It seems more and more that the Clinton presidency was our generation's version of the Eisenhower presidency....In both cases they were elected in the early part of the decade after their predecessor left office very unpopular....
In the early part of the 50s...Truman was president and the early part of the 90s Bush SR was President....there was a brief time where each had alot of popularity and Bush SR in particular was in the 90% approval rating after Gulf War....
But long story short....both were elected(52' and 92" ) and saw what the generation under each considered "the good old days"...With Eisenhower it was all the new homes, cars, economy was buzzing,etc...and with Clinton it was the internet and tech boom, housing bubble.....and also the economy....The unpopular President before them had an unpopular War(Korea for Truman) and Gulf War for Bush....and Clinton and Eisenhower went for the majority part of their presidencies without big wars...
while people were busy being brainwashed it was all good cause the economy was great....both were responsible for something shameful.....Eisenhower with the military industrial complex overspending on the military budget and sending it to new heights that were unnecessary and Clinton with the prison industrial complex and "tough on crime" that he never gets called out on