Cruzonomics

Tea Partyer Texas Senator Ted Cruz, the author of the recent federal government shutdown and expected 2016 Republican presidential candidate, went on the Tonight Show this past Friday and proved that while he knows little about economics, he knows a lot about how to swindle voters.

Cruz is polished, to a fault.  You listen to the man speak, answer questions, and you get the impression that no thought, no word, leaves his lips that hasn’t been previously vetted in 100 focus groups.  Ted Cruz is Washington slickness at its distilled worst.

In addition to criticizing “the 1%” (like anyone believes that Ted Cruz is on the side of the 99%), Cruz also told Leno that he was actually one of those opposed to the recent government shutdown. (In fact, Cruz was the architect of the shutdown.)

Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz (bottom right) lead "veterans" in protesting the Republicans own shutdown of the government.

Ted Cruz (wearing Rick Perry’s gay Brokeback Mountain jacket) leads “veterans” in protesting the his own shutdown of the government.

TED CRUZ: Listen, Jay, I’m one of the many people who was not a fan of shutting down the government, throughout this whole thing I said…

JAY LENO: You looked like a big fan from where I was sitting.

….

TED CRUZ: I said throughout, we shouldn’t shut down the government.

Cruz goes on to explain that it was the Democrats who shut the government down by refusing to negotiate on a law that already passed Congress, won several elections, and then passed constitutional muster before the Supreme Court.  Keep in mind the depth of Cruz’s disingenuousness when I get to my next point, Cruz’s take on the economy.

TED CRUZ: You know in the last four years our economy has grown on average 0.9% a year. It’s not working.

What’s not working are Ted Cruz’s math skills.

The economy did not grow on average only 0.9% a year over the last four years.  The last four years would be the 4th quarter of 2009 to the 3rd quarter of 2013.  And the % change in real GDP per quarter, averaged together, is decidedly higher than 0.9% – in fact, we only had one quarter of negative growth during the entire last four years (all data from the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis):

gdp-per-month-four-years

You could also look at the annual percent change in real GDP for the last four years – which is what I suspect Cruz is doing – but we don’t yet have the GDP growth for the 4th quarter of 2013 (since the quarter hasn’t finished), but estimates are putting it at between 2 and 2.5% (Ted Cruz’s government shutdown is expected to shave off 0.6% from the 4th quarter, so we have him to blame for that.)  Here’s GDP growth in the 3 years before this one:

by-default-2013-11-10-at-9.08.37-PM

In order for the annual GDP growth from 2010 to 2013 to average 0.9%, 2013 GDP growth would have to be -3.5%.

But that’s going to be tough, as the first three quarters of 2013 aren’t anywhere near -3.5% growth:

by-default-2013-11-10-at-9.10.49-PM

That means that in order for Ted Cruz to be right – in order for us to have -3.5% GDP growth in 2013 - the 4th quarter change in real GDP would have to be -20.4%.  And that’s not going to happen, especially when even the pessimists are talking about this quarter’s growth being more on the order of +2%.

Now, we all know what Cruz was really doing. He wasn’t talking about the last four years.  He was talking about the four year period from 2009-2012, which includes George Bush’s near-depression that President Obama inherited.

If you average annual real GDP growth from 2009-2012, you get a little more than 1% growth annually on average:

by-default-2013-11-10-at-9.34.11-PM

But how can Cruz honestly blame President Obama for the near-depression that he inherited from Ted Cruz’s own president and Texas compatriot, George Bush?  The data makes clear that the near-depression began during Bush’s term, and in fact the experts says the Bush recession started in December, 2007 and ended in June, 2009 (President Obama was sworn in on January 20th, 2009).

Here’s the quarterly data showing when the recession began:

gdp

Now let’s look one more time at Ted Cruz’s quote from the Tonight Show:

TED CRUZ: You know in the last four years our economy has grown on average 0.9% a year. It’s not working.

