The 90’s were good in spite of the Clintons, not because of them

A common political mistake is to assume that everything that happened within the tenure of a political leader is solely attributable to them — for good or bad.  One of the most horrific examples of this is when people credit Bill Clinton for the 90’s economic growth.  But that happened in spite of his Presidency, not because of it.

Did Clinton pass everything he wanted to?  Of course not.  “Hillarycare” was a disaster and we are fortunate it was never implemented.  And the Republicans cleaned up in the 1994 congressional elections.  They kept Clinton from doing what he wanted, and he was forced to compromise.

More than that, the growth would have happened regardless of who was President.  Anyone remember the PC and Internet revolutions?  Yeah, those had a “little” to do with the great economy.

And the positive part of the “Internet bubble” occurred on Clinton’s watch then burst at the very end of his 2nd term (October 12, 2000).  Bush had nothing to do with the 90’s run-up in stock prices but the loss of tax revenues from all of that made for unfavorable  comparisons.

So never let Leftists get away with pretending that electing Hillary would bring back the 90’s economy.  She did nothing to make that happen, and Bill only helped by not having his initiatives put into law.

3 thoughts on “The 90’s were good in spite of the Clintons, not because of them”

  1. You have one significant error in this. It’s a very common error, but it still irritates me for reasons I’ll explain.

    The crash didn’t happen during Bush’s presidency. It happened during Clinton’s, on October 12, 2000. I know that because that is my birthday.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s