Voters need jobs. Jobs generally come from increased factory output. In the Bush recovery this is not happening. During the great period before Bush's tax cuts when we recovered from recession based on low interest rates alone we averaged well over 200,000 jobs per month with real increases in wages. Job increases at the start of a jobs recovery generally exceed the average in the subsequent expansion until the economy begins overheating. What's your explanation for the difference? Shouldn't "better" policies provide better results? With Bush we get a longer delay in the jobs recovery and a low response. Hardly evidence for superior economic policy. While he may be the victom of circumstances beyond his control, I doubt it because the results are in line with what I expected and predicted from his target the rich strategy (slow recovery and poor performance compared to previous expansion).

Regards,
Mark