The reason the average annual real GDP growth is so low is the Bush recession bringing the average down – in other words, the data from the first six months of the Obama presidency.  There was no way that “it” was going to “work” to eradicate that negative growth those first six months.  In fact, “it” did work – the President was responsible for slowing the economic collapse, saving jobs, and ensuring that the GDP shrinkage wasn’t far worse.  Don’t forget the CBO analysis from late 2011 that showed just how much the stimulus added to GDP:

stimulus-gdp

Whether you take the high or the low estimate, what CBO showed was that economic growth would have been worse had we followed the Republican’s advice – Ted Cruz’s advice – and not done the stimulus at all.

But what these numbers do show is that Ted Cruz epitomizes the very kind of politician he claims to want to replace.  He’s your typical Washington flim-flam man, playing fast and loose with the numbers in order to confuse you into voting for him.  By claiming that economic growth only averaged 0.9% during the Obama years, Cruz is making people think that the economy basically didn’t grow at all these years.  When it did.  It didn’t grow enough – but that was predicted early on.  That recession was nasty, and everyone knew it was going to cripple us for years.

But rather than the Obama years being about zero growth, they were in fact about 2.36% average annual growth from 2010 to 2012, with 2% growth expected this year.  Now, that’s not enough, don’t get me wrong.  But 2% on average (give or take) is hardly 0.9% either.

By the way, you know who else saw average annual economic growth of “only” 2% during their presidency?  Yep – Cruz’s fellow Texan, George W. Bush.

bush-annual-gdp-growth

Bill Clinton’s average was 3.9%.

George H.W. Bush’s average was 2.3%.

Then again, Ted Cruz also claimed that he opposed the government shutdown.  So I think we have the measure of the man pretty well taken at this point.


(I’m told that in order to actually see my Facebook posts in your feed, you need to “follow” me – so say the experts.)


Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Google+. John Aravosis is the editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown (1989); and worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, and as a stringer for the Economist. Frequent TV pundit: O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline & Reliable Sources. Bio, .

Share This Post

  • Tor

    I am 62% in agreement.

  • Tor

    Ooh. Nasty, but true.

  • Tor

    Let me translate Cruz: “I was against shutting down the government, but the Democrats refused to repeal the ACC, so the shutdown was caused by them.”

  • Tor

    I agree with your assessment. “Pull some numbers out of my ass, and by the time the fact checkers have checked the facts, the news is already out, and can’t be pulled back in.”

  • Bill_Perdue

    Anyone who thinks they’re a progressive ought to get out of Democrat Party, it’s the mirror image of the Republican Party on most issues and getting worse by the day.

    And don’t worry about sounding like me, it’s just the internet. They can’t you or haul you before a Congressional Committee.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    I’ve often wondered that, too. Especially the Colbert Report and the interviews by the Daily Show’s “correspondents”. It’s like they think that they’re on a legitimate news show. Either they don’t get the joke, or they think that they can beat these people at their own game (which is pretty much impossible).

    Clearly some are completely ignorant. Like the local Republican chairman that used the term “nigras”. He had to be stupid to willingly say that on a national TV show. But that doesn’t explain the guys who are supposed to know better. Apparently, the really don’t know better.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    Since the Carter administration the only agenda we’re allowed to discuss is the Republican agenda. What passes for the Democratic agenda consists of alternating putting out fires the Republicans set to the country, and colluding with them to set those fires. There is no progressive agenda in elected politics. Not that I’m trying to sound like Bill Perdue, but there simply are no progressives in Congress, and none looking to run for Congress as far as I know. Those people who do pass for progressives are the kind of people who don’t seem to understand that there can be no compromise between bat shit insane and reality, but yet waste huge amounts of effort trying to find one.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    No idea, but like most network TV, it generally comes down to the ratings, ie ad buys. Pretty much every late night host uses political jokes in their monologue, I guess they figure it’s only fair that they invite the subject of their scorn on?

    I think the better question is, why would politicians go on these shows? Public exposure and some light softball questioning on the Tonight Show is one thing, but I’m continuously stumped at how many “very serious” people go on the Colbert Report and Daily Show, just to have their life’s work essentially disparaged before millions of viewers.

