of finding the right price. What’s always surprising is how cheaply most politicians can be bought, but it’s also true of others. People who wanted a life of wealth and social position can always find it in their heart to declare a mistrial. It just has to be done with tact.
3
As of 11:10 PM on March 8, 2016, the site PredictWise showed Clinton with a 92% chance of winning the Michigan Democratic Primary and Sanders at 8%, close to the same spread the same site show today for their respective chances of winning the nomination. I (a fellow Michigander and an alumna of Wolfer's employer) would like to point out that Bernie's win was a "humbling win" not only for the poll-based prognosticators but also for the prediction markets themselves.
Professor Wolfers, your continuing faith in them is indeed touching.
Professor Wolfers, your continuing faith in them is indeed touching.
10
And if you add five apples to 7 oranges you get...well, nothing really. Can't do that. There is a false equivalency when comparing the result of one primary event to the results of the nomination process. Some variables are the same, some are not. Most important to the cake, Hillary has already half of the delegates she need. Until Bernie start winning places like Ohio or Illinois by 20 to 30 points, he is doomed. The Democratic Party process of allocating delegates proportionally assure that Bernie will always remains behind. But you do not understand that so why do I bother!
4
When the prediction markets say that a candidate has 0 chance of winning vs. another candidate who has a 100% chance of winning, and THAT prediction is wrong, then you can claim that the prediction market has been humbled. An 8% chance is NOT 0. And never has been.
2
Bad enough that we have a horse race following media, now we get the prediction markets media. Never a thought that voters can change their minds as new information becomes available, in this case that Bernie Sanders is spot on and Hillary Clinton think real change is too hard.
7
Bernie Sanders might be spot on in his observations, but HOW TO?
He has no viable plan. He consistently speaks of a revolution of "Millions of People" That is response to "how to?" Really? What bills has Bernie actually gotten passed in Congress? - The Veterans and some issues concerning Post Offices in Vermont - in other words - a very low score. And what about this Republican Congress? Bernie will be able to negotiate with them?
Hilary doesn't think real change is too hard, she thinks it takes time and is a process. I'm with Hilary.
He has no viable plan. He consistently speaks of a revolution of "Millions of People" That is response to "how to?" Really? What bills has Bernie actually gotten passed in Congress? - The Veterans and some issues concerning Post Offices in Vermont - in other words - a very low score. And what about this Republican Congress? Bernie will be able to negotiate with them?
Hilary doesn't think real change is too hard, she thinks it takes time and is a process. I'm with Hilary.
12
Mariana Stevens, you are ill-informed about Senator Sanders. He has been successfully working across the aisle for decades. That you have to ask what he's done tells me you've not bothered to educate yourself. Your ignorance leads you to proclaim Sanders has a very low score. Based on that, I rate your score as educated citizen to be very low.
Why won't Hillary Clinton show us the transcripts from the Goldman-Sachs speeches? What is she hiding? I've been a Democrat for 40 years and I won't vote for Clinton if she gets the nomination unless she comes clean about she said to the bankers at Goldman-Sachs. An honest person (such as Senator Sanders) would have no problem with this request.
Why won't Hillary Clinton show us the transcripts from the Goldman-Sachs speeches? What is she hiding? I've been a Democrat for 40 years and I won't vote for Clinton if she gets the nomination unless she comes clean about she said to the bankers at Goldman-Sachs. An honest person (such as Senator Sanders) would have no problem with this request.
8
Her speeches are absolutely irrelevant and meaningless. Hundreds of famous people make speeches to wall street and other monied groups all the time and no one cares about that. They only care when Hillary does it. She is correct to refuse to be held to a different standard (a double standard) than everyone else. This is just another red herring witch hunt against her, among so many.
Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell used private email servers too and nobody cares. Somehow when Hillary does it it's criminal
EVERY other politician running for ANY office in the history of the United States has taken gobs of money from everywhere to run a campaign. That's how the system works here. Including saint Obama in 2008 and 2012 (yes he was the liberal saint before he became prez and failed miserably). But when Hillary does it it's evil incarnate.
