P&R reveled Wednesday in the stock market's decline, citing it as verification that America chose wrong in re-electing President Barack Hussein Obama. Never mind that bigger economic and political factors are driving the dip, like bad forecasts from Europe and the federal fiscal cliff that suddenly has headline space. I would suggest that asking the people who look and jingle most like Willard Mitt Romney to judge the election results produces a somewhat skewed sample.
But let's look at history. How has the Dow fared immediately after our past Presidential elections?
- 1976: down from 964 at end of October to 927 right after election; spike back to 1000 by year end.
- 1980: up from 924 to 989, then ended year at 960
- 1984: down from 1216 at start of month to 1187 mid-November, spike, then drop, then 1200 by year end.
- 1988: drop from 2145 to 2067 right after election, back over 2160 by year end.
- 1992: drop from 3240 to 3227 after election, climb over 3300 by year end.
- 1996: up in November from 6021 to 6521, then dip and climb back over 6500 by year end.
- 2000: drop from 10817 to 10373 through November's uncertainty, then a spike, then a plunge after the Supreme Court named Bush President, then recovery to just about 10800 by year end.
- 2004: bump up from 10387 10539 right after election, steady climb to year end.
- 2008: Steady drop from 9325 at Oct. 31 to 8046 on Nov. 21, then spike, then slow slide back below 8500.
Nine elections, six drops, three rises. Reagan and Clinton, who wound up overseeing the best economic performance, each got one immediate post-election up and one down. The Bushes, who oversaw crappy economies, got two downs and one up (note that W's 2004 up preceded the biggest economic crash since the Depression).
Obama's 2008 victory coincided with a mid-collapse plateau. Since Obama's inauguration, the Dow has climbed over 60%. And we not only did not have a Depression but we also saw the recession end in June 2009. So anyone who thought they saw judgment on or prediction of the president-elect's economic skills in the 2008 Dow slide was mistaken. In fulminating on this week's market dip as divine judgment on President Obama's re-election, P&R is similarly mistaken.
More earth haters are in the wrong stocks. If they want to learn something they should follow me on twitter: my stocks are soaring including:
http://www.google.com/finance?q=PINK%3ACBIS&ei=koh9UMhlo5aRA-hZ
Wall street's throwing a little temper tantrum. Some of them blew a lot of money backing the wrong horses in the most recent political race. They'll get over it.
Smart investors, Warren Buffet for one, do their homework, pick good stocks and hold for the long haul. Day traders run back and forth like a herd of newly weaned calves getting nowhere, risking injury, and ending up tired. Oh yeah, for a few days newly weaned calves cry like the world has come to an end. It hasn't and eventually they stop.
60% DOW climb on nothing but inflation and devaluation of the dollar. 1.5% growth, 4 years of 8-10% unemployment, increased gov't dependence, lowered median income and you want people to believe we are saved? Bahahah....I had more buying power at the low of 8k than I do now at 13k. It's exactly why Obama never campaigned on that fact. He knew it was complete bull. How do you like those sour apples?
I made almost ten thousand this week in the market.
and will pay less than 15% in taxes.
You and ol Mittens sleeping in the same bed huh Lar?
More fleecing of the sheep by Wall Street. It always cracks me up when the market goes down, it is President Obama's fault, when it goes up, it is "wise tactics" by the banksters. It will be much better for America and the world to have someone in the Whitehouse that knows math to handle the situations that are going on in the world now. The bishop would have just put the moolah in his mom jeans and drained the treasury for more.
It looks like Elizabeth Warren may be on the banking commission in the Senate, that should scare the hell out of the crooks and liars on Wall Street. That pesky regulaton will again make it safer for investors and more likely to keep the wolves away.
DB is factually challenged on one point: inflation is lower under Obama than long- and short-term historical averages:
1914–2008: 3.4%
2001–2008: 2.8%
2009–2012: 1.6%
We can investigate DB's other claims further, but his eagerness to spew economic claims without checking their veracity ought to distress.
And note that while DB likes to shout "Liar!" at me, I simply cite evidence that he is wrong.
Corey, add food and fuel to this mix of irrational numbers fixed to keep us believin. I'm not supporting one guy or the other, just saying.
I, for the life of me cannot understand how our young families I are getting their bills paid.
:-/ ipad, families are
"newly weaned calves"—excellent comparison, Nick!
Jerry: Warren on Senate Banking?! Awesome! That one victory may be as good for regular working folks as Obama's re-election.
Les, there is no conspiracy of fixed numbers. The world is what it is, not what Mitt Romney and Karl Rove wish it were.
It is you searching for conspiracy in me Corey.
Food and fuel are taken out of the calculations when figuring the monthly CPI change. That change is the rate of inflation.
You choose to believe those numbers because you are capable of earning an income that provides?
I choose to disregard and vocalize the inequities those numbers show because I care for all those minimum to lower middle wage earners. For the life of me I don't understand how they are paying their bills.
Les, I'm not searching for conspiracy. I'm just trying to get the numbers right. The website from which I derive my statement about below-average inflation under President Obama says it bases its calculations on the Consumer Price Index. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the CPI includes hundreds of specific items, including food and gasoline.
Now I grant that my cereal, milk, and OJ have all gone up too fast over the last few years. But apparently, even with those increases, the BLS data says our usual basket of goods has increased in price less fast under Obama than over the full historical span of the data.
I read in a later post how you had answered my post on CpI. You've asked the fox in the coop if the chickens are tasty. He replied, "what chickens"?
You are satisfied with breakfast cereal and poultry in the CPI giving us an accurate index on food. That plus the Dow which rides on a continually changing base of companies is the new paradigm of accuracy.