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.
Clinton will continue Obama's policies. She's the status quo, which the market will like. Trump is the unknown. He's unpredictable; hard to say what he'd do. Markets will have a Brexit style movement if he wins. Maybe bigger than that.
A period of caution is expected around every Presidential election, and especially one where there will be a new Chief Executive no matter who wins. Consumers will hold back a bit. Residential and business investment will soften. People will take more of a wait-and-see approach than they usually would. A worst-case scenario here would be a repeat of 2000 where caution grew into a crisis of confidence that spawned a brief, mild recession. Hopefully, we can avoid that.
Typically there is no connection between stock market performance and Presidential elections. Now we have a unique situation with both candidates who are disliked and not trusted by a large portion of the population. Unfortunately some of us can't even pick one that is acceptable and I personally dislike and do not trust either of the candidates. Trump is definitely the wild card. I would not be surprised to see some reaction in the stock market if he wins. On the other hand the odds are greatly against him. The odds are very high that we end up with Clinton and no impact on the market.
Presidential elections are about a possible "party" change and therefore not limited to the candidates or their campaign rhetoric. Over the years I've seen little difference in the way Wall Street relates to the two political parties. Speculation surrounding trade agreements may be an issue if Trump were to actually attempt a party effort toward reversing older agreements as he has alluded to in campaign speeches, but it would take the entire party consensus, not to mention the fact of a huge opposition to anything disruptive to trade.
In the political realm of financial regulation Wall Street has little to fear from either party at present, Clinton, Trump, and their respective parties have no apparent interest in expanding the body of regulatory oversight and will most likely have enough on their plate with regard to maintaining the current economic status quo. The worst aspect of this election is the aforementioned dislike and distrust of both candidates, this may be the real lasting legacy of our failed political system.
I would think that, if Trump wins, the markets will be scared of the potential to upset trade relationships, thus hurting the stocks of companies that do a lot of exporting.
Personally I feel the market will adjust regardless of who's elected, Clinton or Trump.
...sorry about the poll misspell, but I don't know how to change it.
No, because this would allow arbitrage with election prediction markets. Or at least anything other than an upward correction for one candidate and a downward correction for the other, in the same proportion as the prediction market.
The more important issue is what happens in the House and the Senate.
The House matters because that is where all taxation bills and other revenue generation bills must originate (the Constitution's "Origination" clause).
The Senate matters because that is who will confirm (or not) US Supreme Court Justices who will ultimately weigh in on the constitutionality of important lower court rulings that affect the economy in a material way such as Obamacare.
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.