Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: redfreedom

If you discount the first two years of Clinton’s presidency when the Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress, and the last two years when Clinton was just a useless parody and a buffoon in the White House, you could make a strong case that he actually governed as a more conservative chief executive than George W. Bush.


40 posted on 12/22/2015 4:53:20 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("It doesn't work for me. I gotta have more cowbell!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child

I would say you are correct about Clinton. Reagonomics was working good by then and he did nothing to hinder it, and as a result there were very prosperous times.

I would say Bush II did more to harm the country than Nixon.


67 posted on 12/22/2015 3:02:28 PM PST by redfreedom (Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson