Would you rather have Clinton's economy or Bush's?

I know the rich have to pay a slightly higher marginal tax rate under the Clinton economic plan, but Clinton had the longest economic expansion in history. Clinton created over 20.8 million jobs, Bush had negative job growth, i.e. fewer jobs at the end than the start of his term. Fastest and lowest real wage growth in over 30 years under Clinton, stagnated wages under Bush. Budget surplus at the end of Clinton's term, an increase in the public debt of 70% under Bush. With Bush he was even good enough to leave a mive recession, or depression, and 2 hugely expensive wars which have not been paid for in any way.