Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
31 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Something you will never see on Fox (Original Post) Omaha Steve Monday OP
Correct................ Lovie777 Monday #1
Congress determines spending, not the president MichMan Monday #2
So the fact that whathehell Monday #4
"The buck stops here" niyad Monday #6
More complex than that. Pacifist Patriot Monday #7
It is more complex than the OP. That was my point. MichMan Monday #16
always the whitewash Skittles Monday #19
Hehe AKwannabe Tuesday #27
Everyone should always remember this! ReRe Monday #26
This message was self-deleted by its author charliea Tuesday #29
Up until recently... charliea Tuesday #30
I thought TSF was up to 5 Trillion? flying_wahini Monday #3
Just getting started -- that was probably from the 1st term. nt eppur_se_muova Monday #24
Great concept, visualization. Kid Berwyn Monday #5
The Deficit is the annual shortfall IbogaProject Monday #10
Yep and MAGA did it mostly via tax cuts for the rich uponit7771 Monday #8
Rs spend like drunken billionaires. Ds clean up the Rs party mess. Clouds Passing Monday #9
Drunken billionaires don't spend their own money -- certainly not when they're part of the Administration. nt eppur_se_muova Monday #25
Oops, that's right they steal our money to use Clouds Passing Wednesday #31
GW with all his daddy issues, PatSeg Monday #11
Didn't Bush Jr. work the levers somehow yonder Monday #21
Oh, I don't know PatSeg Tuesday #28
correct. does compte . this needs to be either a tv ad or bill board . AllaN01Bear Monday #12
With simplified text... RockCreek Monday #22
Look at em again LilElf70 Monday #13
yet the G.O.P. lies about this all the time BoRaGard Monday #14
Unless the context is provided... SickOfTheOnePct Monday #15
I believe Biden reduced the deficit compared to the prior year after all the Covid spending ended MichMan Monday #17
Anyone familiar with the U.S. debt would know how to interpret it. W_HAMILTON Monday #18
Looking at only the deficit... SickOfTheOnePct Monday #20
the rs do that deliberatly so that the rs can have some one to blame during the election. AllaN01Bear Monday #23

whathehell

(30,219 posts)
4. So the fact that
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 10:15 AM
Monday

in the last half century, deficits increased under Republican presidents and decreased under Democrats is just a coincidence?

Pacifist Patriot

(25,080 posts)
7. More complex than that.
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 10:21 AM
Monday

POTUS has tremendous influence over spending and getting budget bills passed. Bush getting us into a war certainly didn't help in his case.

MichMan

(15,543 posts)
16. It is more complex than the OP. That was my point.
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 03:59 PM
Monday

The OP would ignore completely the role of Congress in spending.

The House was in Republican control in Clinton's and Obama's second terms. It was in Democratic control for the end of Bush II and the last half of Trump's first term. Hell, Reagan even had a Democratic House his entire presidency. None of them could spend anything or sign anything into law without Congress passing it first.

I don't believe that Madame Speaker Pelosi, who famously tore up Trump's State of the Union speech, passed Trump's budgets the last two years of his first term because of the tremendous influence he had over her. Do you?

ReRe

(11,703 posts)
26. Everyone should always remember this!
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 10:10 PM
Monday
The President proposes. The Congress disposes. Period.

Response to MichMan (Reply #2)

charliea

(305 posts)
30. Up until recently...
Tue Jul 29, 2025, 02:23 PM
Tuesday

Congressional Republicans are too willing to let TSF control the purse. Note that they were willing to rescind previously approved spending at his whim, thereby increasing my public media donations. Their latest rescission bill shows that they live to cede their authority to the Orange One.

Just like his cabinet members, eh? Most current example: Hegseth, who apparently just elided a little under a billion from a nuclear readiness update program, Sentinel, to fund a classified project. Coincidentally that 934 million was right about the amount I saw some knowledgeable observers estimate it would cost to prepare the "free" plane from Qatar for use an AF1.

Also note: It's unlikely that the conversion to AF1, could be completed before his term expires. The Secret Service (if they didn't want to get spied on) would require a removal of the interior, re-assembly of the plane from the air frame inward, all new electronic systems installation, re-installation of the plan's innards and those shiny gold gee-jaws he likes so much, and of course the testing. This means that it will be ready just about the time it gets donated to the Trump presidential library. Of course that's assuming he actually leaves...

eppur_se_muova

(39,552 posts)
25. Drunken billionaires don't spend their own money -- certainly not when they're part of the Administration. nt
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 10:08 PM
Monday

PatSeg

(50,681 posts)
11. GW with all his daddy issues,
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 10:32 AM
Monday

managed to outdo his father, at least when it came to the deficit - $1.54 trillion over $102 billion!

yonder

(10,107 posts)
21. Didn't Bush Jr. work the levers somehow
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 06:45 PM
Monday

so that his war costs would not be reflected in the debt increase which occured during his administration?