  • Bill_Perdue

    I have no interest in the differences between Democrat and Republicans. Obama’s agenda is to outflank Republicans from the right.

    They bust unions, he busts more unions. They fight against a public option and he betrays his promise for it. They fight for FISA and propose the Paytriot act and he outdoes them by proposing NDAA and ordering the racist murders of four muslim Americans, one a 16 year old boy.

    The differences between the Democrat and Republicans are, for the most part, just so much partisan noise that yield little in the way of facts or clarity. The real focus of interest is in the differences between both of those parties of the rich and the growing numbers of radicalized women, people of color, workers youth and ourselves. Those differences will change the world.

  • Bill_Perdue

    The dichotomy between the owners of the Democrat party and those who vote for it is enormous and growing.

    There were a lot of antiwar Democrats who shoved Obama aside and torpedoed his plans to attack Syria. (Putin was in on the act too.) There are a lot of Democrats getting very angry about Romney/Obamacare. There are a lot of unions where the ‘official’ pro-Democrat leaders are getting shoved aside by reformers and radicals.

    And the voters are beginning to be heard from. “…in last week’s municipal elections in Minneapolis and Seattle the candidates of Socialist Alternative shook the Establishment in two high profile campaigns for city council.

    The votes are still being counted in Seattle with more returns being
    announced later today. As of Friday’s tabulation SAlt candidate Kshama Sawant had 49.5 percent and trailed her incumbent opponent by 1,237 votes. She has steadily gained in the count and still might win.

    The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reports Socialist Alternative candidate Ty
    Moore lost a tight race to the DFL (the Democrats dba Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party in Minnesota) candidate 47-42 percent.”

    (The incumbent in Seattle is a Democrat). from http://kclabor.org/wordpress/?p=245

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    I truly believe that’s how it is here, too, and goes a long way towards explaining the ever declining news broadcast viewership and newspaper circulation.

    But here in America, the news is owned and controlled almost entirely by the plutocratic oligarchy and thus serves their interests, not the people.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    I am wondering why they bother having pols on late-night talk shows. Perhaps to shill a book, but other than that..? Those shows are meant to be light entertainment – interviews with actors, authors, etc. I just wish that they’d stop interviewing all of the politicians.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    I try everything within my power to avoid HP. There’s to much crap on every page, and every story seems to have a slide show or a video. It’s like the web designers said “Let’s see how much scripting and useless crap we can slam into this page.”

  • MyrddinWilt

    The mistake we are making right now is letting the Republicans set the agenda.

    90% of what progressives are talking about is nothing more than stopping the Republicans being pointlessly nasty.

  • MyrddinWilt

    It is hilarious to watch a US pol being interviewed by a UK journalist who has not been brought up saluting flags and worshiping the powerful all their lives.

    The funny thing is that UK politicians prefer the tough interviews to the soft ones because tough questions are the ones that people are interested in hearing answers to.

  • MyrddinWilt

    I don’t think there is a split in the Democrats on goals. There are splits on tactics and priorities. There is a split between the executive office holders and the party on surveillance and winding down the Bush era legal abuses.

    The cure for the second is for Thomas and/or Alito to do the decent thing and shuffle off their mortal coils and for a Democrat to appoint the replacement.

  • MyrddinWilt

    Not power, status.

    He loves being the guy being driven in the big car with the flags on the fenders. But it is all show and no substance.

    I think the baggers would like to take the speakership but they don’t because 1) they can’t agree among themselves who would take it, 2) their base is only pro-semitic in the very narrow sense of supporting Jews in their predestined role of Armageddon-bait to bring on the second coming by getting destroyed. They realize that removing Boehner would probably put a Jew in the Speaker’s chair which their base believes should only be occupied by white male protestant types.

  • http://hunteratrandom.blogspot.com/ rmthunter

    Nice detailed post, but there’s a simpler answer: Cruz is not using four-year-old figures or averaging in the Bush recession or anything like that. He’s just lying through his teeth because he knows he can get away with it — Jay Leno’s certainly not equipped to challenge him on it.

