Here on Earth, Clinton's net contribution was negative. He damaged our military preparedness, and looted Social Security, both to create a bogus budget surplus. He sold our foreign policy to the highest bidder, and the victims at the WTC footed the bill.
Which was that >YOU< determine what "works" based upon >YOUR< opinion.

And then when us tech R&D types boosted the economy with our creativity, he hogged the credit.
Oh my, this is getting downright pathological.

"...us tech R&D....."

So, you've accomplished more than Clinton did?

Oh, you're looking at his "net contribution". That's what determines whether he has "The Truth" or not.

Which, I guess, is something different than "what works", which, if you will recall, was your earlier definition of "The Truth".

So, Clinton getting elected TWICE isn't evidence of "what works" or accomplishing something.

Well, it is, but it's offset by what you claim he did in damage.

Like I said before, your version of "The Truth" is nothing more than your opinion. And you will always find something in your opinion to support your opinion.

Clinton accomplished MORE than you ever will. And he was RE-ELECTED. Again, evidence that what he was doing "worked".

But now you have to find other aspects to counter the aspects that meet your prior criteria.

Let me guess, you also believe in phrenology. Or, at least you base your definition of "The Truth" on a similar background.