I seem to recall something like that but dont know if it is shown in the 1.54t value.

PatSeg

(50,681 posts)
28. Oh, I don't know
Tue Jul 29, 2025, 08:45 AM
Tuesday

It's entirely possible. What a debacle that administration was. I often forget as this administration is worse than anything I can imagine.

AllaN01Bear

(26,718 posts)
12. correct. does compte . this needs to be either a tv ad or bill board .
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 11:19 AM
Monday

but do they listen to facts. nope .

LilElf70

(1,002 posts)
13. Look at em again
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 11:42 AM
Monday

All but 1 seem happy and are showing teeth.

Hmm..... I wonder what's that all about.

BoRaGard

(6,604 posts)
14. yet the G.O.P. lies about this all the time
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 11:48 AM
Monday

republicons Bear False Witness -- then claim they are christians. Sure.

SickOfTheOnePct

(8,245 posts)
15. Unless the context is provided...
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 01:05 PM
Monday

...no reputable news outlet should be showing this. For example, in which year of his Presidency did George W. Bush add $1.54 trillion the to the deficit? In which year of his Presidency did Joe Biden decrease the deficit by $954 billion?

The number that really matters is how much was added to the national debt, in current dollars, during any given Presidency.

MichMan

(15,543 posts)
17. I believe Biden reduced the deficit compared to the prior year after all the Covid spending ended
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 04:01 PM
Monday

W_HAMILTON

(9,388 posts)
18. Anyone familiar with the U.S. debt would know how to interpret it.
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 04:32 PM
Monday

The numbers come from what the deficit was that each president inherited vs the deficit that each president left for his successor. I eyeballed the math a bit and it looked correct based on https://usafacts.org/answers/what-is-the-federal-governments-budget-deficit-or-surplus/country/united-states/

For example, in 1981, the deficit that Reagan inherited was $79 billion; when he left office in 1989, the deficit was $153 billion, resulting in an increase to the deficit of $74 billion, which is exactly what the OP's graphic shows.

But this is a "you are losing sight of the forest for all the trees" situation, because there is no question that Democratic administrations have been much better stewards when it comes to our national debt than Republican administrations have been for at least the past ~half century or so. Do you -- or anyone else -- doubt that?

SickOfTheOnePct

(8,245 posts)
20. Looking at only the deficit...
Mon Jul 28, 2025, 06:14 PM
Monday

...in the first year and last year of administration does nothing more than show you the static information for those two years, but shows nothing about the what was going on with the deficit in the intervening years, nor the overall impact to the national debt, which is the number that has the longest term impact. If Reagan's deficit number in 1989 had been $50 billion, the chart would have correctly shown that he reduced the deficit by $29 billion, but would have ignored all the years in between when the deficit was high and the national debt was increasing.

Using the chart for Reagan's terms for example, you could say that he increased the deficit by $73.6 billion, which doesn't sound horrible, given recent numbers. But when you look at each year of deficits, and calculate what was added to the national debt, it's $1.412 trillion over 8 years.

Plus, looking at the deficit at the beginning of a term and the end of a term doesn't account for anything that happened in the intervening years that required unexpected big hikes in spending.

Bill Clinton is the only President in the chart that actually subtracted from the national debt, and everyone else added to it.

Reagan: $1.412 trillion (8 years, $177B/year)
Bush I: $1.036 trillion (4 years, $259B/year)
Clinton: -$62.8 billion (8 years,, $-7.85B/year)
Bush II: $3.534 trillion (8 years, $442B/year) (9/11, wars, Great Recession)
Obama: $6.557 trillion (8 years, $820B/year) (Great Recession)
Trump: $7.663 trillion (4 years, $1.92T/year) (COVID)
Biden: $4.9 trillion (3 years, because they only show the first three fiscal years of his administration, $1.6T/year) (COVID)

As for whether or not Democrats have been better stewards of the national debt, pre-Clinton and Clinton, yes, Democrats were definitely better. Post-Clinton it's hard to tell, because every President since him has had some kind of national crisis that had to be dealt with, primarily the Great Recession and COVID, which naturally increased spending.

For Bush II, deficits were going back down during his second term until the Great Recession hit, so it's impossible to tell what his final year of deficit would have been.

For Obama, he brought down deficits that were at their peak during the Great Recession, but in his final two years in office, deficits were creeping back up. Had he not had to do the initial spending for the Great Recession, thus already starting him in a deep hole, would he eventually gotten to a balanced budget? No way to know.

For Trump, deficits were going up, no question, and then exploded during COVID, so he was definitely adding to the debt bigly, even before COVID.

For Biden, he brought the deficit down from peak COVID spending, but they immediately started going up again. Would he have brought them back down in a second term? No way to know.

All of this is to say that showing a starting number and an ending number, and using that to prove that someone is doing a great job or someone is doing a crappy job isn't necessarily valid.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Something you will never ...