03-01-2019, 12:02 AM
(02-28-2019, 11:57 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Obama’s last 21 months.
But why 21 months!?
![[Image: tenor.gif]](https://media1.tenor.com/images/09c075a32556feeb23c5943c3b5bd496/tenor.gif)
Edit: Just saw your edit after I posted this. While comparing economic performance under presidents to operationalize presidential performance is a fool's errand, using any period that includes different quarters would be extra so. Final 21 months for Obama would have been April 2015 through December 2016, while Trump's first 21 would be January 2017 through September 2018. Different economic quarters bring with them different trends, which means comparing those two data sets would not work out as they are too dissimilar.
All in all, it's stupid to look at these things in general. Presidents are stupid for making promises, and they are stupid for touting good numbers. The population is stupid for putting so much stock in economic numbers as an indicator of what a president is doing.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
