Like the Reagan period 1982-1990, the up-segment of an economic cycle is normal for being eight-nine years long, as it was 1991 to March 2000. Bush #41 was president when the up-segment started in 1991. Scumbag was president when the stock market crashed in 2000 and when the economy hit the skids in 2000. Scumbag just happened to be president in the meaty middle part of an economic cycle on the upside.
Presidents have very little to do with economic expansion or contraction. To give Scumbag credit for something out of his control is childish thinking. To place blame on Scumbag for the stock market crash or economic downturn is also childish thinking.
There are plenty of items to roast Scumbag over, including the multiple terrorist attacks and bin Laden's declaration of war against America that occurred during his filthy regime in which he did absolutely nothing about.
As doug implied, CEO management creating supply and demand has more to do with the economic boom than anything Scumbag ever did. We would not have had the economic boom in the 1990s if CEOs did not create products to feed the Internet explosion and personal computer explosion during that period, and likewise if the CEOs had not created products to fix the Y2K problem. Techology spending for Y2K was the single biggest factor in the explosive economic growth that occurred in the 1997-2000 period. It is also the excess capacity that built up in this period from the CEOs that was the biggest factor in making the crash that occurred post Y2K. Had lousy CEOs been running most the major tech companies in the 1990s, we never would have had the economic boom Scumbag falsely wants to take credit for.
Scumbag had nothing to do with any of this, but everything to do with his lies, his corruption, his marriage to that ugly swine Hillary and all her corrupt actions and cronies and his failure to be a good Commander in Chief and protect America after attack.
Scumbag will forever carry the stain of the blood from 911.
