Apparently Alexandra Franceschi, Specialty Media Press Secretary of the Republican National Committee, came out and said that the Republican Party wants to push economic policies that are demonstrably bad for the economy and workers. I think such a gaffe speaks more to the tone-deafness of the GOP than anything else. They can spout a few stock lies about trickle-down effects and such, sure, but at the end of the day, they still don’t get what was so bad about the Bush years.
Which is why, on a radio show last week, after Franceschi explained the GOP’s economic platform—which you’ll be surprised to hear primarily involved tax cuts and austerity and at least one reference to the mythical “deficit crisis”—this revealing exchange occurred:
ESPUELAS: Now, how different is that concept from what were the policies of the Bush administration? And the reason I ask that is because there’s some analysis now that is being published talking about the Bush years being the slowest period of job creation since those statistics were created. Is this a different program or is this that program just updated?
FRANCESCHI: I think it’s that program, just updated.
“So it’s like that time when the economy sucked and nobody could get a job?”
“Yeah, like that! ROMNEY 2012 WHOOO!”
Well, Bush’s policies didn’t turn out badly for anyone who mattered, after all, so Republicans just can’t figure out why they’re so unpopular.
Probably because of this:
As a result of the Bush economic platform, “growth in investment, GDP, and employment all posted their worst performance of any post-war expansion,” while “overall monthly job growth was the worst of any cycle since at least February 1945, and household income growth was negative for the first cycle since tracking began in 1967.” Meanwhile, the deficit and debt exploded. It would have to be quite the update for the GOP to make anything better happen this time around.