>as I said I don't think checking historical trends is excuse for current policy. I wasn't excusing current policy. I was making the case that Trump's economic

>as I said I don't think checking historical trends is excuse for current policy. I wasn't excusing current policy. I was making the case that Trump's economic failures were due in large part to Republican Party policies, not just to covid. >first two years of his presidency deficit was relatively low It took him a while to overcome Obama's economic policies, but he was certainly making headway in damaging the US economy and increasing deficit spending by the time covid hit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_Donald_Trump_administration#2017%E2%80%932019_2 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_Donal... >this is a loaded question. Well, that's a novel use of the term "loaded question". It wasn't even a question at all; it was a simple statement of my opinion. >One would need to do some quantitative calculation... Fortunately, the field of economics is dedicated to doing quantitative calculations and making assessments like these. Economists strongly favor policies that Democrats tend to adopt (especially demand-side economics: think lower taxes for the poor and higher taxes for the rich and for businesses, relief of personal debt, a stronger safety net for the unemployed, cheaper and more accessible healthcare, more spending on public services that aid economic development such infrastructure and education, etc.) and oppose economic policies that Republicans tend to adopt (especially supply-side economics: lower taxes for the rich and for businesses, union busting, a weaker safety net for the unemployed, healthcare that preferences insurance companies, reduced spending or even outright privatization of public services that aid economic development such as the postal service, etc.).