  • Badgerite

    I find that odd. His not questioning his father’s beliefs. Usually, exposure to the world of ideas opens up the mind to other possibilities. Breaks down the barriers of a closed mind. In his case it seems to have had the opposite effect. It convinced him of his and his father’s superiority. He so Smart.

  • emjayay

    NYT and Washington Monthly comment streams are often intelligent and interesting. Unfortunately Kevin Drum at Mother Jones attracts three or four regular right wing idealogues for some reason who divert the discussion down useless paths.

  • emjayay

    Once again, he is a lawyer and a debater. Only winning matters, not truth or anything else. That plus being brought up by a far right delusional pastor of something father, whose worldview he has no doubt never questioned.

  • emjayay

    But I don’t think in the form of any kind of welfare or make work programs (not that that’s gonna happen anyway) but in the form of equal taxation of capital gains and earned income and closing loopholes and ending Cayman Island (hello Mitt) fake parking of assets and fake corporations and a lot more of that kind of stuff. A small tax on financial/stock transactions. Whatever it takes to remove the means of the top money earners/financial sector from cornering higher and higher percentages of national income.

    A problem of course is that over the years the bazillions spent on lobbying and campaign contributions etc. over the years has baked thousands of things into law and regulations that do just that: cornering higher and higher percentages of national income.

    It seems to me that a politician (Bill de Blasio?) repeating “95% of all the income growth since 2009 has gone to the top 1%” might clarify things.

  • emjayay

    Thanks. Carlin was right.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    I occasionally read some of the stories over there, since they’re not a terrible news aggregator — provided one avoids the “OMG, look at (insert young starlet name) in plunging/sheer/see-thru gown!” posts.

    But I don’t go anywhere near the comments. Not even to look. They are so not worth anybody’s time.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Like they say, “it’s not a bug, it’s a feature.”

    The Ryan budget — and indeed every GOP budget and policy priority is geared towards increasing the gap between rich and poor, and to force the middle class down.

    Unfortunately, the message from the Dems is a confused mishmash of mostly neoliberal pro-corporatist rubbish, with a smattering of platitudes such as ‘grow out the middle class’ — when what this country really needs is a poverty elimination program the likes of which we haven’t seen since the Great Society. Paid for by those who’ve benefited almost exclusively from all the economic growth from 1980 onward: The wealthy.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    I’ve posted a couple times over there… but I can’t bring myself to get into a blog that has no dissenting opinions. No discussion, little information, just cheer leading.

  • nicho

    expected 2016 Republican presidential candidate,

    There is no way the corporatocracy wants a loose cannon like Cruz any where near the White House. If he gets on the GOP ticket, then it’s a sure sign the corporatists want the “Democratic” ticket to win.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    Try Maddow’s site, her pc bots are ever vigilant over there. And god forbid you ever deviate from the script.

  • Bill_Perdue

    The danger here, as it is in Europe, is more imposed austerity. Both parties favor austerity and may get a chance to enact it when the next round of ‘deficit’ talks early next year even though deficit growth is declining.

    From the Guardian UK “ The great austerity shell game – Here’s how the capitalist scam works: let government borrow for crisis bailouts, then insist cuts pay for them. Guess who loses”

    “Center-right governments in Britain and Germany do it. So do the center-left governments in France and Italy. Obama and the Republicans do it, too. They all impose “austerity” programs on their economies as necessary to exit the crisis afflicting them all since 2007. Politicians and economists impose austerity now much as doctors once stuck mustard plasters on the skins of the sick. …Obama’s austerity policies during 2013 started 1 January, when he raised payroll taxes on everyone’s annual incomes up to $113,700. Then, on 1 March, the “sequester” lowered federal expenditures. Thus, 2013′s US deficit will drop sharply from 2012′s. … Obama will likely impose more austerity: cutting social security and Medicare benefits to compromise with Republicans.” http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/great-austerity-shell-game Richard D Wolff is professor of economics emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. As always the comments section in the Guardian is first class.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    I was hoping Leno would have been a little more forceful, considering he’s already fired and out at the end of January. Not like he has to worry about offending the likes of Ted Cruz.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    That’s actually why I came here, like five or six years ago… I got tired of HuffPost censoring random things they disagreed with, but not doing anything about the people actually having all-out flame wars.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    Because natural born citizenship law is more complex than simply where you were born.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    Not to mention, the Ryan budget would make a 0.9% GDP growth seem great. It would drop us into a pit.

