A bit of a flaw in my system when it comes to money matters. I grade them based on what they say, but I may not really trust them all equally to do what they say. It's easy to throw out numbers, in other words.
12 points- Ron Paul
I think Paul has the most specific plan to cut the federal budget. And they are big cuts! I also tend to think he's right about the federal reserve system being flawed at its core. He may be the only guy who suggests lowering taxes that can actually match lost revenue with deleted programs. But would it ever happen? Probably not.
11 points- Mitt Romney
I have him and Santorum as 11's on paper, but my gut trusts Romney way more than Santorum on economic issues. I like the idea of linking the federal budget at 20% of GDP. His 25% corporate tax number is better and realistic compared to some of the other lower suggestions. Other issues made him sound pretty similar to Obama.
11 points- Rick Santorum
He talks a big game (5 trillion in cuts in 5 years), but I haven't seen a specific plan to get there. His other positions seem pretty reasonable.
9 points- Newt Gingrich
I think I'd trust Newt on the economy more than Santorum, but his plan is pretty vague and seems more like a campaign than a realistic set of ideas. I don't see how we could cut the corporate tax all the way down to 12.5% without cutting out a lot of government. I do like the optional flat tax idea for the sake of simplicity, but I am sure this would create tons of lost revenue too.
-6 points- Barack Obama
I just don't think his positions reflect the serious nature of the problem. Increase spending? Try to increase revenue? Bernanke's doing fine? Raise the debt ceiling? Bailouts are working? Keep taxes the same or raise them? I only found a few points of agreement here, but many minuses. Big contrast.