GDP wasn't going down when Clinton left office. The numbers I posted show that, the numbers you posted show that, the other set of numbers on the BEA spreadsheet show that. Every number either of us have looked at show that. The rate of GDP growth was going down, but there wasn't a single one of those quarters where the GDP was lower than it had been the prior quarter. There was not a single quarter between September 1991 and September 2008 when GDP went down. So how exactly did "the slide start when Clinton was in office" if the first quarter in nearly two decades with negative GDP growth was seven and a half years after Clinton left office? If you don't know what the numbers you posted mean, I'm sorry. But you're wrong. GDP isn't expressed as a percentage, the percentage is rate of GDP growth (or percent change over prior period, which is the same thing). If the percent change is positive, that means GDP went up. "Going up slower" isn't the same as "going down" because, well, it's still going up. Every time that number is positive, that means GDP is higher than it was in the quarter before that (aka "GDP was going up"). That number is positive, thus GDP was going up, for every single quarter Clinton was in office, plus every quarter for the next seven and a half years after he left office.