but assuming you are arguing FOR Bush you might try:
1. The whole mess wasn't his fault -blame it on Bill! Actually there is some evidence to suggest that Greenspan massively overinflated the money supply during Bill's day, which contributed to the prolonged recession.
2. With bonds being so low, where else are people going to put their money.
3. Historically there is no precedent for 4 down years in a row. We were due for a bump. Not a W argument, but some people will buy it.
4. W's tax cut is JUST what the economy needed. In actual fact the tax cut on dividends did very little near term help and probably only helped the rich, but like #3, some people will buy it.
5. Historically, going into re-election the market is pretty strong. Presidents spend to get re-elected.
6. You could look at specific treaties that W has chosen to nullify (ie Free Trade or wild life preserves) and argue that those decisions stimulated the economy.
7. By winning the war (Did the U.S. win? Let's ask the sniper victims.) Bush made the world safer which encourages investment.
8. Bush is encouraging a lower dollar, which stimulates exports.
I'm sure others on this board will contribute some other arguments. I'm not a big W fan (I used to be) so it's hard to get excited about defending the guy.
Good luck. Let us know what you argue.
I just re-read your post after I posted this the first time. I should add although I'm long at the moment, I'm pretty bearish on the state of the economy.
