Your implication from the earlier post is that he inherited the strongest economy in the world and plunged it into recession. He didn't, the "recession" (such as it was) was coming our way when he took office. If the economy was the strongest in the world when he took office, then its still the strongest in the world today.

Now, how do we measure the strongest economy? Are we talking about a roughly $9 trillion GDP? If so, then we're still the strongest economy on Earth and have been for decades. Are we talking about growth in the economy and comparing economic health? If that's the case, then I'm reasonably sure there are countries out there when faster growing economies than ours. For example, China's economy was growing at a rate of 7.9% in the first half of 2001, a much higher rate of growth than ours and one that has been growing rapidly for several years.

Comparing economies between nations can be difficult because you have to consider factors like per capita GDP and compare that to the cost of living. For example, on aPer Capita GDP basis, the US economy ranked 8th in the world in 1997. This climbed to second place in 2001. If you talk about purchasing power parity, the US was ranked 3rd in the world in 2000.

You seem to be one of those people who project magical powers on a President to control the economy. If so, then you're sadly deluded. Some people like to claim that "Clinton gave us a great economy." However, they never seem able to provide a cogent answer to the simple question, "Exactly what did Clinton do to accomplish this?"