  • Bill_Perdue

    Both parties are in turmoil. Both are moving right. Both will become obsolete, sooner rather than later, as a result of the growing radicalization of workers and an out of unions.

    I don’t have any way of telling which will split or when but for Republicans I think it’s safe to say that they have to deal with internal polarization and partisanship that’s heading in the direction of becoming as intense as the partisanship between the Democrats and Republicans. I’m not sure that the Democrats will go under from a split but I think it’s likely that they’ll lose the support of workers. I can’t wait. The growth of workers parties will be a great victory.

    I don’t see any real differences on most questions between the parties so I don’t think their demise will be a bad thing. The US has always been ruled by the rich. Cruz is a tool of the rich and so is Hillary Clinton. The difference is she’s a much more experienced pol.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    If 2008 was the first fact-free election cycle, 2016 will be the first reality-free one.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    Because Boehner is a Republican; he never saw a glimmer of power that he didn’t want to cling onto until his last dying breath. It’s the same reason why Eric Cantor wants his job so bad, yet has no possible path to being able to do the job more effectively.

    The whole reason why the teabaggers are letting Boehner keep the Speakership is so they have someone to take the blame for not being crazy enough, every time they fail. If he threw up his arms and decided to quit, and Cantor didn’t immediately try to jump in his grave, the party would crap all over itself trying to figure out what to do next.

  • Zorba

    The saying “You get the kind of government you deserve” has been attributed to many people (Thomas Jefferson, H. L. Mencken, Alexis de Tocqueville, and even Ayn Rand. Among others.).
    But perhaps my favorite quote came from comedian George Carlin:

    “Now, there’s one thing you might have noticed I don’t complain about: politicians. Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don’t fall out of the sky. They don’t pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It’s what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you’re going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain’t going to do any good; you’re just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it’s not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here… like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There’s a nice campaign slogan for somebody: ‘The Public Sucks. F*ck Hope.’”

    Yep.

  • MyrddinWilt

    Thats not how parties collapse. The challenges always come from the extremes. The Republican party came into being because the existing parties did not have room for an absolutist anti-slavery stance.

    The Republican party is currently facing an existential crisis because Fox News keeps feeding the base crack. Even the Koch brothers are starting to realize that they can sign big checks but they don’t buy control of the monster they created.

    The actual mechanics might well end up with the Tea Party ending up winning control of the GOP causing the moderates to bolt. Only there aren’t very many moderates in the GOP, they have bolted to the Democrats or retired. Christie is the only elected Republican who isn’t trying to pretend to be a Tea Partier.

    Splitting the Democrats is not going to do the Progressive cause any favors. It would be a disaster for the left and let the reich run the country. If you can’t tell the difference between Hilary Clinton and Ted Cruz then you need some sense.

  • http://www.newmillgay.com/ The_Fixer

    It’s a go-to debate technique of all disingenuous politicians of either party, but the Republicans and their mouthpieces seem to have made it their speciality. That being, flood the debate with known false statistics or accusations, knowing that it takes time and effort to refute them.

    The person hearing them doesn’t have the time to check them out, and therefore, the false information gets a pass and worse yet, gets quoted by other “very serious people”. One has to be a statistical wizard in order to push back against this technique.

    This makes for a very difficult structured debate, and is tailor-made to propagate false information.

