CNN's Interview With Graham Platner's Accuser Is an Election-Killing Moment
Watch Scott Jennings Nuke the Dems' Narrative on Graham Platner in Less Than...
This Defense Attorney Thinks Charlie Kirk's Assassin Won't Go to Trial
Here's What Iranians Were Chanting During Khamenei Funeral Procession
British Journalist Has a Message for Americans, Forgetting She'd Be Speaking German If...
Sour Grapes: Turns Out Jasmine Crockett Is Still Pretty Bitter About Her Senate...
Rep. Bennie Thompson Urges Voters to Put Politics Ahead of Their Children's Financial...
Maine Democrats Have Another Candidate in Mind to Replace Platner, but This One's...
Gavin Newsom Threatens to Arrest Anyone Who Tries to Clean Up California's Disastrous...
Lupita Nyong'o Just Doomed Christopher Nolan's 'Odyssey' Adaptation
Wisconsin Election Officials Have Sent Duplicate Mail-In Ballots to Green Bay Voters Again
Here's One of the Names Being Floated As a Replacement for Graham Platner
French President Macron Safe After Bombing Near His Hotel in Syria
President Trump Says the Iran War Was a Test of Our NATO Allies—And...
Iran Just Violated the Ceasefire Again
OPINION

Saint Ronald versus Barack the Destroyer

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Saint Ronald versus Barack the Destroyer

I’ve done a few comparisons of economic performance under Reagan and Obama, sometimes using the interactive data from the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank.

And I’ve done a few TV interviews on the same subject.

Advertisement

But something was very different in this interview on the Fox morning show. I was asked to respond to the Obama campaign’s assertion that Barack Obama’s policies created more private-sector jobs than Ronald Reagan’s policies.

I confess that I did the interview without first checking the numbers, and may not have been overly animated since I was in Denver and had to wake up before 4:00 a.m., but I felt confident enough to joke about an intern torturing data in the bowels of the White House.

But now that I’m back at my desk and I’ve had a chance to review the numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, I can now say, with full confidence, that Stephanie Cutter must be smoking crack (she’s also smoking hot, but that’s a separate discussion).

And her intern should be fired.

Here are the numbers for private sector jobs (technically “Private wage and salary workers”), looking at the first 42 months in office for both Reagan and Obama. I’m including both seasonally adjusted and raw numbers, just to show that there’s no way to slice the data to justify Ms. Cutter’s assertion.

And here’s a look at the comparative performance of Reagan and Obama, based on the percent increase in private jobs in the first 31 months.

Advertisement

I also looked at what would happen if agricultural and/or self-employed workers were added to the mix, but nothing changes. Reagan beats Obama with both hands tied behind his back.

And what makes these numbers even more stunning is that Obama took office in the middle of a downturn, so a lot of the job losses already had occurred. Reagan, by contrast, got hit with a recession after taking office. So even though I think that downturn can and should be blamed on Jimmy Carter, all of the job losses show up in Reagan’s column. Yet he still kicks the you-know-what out of Obama.

The lesson to draw from these numbers is that Presidents should reduce the burden of government if they want better economic performance. Saint Ronald understood this basic insight, but Barack the Destroyer somehow thinks America will be more prosperous if we mimic Europe’s welfare states.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement