Gab and John D., you are in an unwinable argument. Those who cite Clinton for a good economy will cite the record during his years of office and will point out that he was willing to (and did) shut down the federal government, refusing to sign a budget that wasn't balanced and making Congress pass it.
Those on the other side of the aisle will tell a story of GHWB finally fixing the budget and getting it turned around, but only after the elections and just in time for Clinton to step into office. They will say that the Repug Congressional majority, not the president, insisted on a balanced budget, and they will point out that the economic downturn began during Clinton's reign, just in time to hand a poor economy over to Bush.
Now, I personally side with the Clintonistas on this issue, but my point is that this argument is not winable. Each side has facts to argue, and arguments to make against the other side's facts. So, this great debate you guys are engaging in is sorta like hitting yourself in the head with a hammer -- it feels good when you stop.
