Nov 3rd 2010, 11:05 by R.A. | LONDON
APPARENTLY there was some sort of election in America, and it's managed to clog up my blog reader with political news. A quick scan of the post-mortems does suggest that the economy may have had something to do with voting patterns, though not necessarily in the ways one might have expected. Marc Ambinder turns up an amusing exit poll result:
Who's to blame for the economy? Bankers (34%), Bush (29%), Obama (24%). Of those who blame bankers, Republicans hold an 11 point advantage.
I'll leave an interpretation of this fascinating piece of data to you.
In this blog, our correspondents consider the fluctuations in the world economy and the policies intended to produce more booms than busts. Adam Smith argued that in a free exchange both parties benefit, and this blog's aim is to encourage a free exchange of views on economic matters.
Advertisement
Over the past five days
Over the past seven days
Advertisement
Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
Voters know only what the media tell them. So polls of voter opinions are nothing but self-congratulatory stories of how effective the media have been at getting the public to buy into media biases.
Was Greenspan listed as a choice ?
On a similar note, when asked what would turn the economy around, one Senate candidate in Kentucky responded with "A few bows to the Aqua Buddah couldn't hurt".
"What do we want?"
"AUSTERITY!"
"When do we want it?"
"RIGHT AFTER OUR TAX CUTS!
----
With the 'R's calling for spending cuts
(see Boehner's speech last night),
my 9.3% over/under unemployment rate for 2011
is looking good.
Best for the Fed to get to the sidelines - QUICKLY! -
so they don't get blamed for the mess the new incumbants will create.
Regards
I still prefer the old days of
pitchforks and torches.
Regards