2010 Senate Races

[eminitrader007]

Quote from Ivanovich:

If, in four years, the economy has truly recovered and we didn't simply bubble into the next disaster a year away, then I will join you in that sentiment. Otherwise, you're deluded. Unfortunately, I think we'll find out that you are, in fact, deluded.

Obama hasn't done anything to protect us from terrorists (at least nothing public) that Bush didn't do before him. So that's a silly defense that is trying to appeal to those out there concerned about homeland security.

I should state, however, that I voted for Obama despite being a card carrying GOP member. I simply was fed up of the "same" and was hoping for "change". Sadly, I see myself as one of those duped into believing change would come. This is looking like the same old Clinton/Bush decades of the past, to me.

Unless we "change" paths, I don't see Obama getting my vote in the future.

I won't vote for a republican just because I follow republican lines, but when it comes to Obama, it'll be the "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me..." syndrome. I feel a lot of republicans and independents who voted for Obama will feel the same.

You make some good points but we just have to wait for the answers. Currently it looks like we are heading in the right direction regarding the economy....but who knows how it will turn out later.

Regarding terrorist, it does not matter who is in the office the assclowns will try to hurt us but I have a feeling that Obama will read the memo and act on it if his secretary of state says that the chances of an attack is very high.

 

[eminitrader007]

Quote from Ivanovich:

Oh, and I missed this gem of a comment you made.

Markets are not expressing faith in the Democratic administration. They are buying into the fact that we're throwing unprecedented amounts of money at the problem. Yes, it is this administration that is doing it, so some of the credit regarding the up move goes to decisions of this administration's treasury (and the Fed). But so, too, will the blame go when the disaster that is our massive debt comes home to roost.

Here is the copy and paste from another thread.

Markets have done better under Democrats, why fight this strong trend. Thank God for President Obama who has rescued the economy and kept us safe from a terrorist attack on our soil.

http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001266.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...14_OPCHART.html

http://www.slate.com/default.aspx?id=2071929

Currently the best bet is to go long. There are going to be corrections on the way but history is on the bull's side. Buy any dip.

A dip is a 7% decline in the S&P from the high.

Sell when a Republiclown becomes a president.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from eminime007:

Lucrum is ET's Joe the Plumber.

I guess that would make you Obama's Monica Lewinsky.

 

[eminitrader007]

Quote from Lucrum:

I guess that would make you Obama's Monica Lewinsky.

Honestly, that's the best you could come up with

Buy Limit NQ 1584.25, Stop 1582.25

 

[Ivanovich]

Quote from eminitrader007:


Regarding terrorist, it does not matter who is in the office the assclowns will try to hurt us but I have a feeling that Obama will read the memo and act on it if his secretary of state says that the chances of an attack is very high.

So your knock is really against GWB, because ANY President should read the memo and act if they think there is a threat. Has nothing to do with Obama.

 

[Ivanovich]

Quote from eminitrader007:

Here is the copy and paste from another thread.

Markets have done better under Democrats, why fight this strong trend. Thank God for President Obama who has rescued the economy and kept us safe from a terrorist attack on our soil.

http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001266.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...14_OPCHART.html

http://www.slate.com/default.aspx?id=2071929

Currently the best bet is to go long. There are going to be corrections on the way but history is on the bull's side. Buy any dip.

A dip is a 7% decline in the S&P from the high.

Sell when a Republiclown becomes a president.

Your NY times article doesn't exist. Regardless, the stats from slate are quite convenient to your argument, I'll give you that. Of course this...

"When both houses of Congress opposed the president, the return was a stellar 12.9 percent."

essentially says that even with a democratic President, as long as both houses are Republican (or vice versa) the market enjoys it's highest return historically.

However, I think we can agree that this period isn't like too many others in history.

Why don't you just step down off the silly argument that the market is in love with Obama and that's the reason we're rallying, and I'll promise to keep an open mind on Obama and whoever else steps up to the mic come 2010 and 2012?

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:

So your party is in shambles and you've lost your faith. You have no hopes, no party and no prospects. So you decide that the next best thing for you to do is to simply spend your time "bashing" the opposition.

That is truly pitiful.

Maybe this has something to do with it.

Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:

... There is nothing yet. No plan, No senate bill, no law...

Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:

Everyone in this thread realizes of course that there is no "plan," yet.

There is only a thousand page jumble of U.S. Congressional House...

Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:

Rationing is inevitable, relax and enjoy it.

 

[eminitrader007]

Quote from Ivanovich:

.........
Why don't you just step down off the silly argument that the market is in love with Obama and that's the reason we're rallying, and I'll promise to keep an open mind on Obama and whoever else steps up to the mic come 2010 and 2012?

When Obama took office and the markets were down for few months the right was quick to point out that it was because of him. Now since it is going in the other direction shouldn't he get the credit too?

 

[Ivanovich]

Quote from eminitrader007:

When Obama took office and the markets were down for few months the right was quick to point out that it was because of him. Now since it is going in the other direction shouldn't he get the credit too?

So because the "right" was wrong then, you're willing to make the same dumb commentary now? I mean, how many shades of "dumb" are we going to look at this through?

 

[TraderZones]

Quote from eminitrader007:

This was sent to me by someone as I mentioned in the fist paragraph. It seems that this was done before Specter switched parties with the assumption that he will lose in the Republican primary.

The main thing is that we need to win 2 more seats to get to 60 without the independents, but it is always better to set the goal a little higher.

I would consider all projections as highly suspicious at this point. It could go either way or stay similar, with every path possible.

There are so many issues, from Health Care, the economy, terrorism, joblessness, and many other things, no one has a real clue where this will go.

The Dems advantage were partly padded by Blue Dogs - part Dems/part GOPs - ie, conservatives who are Dems, from conservative-leaning states. There is a lot of variables in this.