Just so we're clear on something - while I think it's a tad bit preposterous to even argue economy for any President (they don't have - in most cases - much to do with it, they just happen to be there), I have NO PROBLEM making TLP's argument on Trump.
Not because I think the economy is attributable to whomever but because TRUMP HIMSELF was touting stock market numbers and unemployment numbers. It is absolutely fair game to go after any candidate that does that, just as it was fair of Reagan to bring up Carter's gimmick "the misery index" in the 1980 debate, which Carter had used to say Ford shouldn't be re-elected.
In the fall of 1994, Bill Clinton was secretly talking to Dick Morris (or so says Morris's 1997 book). Clinton wanted to go around the country boasting about the better economic numbers in 1994 than they were in 1992. Morris told him it wouldn't work for two reasons: 1) nobody is going to give the Congressperson credit for the economy; 2) you can run on it in 96 if it stays great, but if it goes back you're stuck with it.
If Trump had done everything (or almost everything) right - and we still had 60,000 dead on the thing that couldn't be stopped, I'm fair. I'd have cut him a bit of slack on it because things DO happen to even the best of men.
But to me it's like the Christian values candidate fooling around. YOU chose the yardstick, I'm absolutely fine measuring you with the stick you chose. And Trump is the one who kept touting his economy and great numbers in unemployment which - literally - was his only argument for re-election.
and this economy we have now is actually his fault. Had he taken this virus seriously when his intelligence people were begging him to in January we may have been able to defend ourselves without the drastic shut down measures. I'd also argue that the economy we had wasn't near as good as he purported