  • MyrddinWilt

    What is weird is not that Cruz would lie but the lie he tells. Everyone who has paid the least attention knows that Cruz was a leader in the government shutdown. While it is true that he didn’t cast an actual vote for the shutdown, that is only because he was in the Senate, not the House.

    Usually when a pol tries this kind of blatant lie it is on an issue his constituents consider peripheral, like McCain criticizing Obama for not going into Libya, then for intervening in Libya, then taking the credit for removing Gadaffi and now peddling Benghazi conspiracy theories. McCain can flip and flop as much as he likes because he has been firm to his core policy that he never saw a war he didn’t like.

    This is something very different, like claiming to be for and against abortion. His constituents may not notice but the other members of his party certainly will. His fake filibuster forced the hand of House leaders to back the Tea Party strategy or face a leadership challenge. Now the Tea Party strategy has failed they are trying to heap the blame on Boehner.

    The biggest mystery in DC politics right now is why Boehner wants to keep his job. He is speaker of the House but he isn’t the party leader in any functional sense. Its like watching John Major trying to run the last Tory majority government while his backbench was busy stabbing him in the back. The old difference being that Boehner is obviously a flake and John Major did at least give the appearance of being a decent chap.

    The attack ads write themselves, “There are people who hear voices and do what they tell them, other people take advice from space aliens and rocks. But [Insert GOP member's name here] takes his orders from Ted Cruz, what a moron”.

  • usagi

    Digby has been warning people about this guy since he first slithered onto the scene. She’s correct. Romney failed at becoming the the first post-truth candidate because his personality was inherently unlikable and he couldn’t connect to people to save his life. Cruz can. He spouts this bullshit and people believe it. The actual facts are going to be less important in 2016 than how forcefully the candidates articulate whatever fiction they’re spinning at the moment.

  • FLL

    Cruz pays lip service to a critique of “the 1%,” all the while ignoring the fact that a Ryan-type budget plan, which he supports, would exacerbate the gap between rich and poor.

  • Bill_Perdue

    The problem is not so much lying by politicians, without exception they all do it.

    The problem for working class people is that there is no recovery, it’s only for the rich and they’re doing very well indeed. “Robert Reich wonders why: “As of November 1 more than 47 million Americans have lost some or all of their food stamp benefits. House Republicans are pushing for further cuts. If the sequester isn’t stopped everything else poor and working-class Americans depend on will be further squeezed.

    We’re not talking about a small sliver of America here. Half of all children get food stamps at some point during their childhood. Half of all adults get them sometime between ages 18 and 65. Many employers – including the nation’s largest, Walmart – now pay so little that food stamps are necessary in order to keep food on the family table, and other forms of assistance are required to keep a roof overhead.

    The larger reality is that most Americans are still living in the Great Recession. Median household income continues to drop. In last week’s Washington Post-ABC poll, 75 percent rated the state of the economy as “negative” or “poor.”

    The next election will be based on the failure of both parties to provide any economic or heath care relief for working people and very likely on increased campaigns for austerity by both of them. Republicans will continue to split between an old guard in favor, for now, of Christie and a rebellious Teabag led by Cruz and maybe even Return of the Attack of the Palin. Democrats will have to choose between Biden and Hillary Clinton or the far right and Warren in the right center.

    Both parties are headed to a date with the Whigs. It can’t happen too soon.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    A couple generations ago, they would have.

    Now all the knee-pad wearing stenographers do is report what politicians said and parrot the talking points — without ever pointing out the actual truth of a situation.

  • benb

    I’m beginning to wonder why any politician who tries to make a point with some fact (“0.9%” growth) isn’t pushed to substantiate that fact.

  • rudolf schnaubelt

    75% of statistics are made up on the spot. 64% of people know this.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Yes, Cruz is playing fast-and-loose with those numbers and appears to be pulling them out of his posterior. You can’t come up with 0.9% GDP growth over the last four years by any kind of mathematical acrobatics, and it’s totally disingenuous to use 2009 to completely offset the gains made from 2010-13.

