Would you prefer if Bush said, "Well, its hard to say. The economy was heading downhill during the last part of Clinton's Administration, and they did so much damage it might take a little time to fix it. The bull market started under Republican leadership and ended because of Bill Clinton. It will come around again, now that we are aggressively promoting a better economy and ending irresponsible programs that broke the back of the middle class." A Gore or Daschle would not flinch before answering like this (although with the names of the players changed and "working poor" substituted for "middle class").


If I opposed Bush I would appreciate this answer because it was politically weak. People say Bush should be nice and bi-partisan and everything because he doesn't have a "mandate" and no majority in the Senate, when the opposite is true; he should be acting like he won in a landslide and the Senate is no problem. He should have learned from Clinton - attack no matter what. He should have answered in a positive way, even if he had nothing to say. I find it kind of refreshing that he gave an "undeniably true" answer. I think the U.S. economy is too big to be managed by the Executive Branch of government on a short-term basis. That goes for Democrat or Republican Presidents. So a hint at the truth is kind of nice once in a while IMO. But the economy sure doesn't look too good right now I must say. And we already blew our refund check. I'm just glad it might have come from the Social Security surplus. :-)