If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNBC)   Wall Street rolls the election dice.. comes up Romney. Guess who's looking to win?   (cnbc.com) divider line 112
    More: Obvious, Wall Street, European sovereign debt crisis, Intrade, Four Asian Tigers  
•       •       •

3586 clicks; posted to Politics » on 31 Jul 2012 at 2:22 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



112 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-31 10:58:59 AM
That entire article could be summed up by a picture of some random guy throwing his hands in the air with a "who farkin' knows" look on his face.
 
2012-07-31 11:00:24 AM
Just to sum up the article:

The conclusion Parker draws is that investors are betting that Romney will unseat President Obama and bring a more business-friendly environment to the White House.

"To us, the biggest bull case for US equities is based on the huge cash balances and the potential belief that they will be more actively and productively deployed. The biggest possibility here would be Romney winning the presidential election."

The conclusion, though, is not completely supported, either by past or present conditions.

Historically, moves higher in the market usually mean the incumbent president is likely to win, while sell-offs simply indicate the challenger is favored, according to research from S&P/Capital IQ.


Yawn.
 
2012-07-31 11:17:03 AM
Wait, wait, correct me if I am wrong but didn't the last "business friendly" administration shiat the bed and contribute to the largest economic crisis since the Great Depression?

I ask merely for information.

/also, in no conceivable Universe is the Obama Administration unfriendly to business.
 
2012-07-31 11:25:19 AM
Wall Street always bets on the Republican.
 
2012-07-31 11:34:40 AM

Ennuipoet: Wait, wait, correct me if I am wrong but didn't the last "business friendly" administration shiat the bed and contribute to the largest economic crisis since the Great Depression?

I ask merely for information.

/also, in no conceivable Universe is the Obama Administration unfriendly to business.


Are you saying then...that the Obama administration shiat the bed?
 
2012-07-31 11:41:29 AM

I_C_Weener: Are you saying then...that the Obama administration shiat the bed?


I'm saying they didn't change the sheets.
 
2012-07-31 11:50:45 AM

Ennuipoet: Wait, wait, correct me if I am wrong but didn't the last "business friendly" administration shiat the bed and contribute to the largest economic crisis since the Great Depression?

I ask merely for information.

/also, in no conceivable Universe is the Obama Administration unfriendly to business.


Everyone knows that Obama went back in time to interfere with the policies of George W. Bush. Because Bush wasn't able to put them in place, Obama wrecked the economy
 
2012-07-31 12:22:58 PM
It's a rough week for republicans. throw 'em a bone.

1. Romney goes to London, puts both feet in mouth, manages to offend probably our best friend in Europe.
2. Romney goes to israel, greenlights a war faster than a boobies thread on friday afternoon
2.5 .... and also manages to p*ss off a country we're trying to broker a peace deal with.
2.5(a) ... and he still has another day to cap it off. My bet: He'll call Lech Walesa a socialist who was backed by a bunch of crooked thugs.
2.5(a) ... before commenting on the economic growth in Czechoslovakia.
3. Koch-funded climate change study: "yes, it's real, we're causing it, there is no doubt".
3.5 ... and coal is the biggest problem.
4. Chick-fail-A. (Muppets version)
4.5 ibid, (Berenstein Bears version)
5. Romney spokesman curses out press
6. Leaks hinting that Romney tax rate lower than a Wal-Mart greeter.
7. Sandy Weil: Investment banks caused economic crisis, aided by an incompetent administration, and should be regulated heavily.
8. Dick Cheney rumored to invite a certain hockey mom to go Quayle hunting.

So if you see a republican today, give them a hug. They need it. Bad.
 
2012-07-31 12:33:55 PM

Aar1012: Everyone knows that Obama went back in time to interfere with the policies of George W. Bush. Because Bush wasn't able to put them in place, Obama wrecked the economy


I truly should be more specific, I was Bush bashing not Obama bashing. Though, I hold that Obama happily sells us out to business almost as fast as Bush.
 
2012-07-31 01:23:48 PM

Ennuipoet: Wait, wait, correct me if I am wrong but didn't the last "business friendly" administration shiat the bed and contribute to the largest economic crisis since the Great Depression?

I ask merely for information.

/also, in no conceivable Universe is the Obama Administration unfriendly to business.


FIRST MBA PRESIDENT
 
2012-07-31 01:29:22 PM
Thanks to Citizens United, President Romney's already won.
 
