Remember, this is the crew that wrongly dismissed, then downplayed, inflation, before calling it "transitory," before shifting to full blame-storming. Their track record on this stuff is...not great. Now here we are on the brink of getting an economic report that might show a second consecutive quarter of GDP contraction, and they're busy playing similar parsing games about the possibility of a recession. They don't want to use the traditional definition of a recession, but they don't want to offer an alternative either, apparently:
RECESSION:
— Forbes (@Forbes) July 25, 2022
Reporter: "What is exactly the White House's definition of a recession?"
Karine Jean-Pierre: "I'm not gonna define it from here." pic.twitter.com/RVyWw5JKcy
KJP wouldn't define recession, but she did say that we aren't even in "pre-recession," whatever that means. I'd love to hear her define that term, which she raised herself. Alas, asking progressives to define basic words is quite an adventure these days, so some are just opting out. Not an economist, not a biologist, etc. Meanwhile, here's the president assuring Americans that "we are not going to be in a recession," in his esteemed view. Who among us is not relieved?
Reporter: "We're getting GDP numbers on Thursday, how worried should Americans be that we could be in a recession?"
— Forbes (@Forbes) July 25, 2022
President Biden: "We're not going to be in a recession." pic.twitter.com/wSBhVC5VEI
In the event that we do enter a recession, do you think that clip might show up in some political ads? Biden literally just celebrated his one year anniversary of confidently telling the American people that inflation was "temporary" and not something to be concerned about -- and that he didn't know 'anybody' who was worried about it. He helpfully even name-checked a man whom he said wasn't worried, but who very much was worried at the time, and had been saying so for months. And we all know how that worked out. Given Biden's extra special knack for high-stakes public predictions (here's another big one), it's probably a safe bet to start bracing for a recession on his watch, sooner or later. To put a bow on it, one of Biden's top economic spinmeisters said last May that rising inflation was really an encouraging sign for the economy -- so perhaps they'll eventually get around to explaining that a recession is somehow ackshully good. But for old time's sake, I hope they call it 'transitory' at first, at least for little while:
Townhall’s @guypbenson on the Biden Administration’s recession denial:
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) July 25, 2022
“If you’re frantically redefining basic terms, as part of a spin to try to deflect away from painful realities, you’re really losing.”pic.twitter.com/pi0GzxwT1H
If Thursday's number lands in the red (it may or may not be, though it seems like the R-word may be headed for us like a freight train at some point, one way or another), we'll be treated to a lot of highly technical spin about what a "recession" really is. It won't fool anyone who doesn't want to be fooled, of course, but the RNC is right to preemptively remind folks that certain administration officials (and journalists) weren't bashful about tossing around the widely-accepted general definition of the word not that long ago:
In 2019, now-Biden economic advisor Jared Bernstein defined a recession as GDP “crossing zero.”
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) July 25, 2022
In the first quarter of 2022, GDP was -1.6%. pic.twitter.com/ngZsN7H0gM
I'll leave you with two handy definitions. One from the dictionary, one from the data:
Siri, what is the definition of a recession? pic.twitter.com/xMqebyT08D
— Tommy Pigott (@TommyPigott) July 25, 2022
Question: Out of the past 10 times the U.S. economy has experienced two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth, how many times was a recession officially declared?
— Michael R. Strain (@MichaelRStrain) July 25, 2022
Answer: 10. pic.twitter.com/yrR1kwlC4r