This is from the Washington Post which is taking it from a paper found here:
I think it's fair to say Clinton was the most free market of the three (Clinton, Bush, Obama), Bush the second most free market and Obama the least. So if you believe policies have consequences, and I count myself in that crowd, then free market policies may be an explanation for different higher income growth of the bottom 99% during the three recoveries. That's how I look at the table.
If you disagree, how do you explain the horrible income growth of the 99% under Obama?
PS. I think it's interesting Clinton gets a recovery named after him. So does Bush. But who was President from 2009-2012?