2012-07-31 01:45:05 PM
Always bet on black.
 
2012-07-31 01:47:16 PM

themindiswatching: Thanks to Citizens United, President Romney's already won.


Fortunately, President Obama still has access to a time machine.
 
2012-07-31 02:15:47 PM
reporter: hey i just noticed that your year end guidance for the S&P calls for a 15% drop, are you going to adjust that based on the recent bull runs?
analyst: no.
reporter: why?
analyst: f*cking republicans.
 
2012-07-31 02:25:18 PM
And by "business friendly", they really mean "corporation friendly". And there's no doubt he would be.
 
2012-07-31 02:26:04 PM
And rising hemlines prove that the NFC will win the Super Bowl in an even year and that a Canadian NHL team will win the Stanley Cup in an odd year.
 
2012-07-31 02:26:46 PM
Dice? More like a trick coin.

Heads they win.

Tails you lose.
 
2012-07-31 02:27:38 PM

Bhruic: And by "business friendly", they really mean "corporation friendly". And there's no doubt he would be.


and by "corporation friendly" they really mean "multinational corporation friendly."
 
2012-07-31 02:28:12 PM

quatchi: Dice? More like a trick coin.

Heads they win.

Tails you lose.


So the American public is Joey Tribbiani?
 
2012-07-31 02:31:46 PM
I agree with the article completely. The signs are everywhere.

For example, it's raining outside where I am. That can be interpreted in no other way than Obama is going to lose in November. And just this morning my toaster burned only one side of the toast. The other was almost burned but not quite there (I think we all know what that means).
 
2012-07-31 02:32:03 PM
Suck on it, libs. Further proof the winds of true "change" are blowing in.

Or: CNBC? Do not chick on right-wing derpery.
 
2012-07-31 02:33:28 PM
Yeah, Wall Street. Those are smart people. And CNBC collects some of the dimmest of the dimmest. Correct me if I'm wrong, but CNBC always does the pre-election "who's better for the Market, Republicans or Democrats" and have yet to admit that Democrats are historically, by any metric, better for the market.

Chicken farking futures are up! Buy buy buy Wall Street.
 
2012-07-31 02:34:00 PM
To us, the biggest bull case for US equities...

And I had to stop reading there...

The market has been pretty bullish under Obama...

DOW in 01/20/2009: 7,949.09
DOW in 07/27/2012: 13,075.66
Rate of Return: 64.49%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2009: 805.22
S&P 500 in 07/27/2012: 1,385.97
Rate of Return: 72.12%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2009: 1,440.86
NASDAQ in 07/27/2012: 2,958.09
Rate of Return: 105.30%


Maybe they should do some basic research and see how the markets performed under Bush... or for that matter, under all Republican presidents.
 
2012-07-31 02:35:18 PM
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-07-31 02:35:35 PM

Ennuipoet: Wait, wait, correct me if I am wrong but didn't the last "business friendly" administration shiat the bed and contribute to the largest economic crisis since the Great Depression?


Yes, but what does that have to do with Wall Street profits?
 
2012-07-31 02:36:18 PM
My morning dump was extra satisfying. That must mean that Republican-ass-rammings are good for you and therefore good for America.

//bye bye nObama.
 
2012-07-31 02:39:56 PM

hugram: The market has been pretty bullish under Obama...


That's being just as disingenuous as the people who claim that gas prices rose 100% under Obama
 
2012-07-31 02:41:43 PM
This isn't partisan bullshiat talking, the thought of President Romney is genuinely frightening.
 
2012-07-31 02:42:16 PM

Ennuipoet: in no conceivable Universe is the Obama Administration unfriendly to business.


When you're an asshole kleptocrat, anything less than complete and total deregulation is being "unfriendly".
 
2012-07-31 02:42:40 PM
Of course, the only logical conclusion for stocks to go up, is that a Republican is going to win....

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/02/28/433530/stocks-better-demo c ratic-president/


Also, the stock market makes total sense, and isn't based on irrational fears, or the moods of the guys on the floor, or the weather.......
Link
 
2012-07-31 02:42:52 PM
Of course Wall St. is betting on Romney. Romney represents potential return on their investment, in terms of tax law and regulations. It's the same reason big-money donors mostly side with Republicans.
 
2012-07-31 02:43:12 PM

Cletus C.: Suck on it, libs. Further proof the winds of true "change" are blowing in.