VERY sick of the double standards applied to her and she has every right to push back against them.
Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell used private email servers too and nobody cares. Somehow when Hillary does it it's criminal
EVERY other politician running for ANY office in the history of the United States has taken gobs of money from everywhere to run a campaign. That's how the system works here. Including saint Obama in 2008 and 2012 (yes he was the liberal saint before he became prez and failed miserably). But when Hillary does it it's evil incarnate.
VERY sick of the double standards applied to her and she has every right to push back against them.
7
On Tuesday morning Sanders was about 200 pledged delegates behind Clinton. When the day ended he was about 220 pledged delegates behind Clinton. The numbers are what they are.
18
I welcome mass media scholars' content analysis of the NYT's shameful biased "news" coverage of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton vs. candidate US Senator Bernie Sanders whose issue focused campaign has galvanized the American public who are sick to death of both electoral parties self-serving obeisance to the military (read endless wars) and to Wall Street. Readers may wish to read
On the specific matter of "electability," different from the NYT' endless naysayers' rant, an article by Matt Karp, Princton University, in jacobinmag.com
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/02/karp-bernie-sanders-electability-clin...
And, additionally a youth focused news feature on Electability by "The Young Turks" via YouTube citing clear statistics supporting a Bernie Sanders win.
In closing I expect the NYT to end its coronation of Hillary Clinton, to end its vilification of and naysaying about Bernie Sanders, to begin anew a commitment to sound journalistic practices, to provide full detailed fact based, issue based reporting as well as unbiased analysis of these candidates. I also expect the NYT to permit the same 2,000 plus "comments" to a Bernie Sanders article as it obviously does on a Clinton article. And further I suggest that the NYT move beyond coverage of our neanderthal two-party system to cover third party hopefuls, e.g. The Green Party. Let's move on, my friends. Our children's' lives depend on it.
On the specific matter of "electability," different from the NYT' endless naysayers' rant, an article by Matt Karp, Princton University, in jacobinmag.com
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/02/karp-bernie-sanders-electability-clin...
And, additionally a youth focused news feature on Electability by "The Young Turks" via YouTube citing clear statistics supporting a Bernie Sanders win.
In closing I expect the NYT to end its coronation of Hillary Clinton, to end its vilification of and naysaying about Bernie Sanders, to begin anew a commitment to sound journalistic practices, to provide full detailed fact based, issue based reporting as well as unbiased analysis of these candidates. I also expect the NYT to permit the same 2,000 plus "comments" to a Bernie Sanders article as it obviously does on a Clinton article. And further I suggest that the NYT move beyond coverage of our neanderthal two-party system to cover third party hopefuls, e.g. The Green Party. Let's move on, my friends. Our children's' lives depend on it.
7
When the Green Party stops being a sad joke, perhaps the NYT will give it some serious coverage. Please, tell me exactly what has the Green Party accomplished in all its years of existence? Has it demonstrated the ability to win meaningful elections and then produce results at the municipal or the state level? Has it managed to put even one member into the House of Representatives? Municipal, state, and congressional elections--outside of the obvious NY city and state races--do not depend on coverage from the NYT. Elected officials from the Green Party are essentially invisible everywhere, and that cannot be laid at the feet of the NYT but of the basic weakness of the Green Party itself. Visit the Green Party website, and you come away with the image of a group of self-congratulatory and totally ineffectual people who haven't the vaguest idea of how to realize any of the ideals they so nobly espouse. They are basically indulging their own sense of how wonderful they are and far less concerned with actually making a difference in the world.
3
I don't know, Annie. The Times and the rest of the media had no qualms about giving tremendous, wall-to-wall, 24-hour coverage to the sad joke who now leads the Republican nominating process. If it fills the hours of TV and columns of newspapers and *sells* papers, they're all for it.
1
I see politics from a simple perspective. I ask the question..."would I want any politician to come to dinner, at my house, be around my children, share my life for a short moment?"
