To: Steve Lokness who wrote (33006 ) 2/19/2009 4:29:51 PM From: TimF 1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588 you want to compare the democrats control when Clinton was President to the Bush years when he had total control Again in the last 30 years the Republicans have only had total control for four and a half years. Clinton benefited from many things that he was not behind. People were getting richer, employment was high, GDP was up, trade was booming, the deficits were FINALLY coming down. He benefited from the tax cuts and tax reform and deregulation under Reagan (also the crushing of inflation at the time) that set up the economy in a very positive way going forward. He benefited from the end of the cold war, allowing him to reduce the size of the military. In an odd way he benefited from the Republicans taking control of congress, before they took control he had laid out budget plans of expanding government including higher deficits, but after the Republicans took control government expansion was restricted (unfortunatley the Republicans only acted that way when they where new to controlling congress, that didn't last they later became spendthrift, and the Democrats that followed them similarly liked spending money). And then you have all the private sector changes that Clinton had little or nothing to do with. He wasn't the force behind advances in computing and the internet. Clinton was the beneficiary of tremendous timing. He came in to office at a time when any decent president was going to have great results, than he left as the tech bubble had popped, but before a real recession started. Reagans domination of Congress Reagan never had a Republican dominated congress. The Democrats always had control of the house from FDR until Gingrich.