An interesting comparison, but it doesn't show what would have happened if the usually recommended plan of tax cuts to the lower income brackets instead of the highest had have occured. He concludes under Dean there would have been a milder recession but he seems to be extrapolating a better recovery for Bush though that is off the chart. Interest rates would have been higher under Dean but they were lowered to stimulate the economy anyway and under Dean they wouldn't have needed that stimulation.
Newcomers to EconoPundit (EcoNewbies?) should know we're referring to no less than a full implementation of Howard Dean's cornerstone economic policy using the Yale econometric simulation model. What levels of income, output, employment, interest rates, economic growth, prices, and -- apparently most important to Andrew Sullivan -- the deficit, would we have experienced had the Bush Tax cut not gone into effect?
Sullivan, Klein, and EconoEquiv