Then I use this litmus test… How does a politician's platform compare to the work of Jesus. Jesus cared for a prostitute, fed the poor, healed the sick, fought the money changers, taught through philosophical stories, he didn't even profess religion but taught a belief in God...etc.
As it stands, I can say most sincerely that there isn't a single member of the GOP that I want to even cross the boundaries of my property. I find them unsafe and willing to endanger my family in almost every way imaginable. They attack the very core of everything that supports a healthy family ...everything. Between Hillary and Bernie, I figure either would be an interesting evening of discussion and the discussion would be at worst PG vs an R rating with any of the GOP.
Litmus test...Jesus represents everything that the GOP isn't. Like the GOP is the Anti-Jesus. If Jesus didn't, the GOP sure as hell will.
Then I use this litmus test… How does a politician's platform compare to the work of Jesus. Jesus cared for a prostitute, fed the poor, healed the sick, fought the money changers, taught through philosophical stories, he didn't even profess religion but taught a belief in God...etc.
As it stands, I can say most sincerely that there isn't a single member of the GOP that I want to even cross the boundaries of my property. I find them unsafe and willing to endanger my family in almost every way imaginable. They attack the very core of everything that supports a healthy family ...everything. Between Hillary and Bernie, I figure either would be an interesting evening of discussion and the discussion would be at worst PG vs an R rating with any of the GOP.
Litmus test...Jesus represents everything that the GOP isn't. Like the GOP is the Anti-Jesus. If Jesus didn't, the GOP sure as hell will.
5
If these are the prediction markets, I may just wager a few dollars. So far, the only thing reliable about the predictions is that they are almost unfailingly wrong.
Justin Wolfers's thought that the markets "basically have it right" comes across as either wishful thinking or unsubstantiated, or both.
Justin Wolfers's thought that the markets "basically have it right" comes across as either wishful thinking or unsubstantiated, or both.
2
None of the prediction markets predicted Bernie winning in Michigan. They just follow the polls.
2
Lost in all the cold math about statistics , probabilities and outcomes is the simple truth about this democratic primary campaign.Namely, it is a clash between old centrist inertia and the aspirational message and promise of democratic socialism. And yes, I can hear the gasp from the vast majority of Americans brainwashed by free-market orthodoxy and the myth of the frontier rugged individualism mentality. Truth is , we live in globalized , post-industrial world and never before has the middle class in America been exposed to such external pressures such as globalization and automatization. So, voters in this country should ask themselves who is the best advocate for working people . The unapologetic socialist from Vermont or the smooth political operator from the Clinton political dynasty. In my heart , there is no doubt that Bernie is the champion of the people. His message resonates to me on an emotional and also on purely rational level. The only way we can prevent our democracy from being hijacked by deep- pocket interests is to sever the connection between money and puppet politicians. The only way to counteract the brutality of unfettered free market social Darwinism is to build a strong and fair welfare state. And yes , it is not going to happen overnight but we need to have the mindset and clear goal in our site. That's what Bernie's campaign represents . It is a call for Americans to wake up from their materialistic stupor. FEEL THE BERN!
9
I'm sorry but I can't ignore Hillary's basic dishonesty. I don't care about Bengazi or her server or Whitewater or her so-called murder of Vince Foster. That's all just so much noise.
I'm talking about the dishonesty that slapped me in the face during the first debate against Bernie when from out of left field she accused him of being some kind of gun nut carrying water for the NRA. Her lies about Bernie destroying Obamacare and leaving people in a lurch or her recent silliness about Bernie being against the auto bailout were the final straw.
Okay, she's better than any Republican; but, at the end of the day, she's just like Bill and will say anything she can get away with in the pursuit of her personal quest.
I'm talking about the dishonesty that slapped me in the face during the first debate against Bernie when from out of left field she accused him of being some kind of gun nut carrying water for the NRA. Her lies about Bernie destroying Obamacare and leaving people in a lurch or her recent silliness about Bernie being against the auto bailout were the final straw.
Okay, she's better than any Republican; but, at the end of the day, she's just like Bill and will say anything she can get away with in the pursuit of her personal quest.
