You start off well, puncturing the statement that New York City's turnaround under Mayor Guiliani was the greatest accomplishment of the 20th century, but then make a serious of untenable arguments.
New York City's turnaround under Mayor Guiliani was indeed impressive. It had lost 1 million people under the prior mayor, and regained that number under Guiliani. Incomes and property values rebounded strongly, and crime fell by so much that it impacted the national figures.
You say the rebound of New York City wasn't due to Mayor Guiliani, but was due to President Clinton. If this were true, why didn't all or even most American cities rebound? Why is it that Detroit continued its slide into the abyss, and Philadelphia start to totter on the brink of demise?
Considering President Clinton, for two years he worked with a Democratic Congress and for six years he worked with a Republican Congress. A lot of credit for what we did in terms of maintaining and deepening the economic expansion that began in 1992 (cutting taxes, welfare reform and developing a budget surplus), has to go to both President Clinton and the Republican Congress.
On the other hand, President Clinton (and that Republican Congress) down-sized the military, and the Army in particular, leaving us unable to amass the kind of occupation force that could have overwhelmed any insurgency in Iraq. To be sure, the army was lighter, more moble, and more lethal, as was demonstrated in our amazing victories in both Afghanistan and Iraq. But, in terms of putting boots on the ground, our contingency plan for Iraq envisioned the blue helmets of the U.N. taking over, and that proved to be unrealistic.
The down-sizing of the army and the continuing treatment of the war on terror as a police matter instead of a military matter, left us exposed to the 9-11 attack and limited in our options in prosecuting the war in Iraq. These are, equally with the economy, part of the Clinton legacy.
Guiliani, among other candidates, would be fresh, free of any defensiveness with regard to the mistakes we made either under President Clinton or President Bush, able to learn from our experiences thusfar in the war on terror, and to move forward.
New York City's population fell by 800,000 in the 1970s.
From 1980 to 1990, New York City's population climbed rose from 7.1 to 7.4 million.
From 1990 to 2000, New York City's population climbed from 7.4 million to 8 million.
Giuliani did prevent it from sliding back into the abyss after Dinkins, but the major turnaround after the sharpest population decline is attributed to Ed Koch.
I NEVER said this and I don't believe it. I am merely pointing out the 90s were a very strong period for the economy nationwide. Hillary will TRY to take credit for this and the media will support her claim.