Yeah! Finally those giant corporations will get a break!!
 
2012-07-31 02:44:24 PM

qorkfiend: Of course Wall St. is betting on Romney. Romney represents potential return on their investment, in terms of tax law and regulations. It's the same reason big-money donors mostly side with Republicans.


you might want to take a look at who the top contributors to the obama campaign have been.
 
2012-07-31 02:44:50 PM

thomps: qorkfiend: Of course Wall St. is betting on Romney. Romney represents potential return on their investment, in terms of tax law and regulations. It's the same reason big-money donors mostly side with Republicans.

you might want to take a look at who the top contributors to the obama campaign have been.


Did you miss the word "mostly"?
 
2012-07-31 02:45:11 PM
So what I take from the article is that "[t]he market rally would typically support the incumbent president, earnings growth and improving conditions but I don't like that conclusion so Romney."
 
2012-07-31 02:45:32 PM
Who ever that asshole is who wrote the story He is a shiatass who is full of shiatAND an ass.

The opposite is more closer to the truth as many have already pointed out.
The top comment in the Article pretty much nails it.
 
2012-07-31 02:45:57 PM
Hey, awesome homework by those thorough investigative journalists on CNBC. Speaking of which, is Jim Cramer still bullish on Goldman Sachs?
 
2012-07-31 02:47:20 PM

qorkfiend: thomps: qorkfiend: Of course Wall St. is betting on Romney. Romney represents potential return on their investment, in terms of tax law and regulations. It's the same reason big-money donors mostly side with Republicans.

you might want to take a look at who the top contributors to the obama campaign have been.

Did you miss the word "mostly"?


well you framed it as romey v. obama, so eiher your second and third sentences are complete non-sequiturs or you are implying that wall street is not investing in romney's opponent.
 
2012-07-31 02:50:03 PM
FTA: there is no other reason now to like stocks than a Romney win.

That's absurd. Go here

It has a dozen links to analysis on why stocks are doing what they're doing. And none that I saw referenced Romney. A quick read says better than expected 2nd quarter and Eurozone.
 
2012-07-31 02:50:51 PM

thomps: qorkfiend: thomps: qorkfiend: Of course Wall St. is betting on Romney. Romney represents potential return on their investment, in terms of tax law and regulations. It's the same reason big-money donors mostly side with Republicans.

you might want to take a look at who the top contributors to the obama campaign have been.

Did you miss the word "mostly"?

well you framed it as romey v. obama, so eiher your second and third sentences are complete non-sequiturs or you are implying that wall street is not investing in romney's opponent.


No, actually what I said was that Romney and Republicans in general represent far greater potential ROI than Obama and Democrats in general, because Republicans tend to improve profits by cutting taxes and removing regulations. Contributing to both sides changes nothing about this dynamic.
 
2012-07-31 02:51:44 PM

DrD'isInfotainment: .
The top comment in the Article pretty much nails it.


Posted below, for the lazy ass conservatards unable to read the article:



This article is another reminder of what a right-wing LYING machine most of US Media is most of the time. That it actually says:

"One analysis concludes that last week's sharp three-day market surge can only mean that Wall Street is banking on a victory from Republican Mitt Romney.

That's the logical interpretation one can draw from a rally"

WOW! REALLY!

Stock market has gone up more than 100% during Obama Admin while it collapsed 50% during Bush Republican Admin, and article states that as a "logical interpretation"!

That is some arss backward logic. That is the same logic that has resulted in Republicans being such a party of lunatics.

After all: Romney's economic plan is EXACTLY the same as Bush plan was.

To be exact what is Romney going to do different than Bush in creating Jobs or not causing an economic catastrophe? NOTHING. NOT a thing!
And most of the US Media does not point out this amazing FACT.
 
2012-07-31 02:51:57 PM

Lost Thought 00: hugram: The market has been pretty bullish under Obama...

That's being just as disingenuous as the people who claim that gas prices rose 100% under Obama


How do you figure? Sure, the markets were in the bidet when Obama took office, but that was certainly no guarantee that they would improve. Indeed, all the momentum was bearish at the time, and even after that momentum turned around a lot of allegedly smart people were predicting a double-dip recession. Obama had plenty of opportunities to fumble, and yet the numbers in the actual event are as the previous poster provided.
 
