Now people can talk all they want about Clinton's personal life and his "no sex" comment, but when he was in office, not only was the budget balanced, but we had a SURPLUS! The economy was going good, the unemployment rate was low....then came 8 years of BUSH and look where we are now. We definitely can't continue going in the same direction we're going, and since McClain voted 95% WITH BUSH, I don't see anything different with what he will bring to the white house. Heck, with McClain in office heck, talk about being in 1 war, we may be in 5 or 6!
And this 8 years of economic happiness was a result of Clinton? Is that your contention?
We had 8 years of economic success because of the dot com boom. We had a one two punch of technological/commercial breakthroughs. First the personal computer which carried the economy in the first part of the '90s (and got us out of what was then a recession), then when that started to flag, the internet took the baton and carried it all the way through to 2000. People where making money hand over fist, and companies were springing up like weeds. The surpluses you are talking about was due to that success and the taxes that were brought in because of that success. Bill Clinton didn't invent the personal computer, and despite Al Gore's slip, he didn't invent the internet.
Now, we get to why the economy is in the tank...
Three things happened to shock the economy. First, the Netscape suit against Microsoft that case hit the Supreme Court in 2000. The Supreme Court ruled that Microsoft was a monopoly and recommended that it be split into two companies (which never happened). That sent shock waves throughout the technology sector and caused people to take a closer look at what was going on everywhere else. What they saw was an orgy of spending and irresponsibility that bordered on insanity. Money was flying all over the place and companies were making NOTHING. They were spending it on $1000 chairs for everyone and wild parties. The result of all that was the dot com bust. Companies folded, or were bought up by bigger fish, as fast as they had sprung up. That's strike one.
Second was 9/11. Of course that was Bush's fault. Clearly he should have seen that coming (and I'm not being sarcastic, he and his predecessors should have seen it. That's their responsibility). Strike two.
Third was the shock of multiple large companies going bankrupt. Enron, Worldcom, and a few other high profile blowups started people taking a closer look at how books were being kept, and what they saw was troubling. Strike three.
But the reason these things were possible were a direct result of decisions made during the Clinton administration (9/11 is more of a long standing historical issue so that wouldn't altogether be included in that comment, though he played his part). Regulations were dropped, and changes were made to allow these companies to do some of the things they were doing to get out of control. This was done by Clinton and by Reagan and Bush senior. They are all at fault. Bush Jr is just left with the mess, similar to Herbert Hoover after the 1929 crash. Hoover proved incapable of handling the situation so it just got worse, and we call that the Great Depression. The bottom line is the ball was dropped by Clinton, and wasn't picked up by Bush.
Since then we've had the rise in oil costs driving gas prices through the roof, and the real estate market's bottom dropping out. Now I would suggest that both of those could have been prevented or perhaps helped by the Bush administration. His adventure in Iraq and irresponsible spending have also been deplorable.
Bush has exacerbated the situation is many ways, so no credit to him at all. But don't blame this situation entirely on him. He is just standing on the shoulders of "greatness".