When this data is analyzed, there is a clear conclusion.....US Democratic Presidents have done a consistently better job in reducing the US Unemployment Rate during their Presidential terms than have Republican Presidents, and markedly so.
For Presidents with two Presidential terms, I averaged the US unemployment rate change for their two terms in order to get comparable data below for all Presidents on a single-term basis.
Since 1949, the first full Presidential term where this data is available, no Democratic President has experienced an average increase in the US unemployment rate during his Presidential term.
And only one Republican President, Ronald Reagan, has experienced a decrease in the US unemployment rate during his average Presidential term.
Here are the Unemployment Rate Change Rankings of these average Presidential terms:
|1||Dem||Kennedy/Johnson||Jan 1961-Jan 1965||(1.70)%|
|3||Dem||Johnson||Jan 1965-Jan 1969||(1.50)%|
|5||Rep||Reagan||Jan 1981-Jan 1989||(1.05)%|
|6||Dem||Carter||Jan 1977-Jan 1981||0.00%|
|8||Rep||Nixon||Jan 1969-Jan 1973||1.50%|
|9||Rep||Bush II||Jan 2001-Jan2009||1.80%|
|10||Rep||Eisenhower||Jan 1953-Jan 1961||1.85%|
|11||Rep||Bush I||Jan 1989-Jan 1993||1.90%|
|12||Rep||Nixon/Ford||Jan 1973-Jan 1977||2.60%|
So, why is it that Democratic Presidents have had much more success with lowering the US unemployment rate during their terms than have Republican Presidents?
I think it has to do with governing philosophy.
When US employment rates go up markedly, the typical Democratic strategy is to proactively attempt to correct it as soon and as substantially as possible.
On the other hand, when US unemployment rates go up markedly, the typical Republican reaction is to let the free markets correct themselves.....the laissez-faire strategy.
And below here is the Bureau of Labor Statistics actual data used, along with the relevant computations:
|Jan 1993||7.3%||1.9%||Bush I||1.90%|
|Jan 2005||5.3%||1.1%||Bush II|
|Jan 2009||7.8%||2.5%||Bush II||1.80%|