Are You Better Off Today Than You Were Four Years Ago?

The answer is a resounding--no. It's still bad. But would a Republican elected in 2012 be any better? The answer is still--no. Every election cycle we go through this same pointless exercise. The Democrats would say that if we get a majority in both houses of Congress we get things done with President Obama. They wouldn't have to deal with the do-nothing Republicans. Well they had just such a majority in 2009 and the Donkeys failed. The American people did what they do every election now, give the majority back to the other party. When will we wise-up and stop playing musical chairs. It is as clear as it has ever been. The problem is a two-party system that gives us no choice, just the same nonsense masquerading as something different:

 Back in the 1980 presidential race, Republican candidate Ronald Reagan set the modern standard for gauging the economic mood of voters when he defeated incumbent Democrat Jimmy Carter by asking the simple question: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

In 2012, President Barack Obama will try to win re-election in the face of what is likely to be the highest unemployment rate for any president seeking a second term in 76 years. Not since Franklin Roosevelt won re-election in 1936 has a president faced a worse economic situation. Obama's job approval stands at 46% – below George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Ronald Reagan a year before they were re-elected – and approval of Obama's handling of the economy is a dismal 39%.

Full article