10
Not much reality in this realist! Were you just born yesterday? Have you ever been involved in a political campaign? Or follow it on the media? If you think that Hillary's talking points agains Bernie are sinister, just wait until the GOP get a hold of the man. And about this honesty thing, Pray tell, is Bernie honest when he says we will have single pay health care? Or free tuition on public college? Or increased benefits in Social Security? Or executive orders to enable immigration reform? Every single one of these promises are pie in the sky. Impossible to enact, even if we had a democratic congress, never mind a republican one. See Realist, your love for veracity and truth is selective. You have a blind spot. A realist you are not.
10
Robert, you are the one being dishonest. Bernie Sanders did NOT promise single-payer, free tuition, etc. He said he supports those things and would WORK hard to make them a reality. Let's also keep in mind that Sanders has been successfully working across the aisle for decades. Why do Clinton supporters so often lie or mischaracterize things to make their arguments?
3
Clinton was spot on when she called out Sanders on guns. He was willing to deal with the NRA and take money from them to get his congressional career started.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-the-nra-helped-put-bernie-sa...
And what did NRA money buy? Five Sanders votes against the Brady bill. Sanders is just another politician and he has no credibility on guns. He has a D rating now but you can erase those horrendous and inexplicable votes.
...and btw, what would have happened if Sanders vote against the TARP funds that included releasing the auto bailout money had prevailed? No auto bailout. Another example of how Bernie's ideological purity gets in the way of doing the logical thing. Yeah, voting to bail out the banks was a hard pill to swallow, but supporting the auto industry was critical... And make no mistake, it was clear at the time the funds were coming from TARP. This is an example of why he has virtually no support from his fellow colleagues in Congress.
Talk about letting personal quests get in the way of doing what is logical, Bernie is clearly fixated on one pet issue at the expense of everything else.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-the-nra-helped-put-bernie-sa...
And what did NRA money buy? Five Sanders votes against the Brady bill. Sanders is just another politician and he has no credibility on guns. He has a D rating now but you can erase those horrendous and inexplicable votes.
...and btw, what would have happened if Sanders vote against the TARP funds that included releasing the auto bailout money had prevailed? No auto bailout. Another example of how Bernie's ideological purity gets in the way of doing the logical thing. Yeah, voting to bail out the banks was a hard pill to swallow, but supporting the auto industry was critical... And make no mistake, it was clear at the time the funds were coming from TARP. This is an example of why he has virtually no support from his fellow colleagues in Congress.
Talk about letting personal quests get in the way of doing what is logical, Bernie is clearly fixated on one pet issue at the expense of everything else.
7
So the young rising star writers of the NYT have discovered that even they can not predict and control the unknown. Yet they are condescending towards their contemporaries who support Sanders for being socially and politically "naive"
I am giving some more money to the naive movement tonight.
I am giving some more money to the naive movement tonight.
8
Bernie Sanders won by 2% in Michigan. According to Bloomberg news, "In Michigan, Sanders benefited from an open primary in which seven in 10 independents voted for him, according to exit polls. They made up 28 percent of voters. Clinton had a 57 percent to 41 percent edge over Sanders among the Democrats who made up 69 percent of those who voted." I'd bet BIG money the "independent" voters were republican operatives who will do any thing to stop Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Sorry, boys and girls - it won't work.
10
Yikes! Yet another "giant right-wing conspiracy"!
1
Polls have been ridiculously wrong. Pundits have been talking in circles. There are so many ways that we communicate and receive information, much of it on our cell phones. The paradigm has really changed, as young people have entered the political arena. It's hard to tell what is going to happen and certainly Michigan shows that we are not really in touch with the electorate. The exponential growth of Bernie Sanders is beginning to grow. Hillary Clinton may very well have peaked.
2
I think you have it wrong. Exit polls really do show that Bernie has a lot of appeal to disgruntled Republican voters. People just don't want to face the fact that Hillary is unpopular with a lot of negative feelings for her out there. Bernie, on the other hand, might be seen as a hippie or a dreamer; but he's almost universally perceived as a non-opportunist who's out for the little guy.
