When it comes to the economy, it doesn't matter who wins the Presidency. The President can make speeches, but nothing else. It's Congress who decides what is or isn't actually done.
Both the main candidates have agendas that the current majority in the House and Senate have declared they will obstruct.
By the way, minor note: referring to the last eight years as the result of "Obamanomics" is silly. He was blocked from doing 90% of what he proposed. A better description would be "political-impass-onomics, with Republican concepts taking the lead." The reason why I say the Republican ideas took the lead, is because they forced Obama and the Democrats to give them ALL the tax breaks they wanted, and gave back nothing at all in exchange.
And no, I'm NOT saying that everything that has and hasn't happened is the GOP's fault, especially since their primary mode for the last thirty years has been "cut taxes on the top earners, and refuse to address any problems at all otherwise." When someone refuses to enact any actions at all, you can't blame them for EVERYTHING. Plus the Democrats chose actively to go along with that inaction, including Obama himself. Notice that he never even TRIED to use the Presidential "bully pulpit" to fight against the Republican obstructionism. So he and the Democrats are equally to blame.
For the first 2 years of his presidency the Dems controlled it all and still nothing was done. But now with the repukes controlling it seems the Dums wish to now make everything an issue and blame it on the repukes for the inaction.
I do agree with you on that regard, but it does go to the point of "too much govt" since they seem to get in the way of getting anything done other than a bunch of finger pointing.
Both parties have earned their 7% approval rating because of their disconnect from the American people and the problems facing them.
How does a millionaire denizen of DC, protected by armed security and living in protected upper class neighborhoods pretend to know the problems in our inner cities, the true nature of hunger, security, the job market, or the effects of the economy on the everyman on the streets?
They vote themselves raises, healthcare, retirement and bonus packages, mingle only with others outside the norm like lobbyists, CEOs, movie stars and bankers with deep pockets and an agenda...... while claiming to know what's best for the people.
This is the definition of disconnect!
I'm with you in everything except the general idea that you seem to be implying, that all the big problems are due to too much government, and that eliminating all of it would fix it.
I think it's much more complicated. I think there are some specific areas where there's way too much government, others where there's not enough, and even more where there needs to be some, but it's been done wrong.
Case by case basis, really. It's a fact that every government regulation came from a situation where unregulated stuff caused big problems. That doesn't mean that ALL regulations are good, especially because as you say (and I agree) there is a huge disconnect between who gets to be in charge, and the bulk of those of us living everyday lives.
What I especially see happen, is that a real problem is caused by some private interest pulling a stunt, or acting irresponsibly, and then the politicians step in, and come up with a regulatory "fix" which either goes overboard, or doesn't actually address the real problem at all.
Each party tends to have their own version of stupid non-solutions. The democrats tend to try to blindly force some sort of good behavior, or to push money out of one groups' hands into another, while failing to appreciate even the fundamentals of how people interact. The Republicans do a variation of the same thing, only they are convinced that being rich, magically makes someone smarter and more right than everyone else, so they try to prevent other people from interfering with the rich guys.
So from Democrats, we get stuff such as laws requiring all employers to do various things for their employees, and because they do a sloppy job of writing them, the employers do the only natural thing in response: outsource everyone, so they aren't employees anymore.
The Republicans step in, and are just as bad in another direction, with ideas like their 90's "solution" for high medical costs: limit how much anyone can sue a doctor for, so that insurance companies MIGHT lower the rates, totally ignoring how capitalism and the profit motive really works. Or, proposing to "fix" competition with overseas markets, by helping American industries to hire everything done in countries with lower cost of living (by eliminating import regulations), while ignoring the fact that that means that no one here will be able to get jobs that pay enough to deal with the cost of living, which they do NOTHING to lower.
I therefore don't support either the Democrats idea of ALL-regulating, and I really hate the Republicans idea of ZERO regulating. I want RIGHT SIZE regulating. Kind of like the story of Goldilocks and the three bears, you know?
We need regulations that are juuuust right.
