Quote:
Originally Posted by bling
Onetime attempted to do something which was impossible: completely discount a discussion because a single piece of 40 pieces of information was not presented. Sorry, but his insistence that the entire crux of the opinion in the first post is invalid because 1 year of 40+ is estimated (but actually known) is absurd.
|
In actuality it was two years in the original chart and that was a substantial part of Bush's Presidency. The numbers were wrong and your belief that this fact is irrelevant is equally wrong.
The only evidence presented to begin this thread was that chart. It was submitted as proof of poor handling of the economy. The entire discussion isn't flawed because of a lack of one year's data, it is flawed because no correlation exists between budget deficits and "the good handling of the economy".
But I digress. There is no point in continuing down this path. You believe this thread is substantial while I believe the premise it was based upon was flawed from the outset. There is no reconciling our stances and, quite frankly, I have little inclination to educate you about economics.