In a general election, that's not a bad something to be known for. If non-Democrats vote for him in the primary, they'll vote for him in the general.
In a general election, that's not a bad something to be known for. If non-Democrats vote for him in the primary, they'll vote for him in the general.
5
i hope so
Justin Wolfers: "I think that the prediction markets basically have it right. They gave Mrs. Clinton a 95 percent chance to win the nomination as of Tuesday morning, and by Wednesday morning, she was at 93 percent."
Me: "I wonder if these are the same people who predicted Hillary was going to win Michigan by 30 percent."
Me: "I wonder if these are the same people who predicted Hillary was going to win Michigan by 30 percent."
10
No, they are not the same people. They are bettors, with money on the line, who historically are the best prognosticators.
3
As of late Tues night, the prediction markets were still giving Clinton a 92% chance of winning Michigan, even though she continued to lag in the actual reported results, something Wolfers' article conveniently fails to mention..
1
It was a mistake for Clinton to have left Michigan when she did. Sanders spent 500 million on attack ads....I'm sure it was ALL from small, grassroots donors.
Maybe that was the case at first but now, big money is coming in
Maybe that was the case at first but now, big money is coming in
1
So the polls that greatly underestimated Clinton's win in Mississippi cancel out those that equally erred in the opposite direction in Michigan. That makes them OK, I guess. That may work for you if you focus only on the numbers and leave out the human element that's behind them. Elections are about candidates making their case and changing people's minds, remember? If the prediction market were reliable we wouldn't need to vote, would we?
Oil futures were reliable, until they weren't
Oil futures were reliable, until they weren't
21
The gamblers have spoken!
5
Where is Jimmy the Greek when you need him???
2
Ever hear of a tipping point?
Certainly the prediction indicators would lag real time data inflections.
How would one know that the "prediction markets" are not rigged like just everything else?
Let me guess. Does Carlos Slim own it?
Certainly the prediction indicators would lag real time data inflections.
How would one know that the "prediction markets" are not rigged like just everything else?
Let me guess. Does Carlos Slim own it?
5
These guys don't know anything...Bernie was at 27% probability for winning Michigan last night around 10:00 PM. The problem is everybody places too much emphasis on polls. In fact if someone took the media seriously they would probably be wondering why we even have elections since polls are almost always quoted as facts instead of with the scepticism they should be. Of course on a lot of simple issues polls are often right, but even then they sometimes shift public opinion after the fact (someone almost always at least tries). Less poll quoting please.
12
One poll done by MSU was pretty close- http://motorcitymuckraker.com/2016/03/07/new-poll-bernie-sanders-could-u... Read the quote from Susan Demas editor and publisher of "Inside Michigan Politics". She was so wrong, egg on her face.
So the polls and prediction take a major bath, and what's your reaction? "Well anyway, back to the analysis we've been making all along."
So much for credibility, or a healthy dose of humility.
Any person using data as evidence needs to answer this question: why should anyone believe me?
And no, the data do NOT speak for themselves.
So much for credibility, or a healthy dose of humility.
Any person using data as evidence needs to answer this question: why should anyone believe me?
And no, the data do NOT speak for themselves.
12
I understand the odds say Hillary Clinton will win the nomination.
I also continue to support Sanders. I am not voting because of the odds. I am voting because of who I trust, who I agree with, who I know means what he says and says what he means.
Hillary Clinton approved of TPP 45 times including calling it the gold standard before pressure from Sanders supporters caused her to recently switch. Do you think she'll maintain that in the White House?
The odds say she'll support trade agreements just like TPP, like she did 45 times before.
The odds say she'll get the nomination. The odds also say that she'll do many other things I don't want, and that Sanders wouldn't do.
I also continue to support Sanders. I am not voting because of the odds. I am voting because of who I trust, who I agree with, who I know means what he says and says what he means.
Hillary Clinton approved of TPP 45 times including calling it the gold standard before pressure from Sanders supporters caused her to recently switch. Do you think she'll maintain that in the White House?
The odds say she'll support trade agreements just like TPP, like she did 45 times before.
