- Syria, Russia cluster munition use 'relentless': HRW
- N. Korea: US has crossed red line, relations on war footing
- SoftBank profit up 19 pct as Japan sales offset Sprint loss
- Biden to speak at vigil for slain Baton Rouge officers
- Iffy skies make pope take car, not copter to Poland shrine
- Father and cousin of British beauty therapist 'murdered in honour killing' are arrested in Pakistan as police hunt for her first husband
- Are these the best (and most tolerant) girlfriends ever?
- Fuming woman POSTS letters detailing her husband's sordid affair to the neighbours
- Adorable bunny bites off more than it can chew, nibbling away at a banana so big it struggles to hold it with both paws
- Lloyds is shutting 200 branches and axing 3,000 jobs as it braces for interest rates cut after Brexit
More from Business
- Bank of England meets to weigh up Brexit threat to UK economy
- PepsiCo profit beats expectations on North American demand; stock rises
- Oil rises as investors await Brexit vote
- General Mills recalls 10MILLION pounds of flour over possible link to E. coli outbreak in 20 states
- Apple loses title of the world's largest company to Google as shares slump to two-year low
NEW YORK -- Economists think Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney would be better for the economy than President Obama. But they're not very enthusiastic about either of them.
Nine of 17 top economists surveyed by CNNMoney picked Romney when asked who's election would help the economy grow more. Only three picked Obama.
But the remaining five made no pick, with several suggesting neither would provide much of a lift to the sagging economy.
"Obama doesn't really understand business and Romney doesn't really understand how to govern. So pick your poison," said Gary Rosenberger of EconoPlay, one of those surveyed who refused to give a pick.
And many of those picking Romney were more critical of, as opposed to excited about, the Republican challenger's plans.
"Romney's policies would likely be less bad for the economy than Obama's," said Bill Watkins, executive director of the Center for Economic Research and Forecasting at Cal Lutheran University.
Several of the economists who thought Romney would be better for the economy pointed out what they thought were flaws in Obama's record. These economists felt there is too much regulatory uncertainty hanging over businesses and that gridlock between the White House and Republicans in Congress also is a drag on hiring and growth.
"Romney might be more likely to get Congress to do something, whereas Obama has shown he can't," said David Wyss, a fellow at Brown University.
Allen Sinai of Decision Economics gave the Republican challenger the most enthusiastic support of those surveyed, saying Romney's calls for "cutting growth of government outlays, lowering tax rates and closing loopholes, less regulatory uncertainty ...smaller government and entitlement reform all must be tackled."
But those who picked Obama are hoping things will be different if the president wins a second term. Obama could be in a better position to enact reforms on entitlement spending and reach a deal on deficit reduction than Romney, according to one economist.
"It's the Nixon-to-China syndrome -- only a Democrat can get away with it," said Bill Cheney, chief economist at Manulife Asset Management.