Comparing Clinton

[ATFFL]

Better than average, but not great.

He has no lasting achievements to call his own.  The economy was good, and he was smart enough to stay out of its way, but did nothing when the bubble started bursting.  He never tried to tackle anything important and spent too much time dealing with minor, niggling issues.

[ATFFL]

Better than average, but not great.

He has no lasting achievements to call his own.  The economy was good, and he was smart enough to stay out of its way, but did nothing when the bubble started bursting.  He never tried to tackle anything important and spent too much time dealing with minor, niggling issues.

I agree with you that he never tackled any big issues. I never remember him addressing the nation from the Oval Office like both Bushes did (NO MONICA JOKES please)

But I had an arguement with someone here recently about Clinton and the 2001 Recession, I'd hate to get into it again. He was out of office by the time it started (March 2001), it was not his responsibility. If he had taken any action in late 2000, he would have been accused by the GOP of trying to influence the election. That actually happened when he tapped the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

Thing is that the President leaving office is reposnsible for the budget for the first year of the new President.  Clinton is responsible for the 2001 budget, just like HW Bush was responsibel for the 1993 budget.

[ATFFL]

Yes but why do you think the 2001 Budget was the main reason for the recession? I thought its basis was the internet and technology companies. Its hard to argue with a budget that had a multi-billion dollar suplus like the '01 did.

The budget establishes the economic climate for the country.

Really Clinton gets the blame for the March 2001 recession for not doing anything to try and stop it from happening for the last two years of his Presidency.  It was obvious the bubble was bursting and the the Clinton admin took no action.  By this point he was desperately looking for a legacy.

[ATFFL]

Yes but why do you think the 2001 Budget was the main reason for the recession? I thought its basis was the internet and technology companies. Its hard to argue with a budget that had a multi-billion dollar suplus like the '01 did.

The budget establishes the economic climate for the country.

Really Clinton gets the blame for the March 2001 recession for not doing anything to try and stop it from happening for the last two years of his Presidency.  It was obvious the bubble was bursting and the the Clinton admin took no action.  By this point he was desperately looking for a legacy.

Well now you're just bashing Clinton and ignoring what actually happened back then. It was only in the final 9 months of Clinton's Presidency that the warning signs appeared. I remember the last quarter of 1999 the U.S. economy grew roughly 8%, thats extremely fast, so 2 years before there was no problem. The Dow Jones didn't start to fall from its peak until March 2000, interestingly right after the primaries.

There was billions of dollars in surplus in in Clinton's last budget that was literally washed down the drain by the 2001 Bush tax cuts BEFORE 9/11 (GOP always uses 9/11 to cover that mistake). Anytime the administration tried to do anything in its final year it was accused of propping up the Gore Campaign, so if he did do something you guys would be angry about it then and when he didn't do anything you ridicule him for it now.

Can you cite a source for that 8% growth in 1999?  I can point to CNN Money That the 7.2% growth in 2003 was the strongest in 20 years.  If you can;t back up your claim, I will haev to operate under the assumption you are engaged in the time honored tradition of "Making sh**t Up."