The odds say she'll get the nomination. The odds also say that she'll do many other things I don't want, and that Sanders wouldn't do.
41
Doesn't matter whether she does or doesn't. It'll be passed long before the next president takes office.
And, as far a I know, when she supported it, she was working for her boss and taking his instructions. How long do you think you'd have a job if you told your boss "no, I don't want to do what you told me to do" while you WERE working for him.
Also, I don't think ANYONE had access to that thing before they allowed congress to view it in a locked, closed room with a guard on it. Real democratic that...but now, Clinton gets the blame.
This republican talking point is getting stale
And, as far a I know, when she supported it, she was working for her boss and taking his instructions. How long do you think you'd have a job if you told your boss "no, I don't want to do what you told me to do" while you WERE working for him.
Also, I don't think ANYONE had access to that thing before they allowed congress to view it in a locked, closed room with a guard on it. Real democratic that...but now, Clinton gets the blame.
This republican talking point is getting stale
Yes, we know how you feel about Hillary versus Bernie, but you don't have to insert the article twice in the same section of the online version.
8
Go ahead, shoot the messenger.
4
Here's a history lesson on the economy between Republican and Democrat governing. Google, then choose.
PoliticsThatWork.com Change in Unemployment Rate by Party of President- Since 1945
Each party has held the presidency for the same number of years since 1945. During those years, the unemployment rate has risen 11.8% under Republican presidents and has fallen 7.2% under Democratic presidents. Unemployment has fallen during the overwhelming majority of Democratic years since 1949. Unemployment rose steadily under Republicans up until 1982, then fell during the remaining Reagan years, and then rose again under both Bush Presidents.
PoliticsThatWork.com Dow Jones Performance by the Party of the President
During the most recent 15 years during which Republicans have held the presidency, the value of the Dow has increased by 42%. During the Democratic presidencies, it has increased by 609%- 14.5 times faster. The average growth in the value of the Dow under Democrats during this period has been 14.75% and under Republicans it has been 5.11%.
PoliticsThatWork.com Change in Disposable Income Since 1930 by the Party of the President
In the 44 years that we have had Democratic presidents since 1930, the real per-capita disposable income has increased 271%. During the 40 years during which we have had Republican presidents, it has increased 44%. On average, it has increased 3.1% (after adjusting for inflation) under Democratic presidents and 1% under Republican presidents.
PoliticsThatWork.com Change in Unemployment Rate by Party of President- Since 1945
Each party has held the presidency for the same number of years since 1945. During those years, the unemployment rate has risen 11.8% under Republican presidents and has fallen 7.2% under Democratic presidents. Unemployment has fallen during the overwhelming majority of Democratic years since 1949. Unemployment rose steadily under Republicans up until 1982, then fell during the remaining Reagan years, and then rose again under both Bush Presidents.
PoliticsThatWork.com Dow Jones Performance by the Party of the President
During the most recent 15 years during which Republicans have held the presidency, the value of the Dow has increased by 42%. During the Democratic presidencies, it has increased by 609%- 14.5 times faster. The average growth in the value of the Dow under Democrats during this period has been 14.75% and under Republicans it has been 5.11%.
PoliticsThatWork.com Change in Disposable Income Since 1930 by the Party of the President
In the 44 years that we have had Democratic presidents since 1930, the real per-capita disposable income has increased 271%. During the 40 years during which we have had Republican presidents, it has increased 44%. On average, it has increased 3.1% (after adjusting for inflation) under Democratic presidents and 1% under Republican presidents.
20
Basically we are scavenging off of the investments in institutions and values that were made by the Silent Generation from the 1930s until 1980s. At some point we have to make sacrifices and reinvest for the future generations. This "me me me" madness and victim complex has to stop. We need to own our failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Ukraine, and also in the Housing Market, the Employment Crisis and the Cancerous Financial System eating away at our economy and our democracy.
Who cares about these minutiae about Michigan and Mississippi and your half-baked polling and analysis? What difference does it make in the grand scheme of things? What is the point being so highly educated that you have lost perspective of the forest for the trees!