New York (CNNMoney) – Economists think Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney would be better for the economy than President Obama. But they're not very enthusiastic about either of them.
Nine of 17 top economists surveyed by CNNMoney picked Romney when asked who's election would help the economy grow more. Only three picked Obama.
............to ship Jobs to CHINA, because he did in Bain-Capital.
Better for the 1%? More trickle up economics.
Oh, that's a ROUSING majority. 9 out of 17. All you'd need is for one of them to pick Obama instead and the story would be 9 out of 17 favor Obama. This is SUCH a non-story, CNN. And then there's the question of WHICH "top" economists were surveyed. When you come back with four out of five then THAT might have some validity. But this? One person – any of the 17 it sounds like could have gone either way – one person who was about 50/50, means you claim "Economists go for Romney????" Puh-leeze. This wouldn't be valid for Obama, either, if 9 out of 17 went for him, with that kind of dithering.
Ahhh...Mitt Romney, the guy who bankrupted so many companies? No thanks, we'll keep Obama!
I find it surprising that the mainstream media didn't take measures to suppress this poll. Anyone economist opting for Obama has to be unhinged. His profound inability to plan and execute any rational economic plan is a disaster for the American people.
Thats because the 9 out of 17 economist asked work for the major banks , they want to keep the jobs doing analises .
These are the same economists that endorsed GW Bush.
I bet they're All Republicans
And all thse economists went thru the same casino Romney did?
Can they truly be economists if they pick smitthead.
Seriously, these guys need to have there head examine. I don't know if they know difference between government and private businessman that's for themselves.
American is Not a company and It can not be run like a company. CEOs at companies Cut jobs or outsourse. Is that really what Americans want? NO
You should've seen their opinion of the economy during 2007-2008....yeah I really do care what they think.
Romney is far smarter than Obama on most of the economic stuff! Mitt doesnt need to ask as many questions on that stuff he is better educated and actually has run a bussiness.Obama on the otherhand couldnt even keep his law practice and ended up a confused proffessor and organizer ultimately spending 3 and a half years being lost in the responsibilties of President! Obama has failed all that put hope on him doing right for our economy!
Yeah right. Is the big bad media still picking on wittle Mittens???
Romney was right !!!!!! he did not get full endorsement from 47% but got it from about 53% of economists. wwhhhaaaa....
We would rather grow slow and steady then put the gop that caused the. Whole problem in the first place . Romney ,no thanks gop pigs !!!!
Romney didn’t tell anything what he will do for American people to improve the economy or in general when he become president, he is saying make me and I will tell you. What he told them to make them believe? I seem likely they have a hunch.
so what does the other half think? Forward 2012
Have they ever heard of the word filibuster?They are narrow minded to think Romney would do better,when he has refused to let anybody in on the specifics of economic policy.Thier judgement is as vague as Romney's economic policy.
1-I would be surprised if one could not identify hundreds of economists that would side with one party or the other. So if the goal was to get a representative sample of economists, then economists should have been selected at random. Was that done? If not the journalist should have the decency to provide this info in his article…
2-I am all about using data and models to demonstrate that a set of policies are better suited to improve economic growth. However, where are the facts and models? All we get here is that a fraction of unidentified economists (with unknown credentials) supporting one candidate over another?! Notwithstanding that many economists are part of the “1%”, especially in the private sector (thus, would benefit from the Bush tax cuts)… This is why it is important to use models and economic theory instead of opinions (math does not lie!). So until the CNN correspondent provides more information about this questionable survey, his piece appears very much like disingenuous misinformation (especially 2 days before the debates). I am a scientist, and in my profession, such a lack of professionalism and ethic would lead me to permanently loose my job…
Was this supposed to be a poll? If so economists should have been sampled at random, and margin of errors should have been reported. Even if sampled at random (e.g., across geographic areas, demographic groups, academic environments...), a sample of 17 seems incredibly small, and probably does not say all that much... Think about presidential polls, it takes hundreds of samples to be able to start making some meaningful inferences about the state of the race. So in comparison a poll of 17 people seems a bit ridiculous doesn't it? This is maybe why basic statistics should be taught in school of journalism...
Romney has been defeated by Romney.
The more we see of him the less we like.
The radical right has presented itself as a fraud.
Economy has succeeded overwhelmingly in Democratic administrations.
Conservatism has one message: austerity a tax slashing.
These are doomed concepts.
Oh and by the way, when computing the margin of errors for your survey (assuming that the sample was taken at random), the difference is not statistically significant. In other words the difference is within the margin of error...
Are you drunk?
Last 100 years ....................1912=2012....................
Dow Jones During GOP presidencies 1.4% During Demo Presidencies 15.7%
Nasdaq " 1.8%...." " 19.8%
Recessions began " " 10 1
Why would any economist in their right mind ever again vote for a GOP president?
8 out of 17 didn't pick Romney... That's 47%