Are you misreading the word consecutive as conservative?

Let's not omit the fact that Trump's handling of Covid was selfish (deny it exists), reckless (deny it exists even harder), foolish (inject bleach), and destabilizing (constantly spewing conflicting information and undermining scientists and experts, you'll to this day still find a steady stream of HN commenters that hold an eternal vendetta against Anthony Fauci for some perceived unforgivable inarticulable wrong he's done.)

Threatening all of our allies with war and tarrifs is a great way to tank confidence in the US and its businesses. Ask me how I know.

Did you look at the graph?

Eisenhower had two terms = 8 years - did poorly.

Kennedy + Johnson two Democratic terms in a row = 8 years, did well.

Nixon + Ford, two Republican in row = 8 years, did poorly.

Carter 1 term, did well.

Reagan Bush - 3 terms Republicans 12 years, did poorly.

Clinton 2 terms 8 years did well.

Bush the second, 2 terms 8 years did poorly.

Obama 2 terms 8 years did well.

Trump, 1 term did extremely poorly

Biden 1 term did well.

So this 4 years thing you're talking about you mean that we can't be sure about Biden, Trump, or Carter. Fair enough, is the 8 years good enough or is that also too short to draw a conclusion?

> making an observation that 4 years is probably too short of a time to credit policy changes within a single administration

Correct. But across repeated administrations, some of which held power for two terms, one can identify patterns. Post-Reagan Republicans have been a consistent trash fire for the American worker.

Yet it tracks for decades with successive D/R presidents, suggesting that this 4 year excuse is not enough to dismiss the correlation

Why aren't you trying to be political? What exactly do you think "political" is?

I suspect the administrations are as much a sign of the shifting tides than a cause.

Conservative approaches tend to be…. Conservative. Which is the opposite of growth.