Stock Market Performance By President

[Toro]

Discuss

 

[editec]

What goes up, comes down.

I'm not prepared to blame any POTUS for controlling what happens to the stock marekt.

They play a part in the outcome, but they surely do not control all the factors that come into play in the market.

The market isn't a good indicator of how the people are doing, anyway.

 

[Zoomie1980]

Discuss

More to do with timing than anything else. FDR had the benefit of taking over after the Hoover crashes so he started very low. Same with Clinton. Clinton inherited a recession and sat in office during the tech boom and was gone by the time that bubble popped during Bush's first term. Likewise, Reagan started out with a depressed market after the woeful 1970's, and an early 1980's deep recession then presided over steady growth the next six years.

Timing is everything.

 

[Toro]

That's a big part of it. Bush II took over when stocks were at their all-time highs in valuation. Obama is taking over when stocks look cheap. That's the main reason why stocks will do better under Obama than under Bush, which has nothing to do with either man.

 

[Skull Pilot]

That's a big part of it. Bush II took over when stocks were at their all-time highs in valuation. Obama is taking over when stocks look cheap. That's the main reason why stocks will do better under Obama than under Bush, which has nothing to do with either man.

i have to agree with toro here.

we'll probably see a nice gain in the market over the next 8 years. We needed this adjustment and will be better for it.

 

[PheloniusRM]

This site is retarted, since I have to have a post count of 15 before I can link another site

Hteeteepee://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2005/12/chart_of_the_we.html

 

[Zoomie1980]

This site is retarted, since I have to have a post count of 15 before I can link another site

Hteeteepee://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2005/12/chart_of_the_we.html

So make 15, it takes 30sec or less a post. You've only been a member.....for 1 MONTH!!!! I make 150 posts a month

 

[PheloniusRM]

That being said, do you have a comment on the graph I linked? It is a pretty telling piece of evidence of why we are in such a mess now. We had this great big phony economic boom, based on mortguage equity withdrawls spending.

 

[Silence]

This site is retarted, since I have to have a post count of 15 before I can link another site

Hteeteepee://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2005/12/chart_of_the_we.html

retarted? that's just funny...

 

[Toro]

The first two years of the Obama Presidency was the best first two years of any President since FDR.

If this is Socialism, call me Comrade | Global Macro Monitor

This is NOT an endorsement of Obama's policies, or to say that the Democrats and Nancy Pelosi et. al. are good for the stock market. Rather, it is a refutation of conservative critics who said that things would be bad because of Obama's policies, at least for the stock market.

 

[william the wie]

Toro, That is not how the blame game is played. If the next two years do not go up then Obama is gone, if they do go up then Obama undermines his party's franchise since he will drive home the Clinton/Carter lesson: a D president with a D congress means disaster. The party activists will be very unhappy with that result. The Democratic and Republican parties will implicitly endorse that lesson in the 2012 election and give the GOP a landslide legislative victory. For the Democratic true believers Obama repudiation in the primaries will be a mission from God. They may or may not pull it off but the effort will do even more massive damage to the party franchise. So, I think the focus is wrong. If Obama can and I for one think he can do a credible job in the markets and on the deficits over the next two years then not only can he get reelected but he will marginalize his own party as a credible legislative party. The Progressives will have to repudiate him or their party disappears.

 

[Sallow]

Discuss

More to do with timing than anything else. FDR had the benefit of taking over after the Hoover crashes so he started very low. Same with Clinton. Clinton inherited a recession and sat in office during the tech boom and was gone by the time that bubble popped during Bush's first term. Likewise, Reagan started out with a depressed market after the woeful 1970's, and an early 1980's deep recession then presided over steady growth the next six years.

Timing is everything.

 

[R.C. Christian]

The presidunce has little to do with this.

 

[rdean]

The first two years of the Obama Presidency was the best first two years of any President since FDR.

If this is Socialism, call me Comrade | Global Macro Monitor

This is NOT an endorsement of Obama's policies, or to say that the Democrats and Nancy Pelosi et. al. are good for the stock market. Rather, it is a refutation of conservative critics who said that things would be bad because of Obama's policies, at least for the stock market.

The first 8 months of any president's term, they rely on the budget of the previous president. They may get sworn in near the beginning of the year, but their budget doesn't go into effect until October.

That means, on the last day of Clinton's budget, unemployment was 4.9%. On the last day of George Bush's budget, the unemployment rate was 10.1%.

Republicans hate government. They are so positive government should fail, they make sure it "fails".

 

[SFC Ollie]

The first two years of the Obama Presidency was the best first two years of any President since FDR.

If this is Socialism, call me Comrade | Global Macro Monitor

This is NOT an endorsement of Obama's policies, or to say that the Democrats and Nancy Pelosi et. al. are good for the stock market. Rather, it is a refutation of conservative critics who said that things would be bad because of Obama's policies, at least for the stock market.

The first 8 months of any president's term, they rely on the budget of the previous president. They may get sworn in near the beginning of the year, but their budget doesn't go into effect until October.

That means, on the last day of Clinton's budget, unemployment was 4.9%. On the last day of George Bush's budget, the unemployment rate was 10.1%.

Republicans hate government. They are so positive government should fail, they make sure it "fails".

 

[Revere]

The Fed and the Obama administration are pumping billions into the stock market to prop it up.

It's a bubble, and it will burst.

 

[loosecannon]

They did the same thing between 2002 and 2008. In fact they did the same thing since 1978: 401(k) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Sallow]

The presidunce has little to do with this.

Yeah..that ol' Telecommunication bill passed by the Clinton administration had nothing to do with the "Tech Boom".

 

[Trajan]

Discuss

cyclical as expected, we still wind up with a net plus.

 

[Revere]

They did the same thing between 2002 and 2008. In fact they did the same thing since 1978: 401(k) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Um, no. Not on this scale. The Fed is giving hundreds of billions in interest free loans to banks who are doing nothing but investing it in stocks.

It's a government induced bubble.