Kind of reminds me of how everyone gives Obama credit for the termination of Bin Laden when it was all built on everything Bush had done prior.
Yeah, Obama didn't really have any hand personally in killing Bin Laden. I don't think he really deserved a Nobel Prize either. There's sensible limits to how much people can circlejerk about his presidency.
But you're right, this is probably at least 80% because of Obama's policies. He did help job growth, but at a very heavy price. Our national debt more than doubled in the 8 years he was president while the previous debt was steadily accumulated over the course of the past two centuries. But hey, that's Keynesian economic theory for you.
If you take his stuff at face value, Annoying Orange is pretty Keynesian too. He wants to invest large amounts of expansionary federal spending into infrastructure (namely, a wall, but also highways) to stimulate the economy, which is a move that's pretty characteristic of Keynesian theory. Some economists say that it's unnecessary expansionary spending that will cause inflation, some say that a little bit of inflation is worth it. I'm not equipped to say whether it's a good idea or a bad one since that's outside my knowledge of macroeconomics.
The problem is that Annoying Orange also wants to drop taxes, which means that the national debt will rise because we'll be spending more money but taking in less revenue, meaning we can't buy back as many treasury securities as we could otherwise.
In defense of Obama, the national debt didn't double (it was like a 69% increase), and the increase was roughly proportional to the increase that happened over Reagan and Bush Sr.'s tenure, which, remember, didn't include a housing market crCIA right at the beginning that plummeted consumer demand and mandated the use of expansionary spending.
And yeah, sure, it made our debt skyrocket, but people didn't want to live in a recession. Ending the recession was definitely the popular choice, and he succeeded in getting us out of it.