2012-07-31 02:54:02 PM

qorkfiend: Republicans in general represent far greater potential ROI


Keep farkin that old GOP chicken!
 
2012-07-31 02:54:07 PM

hammettman: Yeah, Wall Street. Those are smart people. And CNBC collects some of the dimmest of the dimmest. Correct me if I'm wrong, but CNBC always does the pre-election "who's better for the Market, Republicans or Democrats" and have yet to admit that Democrats are historically, by any metric, better for the market.


IIRC, exactly 1 Democratic Presidential term (Carter) was worse than exactly 1 Republican Presidential term (Nixon's first, IIRC) since WWII, the rest of the Democratic terms were all better than any GOP term.

Before WWII, the GOP presided over the crash that lead to the Great Depression and the Democrats presided over the recovery from it.
 
2012-07-31 02:54:19 PM
when someone shouts "Jump you Fu**ers!"

Wall Street patriot vampires hear "Vote Republican!"
 
2012-07-31 02:55:25 PM

qorkfiend: thomps: qorkfiend: thomps: qorkfiend: Of course Wall St. is betting on Romney. Romney represents potential return on their investment, in terms of tax law and regulations. It's the same reason big-money donors mostly side with Republicans.

you might want to take a look at who the top contributors to the obama campaign have been.

Did you miss the word "mostly"?

well you framed it as romey v. obama, so eiher your second and third sentences are complete non-sequiturs or you are implying that wall street is not investing in romney's opponent.

No, actually what I said was that Romney and Republicans in general represent far greater potential ROI than Obama and Democrats in general, because Republicans tend to improve profits by cutting taxes and removing regulations. Contributing to both sides changes nothing about this dynamic.


i guess. that seems like a completely worthless metric then. but yeah, booooo wall street republicans.
 
2012-07-31 02:55:45 PM

MisterTweak: It's a rough week for republicans. throw 'em a bone.

1. Romney goes to London, puts both feet in mouth, manages to offend probably our best friend in Europe.
2. Romney goes to israel, greenlights a war faster than a boobies thread on friday afternoon
2.5 .... and also manages to p*ss off a country we're trying to broker a peace deal with.
2.5(a) ... and he still has another day to cap it off. My bet: He'll call Lech Walesa a socialist who was backed by a bunch of crooked thugs.
2.5(a) ... before commenting on the economic growth in Czechoslovakia.
3. Koch-funded climate change study: "yes, it's real, we're causing it, there is no doubt".
3.5 ... and coal is the biggest problem.
4. Chick-fail-A. (Muppets version)
4.5 ibid, (Berenstein Bears version)
5. Romney spokesman curses out press
6. Leaks hinting that Romney tax rate lower than a Wal-Mart greeter.
7. Sandy Weil: Investment banks caused economic crisis, aided by an incompetent administration, and should be regulated heavily.
8. Dick Cheney rumored to invite a certain hockey mom to go Quayle hunting.

So if you see a republican today, give them a hug. They need it. Bad.


I like the fact that the race is close. It scares them. Cause they know it's coming...

Voting for Romney.
 
2012-07-31 02:58:42 PM

phreezen: I like the fact that the race is close. It scares them. Cause they know it's coming...

Voting for Romney.


Is your alt voting for Romney as well? Gonna be crowded in that voting booth!
 
2012-07-31 03:00:19 PM

BMulligan: Lost Thought 00: hugram: The market has been pretty bullish under Obama...

That's being just as disingenuous as the people who claim that gas prices rose 100% under Obama

How do you figure? Sure, the markets were in the bidet when Obama took office, but that was certainly no guarantee that they would improve. Indeed, all the momentum was bearish at the time, and even after that momentum turned around a lot of allegedly smart people were predicting a double-dip recession. Obama had plenty of opportunities to fumble, and yet the numbers in the actual event are as the previous poster provided.


It's factually accurate, just like the gas price claim, but it is still a lie by implication. Truth is, Obama's impact on the economy is unknowable. I'm not saying he hasn't helped it, but the stock markets were naturally going to rebound after the crash regardless of who was President and what actions they took.
 
2012-07-31 03:02:51 PM

EyeballKid: phreezen: I like the fact that the race is close. It scares them. Cause they know it's coming...

Voting for Romney.

Is your alt voting for Romney as well? Gonna be crowded in that voting booth!


Are you one of Barry's lawyer???LOL
 
Displayed 50 of 112 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report