Why do people, including “experts”, including people like Grover Norquist, always refer to the Obama “recovery” as the weakest since World War II? Truth be told, the Obama “recovery” was the worst since the period between 1929 and 1940 when we had not one crash, but three (’29, ’32 and ’37) At least DURING WWII, despite the incredible tax burden on citizens, we saw a pretty healthy increase in wealth. Post WWII was a bit better.
But our growth under Obama was inexcusably anemic. For some reason, pundits like to give him more credit than he is due by comparing his economic growth to that experienced during WWII.
And, yes, yes… I do acknowledge that I usually disparage placing presidential labels on economic outcomes. However, Barry O was the driving force behind the spending laws be between 2009-2016. BHO and lame ass Republicans negotiated all the laws passed by congress in that time, quite unconstitutionally. So you can very fairly call that nauseating time period the Obama “recovery”.
B. Hussein’s recovery was worse, in span, than the 70s, worse than all the recessions since the great Depression. In fact the Depression was the only period in our history worse than what Obama tries to speak of as a healthy economy. That’s what your $.9T bailout and your $1T Shovel-Ready bullshit bought you.
 For the record, 1929 was not the worst tumble the USA endured during the “Great Depression”. In 1932 the stock market saw a 90% crash. It wasn’t widely appreciated because the common man, by that time, had no money in the stock market because the common man had very little money. And the 1937 crash was the one where Wall street actually DID see stockbrokers jumping to their deaths from office windows, not the 1929 crash as we have been conditioned to believe. Read The Forgotten Man, Amity Shlaes