    That all said though:
    - Median household income has dropped by $4k since the year 2000 (after adjusting for inflation).
    - 95% of all the income growth since 2009 has gone to the top 1%.
    - The gap between the rich and everybody else has never been wider, not even when considering the former high-water mark, 1929.

    Then there’s this chart…

  • ericxdc

    or Muslimia.

  • Monoceros Forth

    The sad thing is that that, really, it doesn’t matter much how mistaken or deceitful Sen. Cruz’s claims are because there’s a huge audience ready to believe any nonsense he might spout. Cruz or any other prominent Republican could claim tomorrow that Obama personally tripled everyone’s taxes, or redirected the entire defence budget into welfare checks and food stamps, or sent officials to greet every immigrant at the Mexican border with a sack full of money and directions to the nearest voting booth, and a large fraction of American voters would lap it all up; and then the press would dutifully transcribe those wild claims and report them as “news” with scarcely a murmur of dissent.

  • lynchie

    Not going to happen as long as the media remain biased and it is ok to lie about everything.

  • lynchie

    You are dead right it does take a fair amount of explanation. But he is crafty enough to know his base can’t read, hell most cannot write. Few will go through the explanation and come to conclusion he is an outright liar. That is one reason the GOP want to dumb down education the better to lie and swindle the voters. We on the Dem side need to always be out front with a story. Rape is always page 1, not guilty page 58. Obama and his minions failed miserably with the ACA. It should never have been launched without testing ,testing and de-bugging. Whoever said it was good to go needs fired publicly and loudly. So easy to throw shit but harder to come up with solutions.

  • Tatts

    Oh, come on. The law is clear. The only country you can’t be born in if you want to be President is Kenya. Everybody knows that.

  • Kevin Taylor

    I thought Cruz was born in Canada, how can he be a presidential candidate?

  • Badgerite

    If you have a memory beyond what you had for lunch then you know that Ted Cruz is just flat out flying about the level of economic growth in the economy during the Obama years and his participation in the Republican Government Shutdown 2.0. I don’t even have to look at the chart. I think Cruz just simply holds the American public in contempt and subscribes to the theory that you can’t go broke underestimating their intelligence. That he considers himself THE 1% goes without saying. .

  • Gary Harmer

    That’s why I’m commenting here on AmericaBlog…

  • Gary Harmer

    I’m damn tired of HUFFINGTON POST deleting all of my comments. Is this not a free country…get off of it HP!

  • gratuitous

    Well, I’m sure that ace journalist Jay Leno jumped on Cruz’s bald-faced lies like a desperate bridesmaid on a bouquet, right? Although, to be completely fair, Leno *did* say that from his vantage point, Cruz looked like a big fan of the shutdown he orchestrated. Which is actually a little more than we get from the likes of Chuck Todd, David Gregory or any of the Foxbots.

  • FLL

    From your post:

    “Now, we all know what Cruz was really doing. He wasn’t talking about the last four years. He was talking about the four year period from 2009-2012, which includes George Bush’s near-depression that President Obama inherited.” [1.075% average annual GDP growth for that period]

    This is a very transparent technique to misinform listeners. Cruz could have been honest and said “about 1% average GDP growth for 2009 through 2012.” There. It doesn’t take a lot of words to be honest, does it? But Cruz thinks he can fool his listeners into thinking that he’s including most or all of 2013, and not including most of 2012. Cruz performs this bait-and-switch in the service of his agenda: to make listeners believe that the Obama administration hasn’t done squat for GDP growth, and we would all be better off with the Republicans in charge. This fabrication technique is getting a little overused these days: take statistics that apply to one concept and insert them into the description of a second, entirely different concept, or at least word your statement so as to lead your listeners to believe that you’re talking about the second concept. Overused. Very overused. These days.

  • Buford2k11

    Teddy is not interested in accurate numbers…unless they are his money account numbers…He is about propaganda, and the full court press to overthrow our government…He is the “inside” guy in the movie plot…I sometimes loose hope in ever seeing our nation united as one again…

© 2014 AMERICAblog News. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS