Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Both parties are stuck with mediocre candidates for the 2016, there is not a single good and interesting candidate, only war-mongers, fake democrats and conservative crooks are available this time.
and how many high net worth investers do you know?
Probably more than you...
Quote:
Most of us who know anything about economics understand the Pres. has very little to do with the market; worldwide actions plays the biggest part. Your screen name says one thing about you, your ideas another.
Wrong
Like the late Marty Zweig used to say, Federal Reserve monetary policy is the "dominant factor in determining the market's major direction".
And perhaps the White House occupant has "little to do with the market". But when 115 years worth of history tells us that the S&P 500 has risen nearly three times as much per year when a Dem is in there, I'm not willing to take a chance with another republican stiff...
Like the late Marty Zweig used to say, Federal Reserve monetary policy is the "dominant factor in determining the market's major direction".
And perhaps the White House occupant has "little to do with the market". But when 115 years worth of history tells us that the S&P 500 has risen nearly three times as much per year when a Dem is in there, I'm not willing to take a chance with another republican stiff...
You have your opinions, fine, I have mine. Both are just that, but I am relatively sure, if you asked a cross section of economists you would not find the majority of them giving credit the any Pres. for the stock market nor the failure of it. It goes much deeper than that. Anyone can quote what one person had to say on an issue, that doesn't make it accurate. Many things affect finances, certainly you, a follower of the market or I am assuming that, must realize this.
MJ's data is correct about a Democrat as president being correlated to higher stock earnings. Idk why that is, but it's been the truth for 100+ years. I wouldn't bet against a correlation that strong.
MJ's data is correct about a Democrat as president being correlated to higher stock earnings. Idk why that is, but it's been the truth for 100+ years. I wouldn't bet against a correlation that strong.
"Clinton 2016!"
Stocks go up and down and if it has do with any one President is a reach. The Market reacts to perceived and executed policy that the Fed Puts out and the confidence of a Elected Gov. overall. The Reason why we are up is the change of leadership that is coming I a week.
My point is Clinton is running on a non record and only based on the positions she held. I see no firm policy that she supports. She has been very careful to say a hole lot of nothing.
Dem's however support here blindly because that is the only strong candidate on the Dem Bench.
Buffett knows that the stock market tends to perform significantly better when a Dem is in the White House as opposed to a hapless republican administration.
I'll be backing Bubba and Hilly with $$$$$ too ... and I would urge my fellow high-net-worth investors to do likewise...
Just because WB makes money on Dem administrations doesn't mean Dem admins are good for the country. You can make money on pretty much any disaster. The ignorant fill inthe blanks when the puppeteers like WB or Obama speak in nebulous terms.
So where is HRC on the latest cop killings in her state?
Guess she is running as she has to hide frm issues. Won't take a stand and if she whispered it to some some media outlet they are keeping it quiet so as not to peel away any potential voters.
No matter Elizabeth Warren will be the candidate to carry on the devestation obama and his handlers wrought.
HRC's only qualification is her novelty election status. What voter doesn't want to be part of history so they can pass down that legacy to their grandchildren.....country be dammed.
How can they back someone who as of yet isent even running?
Even if Hillary does run I am convinced it will be a repeat of 2008 and she will lose to Elizabeth Warren in the primary. The socialist "progressives" have hijacked the Democratic Party and there is no going back to the center.
Google to back Hillary Clinton for President in 2016
are you ready for the biased "googling" ?
I get Google Alerts in my e-mail for news stories about two potential Republican candidates and I already see it in the stories they choose to send me. The problem is I like the clean Google search page. It's my homepage.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
