I guess I really don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to complaining about late responses in the comments!

But hey, I've been trying to do a better job answering folks this week...

-CW

Of course you realize, if Obama starts kicking ass on the deficit, Republicans are going to have to start pivoting to a different economic position. Maybe they'll go back to deficit spending?

The contortions hurt the brain

And sorry for the time delay CW ... traveling on business to RTP.

-David

Yeah, I didn't bother to use FY2013 constant dollars, either, but, hey, I kind of just threw it together on the spot. It serves the purposes it was designed for, in a sort of ad hoc fashion, though.

I did consider marking the presidential eras, but it would have been difficult due to the debate over inauguration years when the budget's already in place (like 2009 or 2001). Also, it took long enough to get the three #*&!¶ colors to look right as it was... sigh... lots of Excel fun, as usual.

I was happy to see actual official CBO figures finally released, though. I guess I was just impatient last week, that's all...

:-)

nypoet22 -

See above comment on the overlap years. I tend to think of Obama getting handed that $1.4T deficit from Bush, but you've got to admit that the stimulus he passed had something to do with it as well (in a minor way). So it's impossible to be really accurate, although when that chart is filled in with the real figures for 2013, 2014, 2015... etc., I think Obama's stewardship will become plain for all to see, and incredibly positive overall. Maybe that's just me, though, I dunno. I am an incurable optimist...

:-)

-CW

my lack of comment was because i think the graph actually makes obama look worse than he has actually been, not better. the reality is that the economy was in free-fall when he took over, and large deficits were necessary to prevent total collapse. however, without that context it looks like even obama's best year (the current one) is worse than bush's worst year - much less the trend under clinton.

If you wanted to be really Partisan (I know you don't really) you could have colour coded it to represent which President was responsible for which years (so blue for 1992-2001 when the deficit shrunk, red for 2002-2009 when it expanded, blue for 2010-present when it once again shrunk). But most people with a brain have already realized this anyway and those in denial will continue to be in denial whether or not you did this...

Also these are just projections the actual result could be worse. But it could also be BETTER - these projected deficits already had to revised downwards because unemployment numbers have been better than expected this year (plus some large bank bailout repayments).

If anything your graph should show that the deficit is starting to come under control and it is UNEMPLOYMENT that politicians should be interested in.

:-(

(Heh.)

-CW