Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman's op/ ed in today's New York Times analyzes the historical fact that the U.S. economy does better under Democrats than under Republicans. A couple of economic indicators since 1947:
1. Econnomic growth under Dems has been 4.35%, compared to 2.54% under Republicans, and
2. The economy has been in recession for 8 quarters under Dems, but a staggering 41 quarters under Republicans.Krugman goes on to note that Dems are routinely modest about what they promise in election seasons, while Rethuglicans typically boast about the economic miracles that they will perform, despite their track record. When Dems succeed in boosting the economy, Rethuglicans focus on the negative (glass is half empty). Krugman explains:
"Every candidate with a real chance of getting the G.O.P. nomination is claiming that his tax plan would produce a huge growth surge — a claim that has no basis in historical experience. Why? Part of the answer is epistemic closure: modern conservatives generally live in a bubble into which inconvenient facts can’t penetrate. One constantly hears assertions that Ronald Reagan achieved economic and job growth never matched before or since, when the reality is that Bill Clinton surpassed him on both measures. Right-wing news media trumpet the economic disappointments of the Obama years, while hardly ever mentioning the good news. So the myth of conservative economic superiority goes unchallenged." (emphasis added)As with so many issues (climate change, race relations, immigration, etc.), conservatives in general and Rethugs in particular live in their own self-contained ecosystem that rejects data and information that conflicts with their "gut" beliefs and cherished myths. We're seeing that in the kerfuffle over the debates, and we'll see it in spades this election cycle.
