probably a dumb cracker or 2 or 3.
he needs oprah's crackers.
he needs oprah's crackers.
Obama is blowing it...who the hell is advising him???
- Thread starter TM_Direct
- Start date
Recent polls and Intrade are not out of synch if you accept the premise that McCain will pick up the majority ('70%' was espoused on Meet the Press today) of the 'undecided' vote come election day. If so, the dead heats we've been seeing in raw poll numbers are indicative of a slight McCain advantage - as suggested by the present Intrade numbers.
As you well know, the Intrade numbers are more volatile than poll numbers because they have two very different meanings. Intrade measures the perceived probability of an event's occurance. If the poll numbers favor Obama 57-43 the day before the election, you can bet that his Intrade number will be somewhere north of 90. In this scenario, both indictors suggest a very very likely victory. However, the movement in the Intrade number obviously LOOKS much more dramatic.
A 15 point Intrade move corresponds to nothing more than a change from 'slight favorite' to 'slight underdog' in this case. Another 12-15 points in the same direction would have the Conservatives feeling pretty darn confident. We're not there yet. I don't expect to see that type of number (for either side) until exit polls are being conducted. Even then, remember what early exit polls were telling us about the 2004 election. I seem to remember Kerry being the prohibitive favorite for a few fleeting moments.
Very good post and you're absolutely on target. I'm impressed, really!!
And you probably remember how stocks went into a mini plunge that 2004 morning off those misguided exit polls (the ones Big Dave thinks use "science") only to rally like 50 ES handles the next 3 days post-Bush victory.
And you probably remember how stocks went into a mini plunge that 2004 morning off those misguided exit polls (the ones Big Dave thinks use "science") only to rally like 50 ES handles the next 3 days post-Bush victory.
Yes, but, this is the type of market movement that actually means something to the average American.
http://www.investopedia.com/article...l-party-democrat-republican-stock-returns.asp
My technical work is all based on fractals so I'm pretty well versed on EVERY YEAR of index movement since 1920. In fact I can freak my friends out with the Jim Morrison game of "pick a year-any year-I'll tell you what the market did."
Very little actual correlation between President's political affiliation and markets. You have to intimately know the situation behind the movement. The only Democrat to really preside over a "bull" market was Clinton. Yet if Gore had won in 2000 he would've been shouldered with the Tech break which was the exact same magnitude as the 29-32 Dow break. Then if a Republican came back to win in 2004 he would've boasted "see how stocks rallied!" All bs, eh? I mean the FTSE has a 90% correlation to us so does Parliament's PM factors in, ect?
The FDR rally skews the data. Stocks had a rally from 32-37 VERY much like 03-07 but then the rally faded. A lot of non historical folks don't know this but the economy really sucked from 38 until the beginning of the war. Unemployment was 14% in Dec/1941.
Plus a lot of rallies were just catch up to inflation from prior years. Reagan benefited from LBJ/Nixon/Carter inflatoion to a large degree. Ike to some degree. Asset prices catch up to inflated increases in book. If the Treasury announced today no more dollars-a new currency-the Super Dollar-swap an old buck for 10 new ones. Where would the Dow open tomorrow? Probably 50,000 bid. Would that reflect TRUE bullishness for business? Obviously not.
Weirdly one of the best correlations is war to rallies. Most every major American military foray has led to sharply higher stocks. And THAT folks is why American leaders LOVE war.
I have no real beef with your position here, which is well thought out. I pull out that particular statistical tidbit when I smell a hint of the ol' "markets do better under Republicans" BS. {A fair amount of (predominately Conservative) people actually believe that crap.} It appeared to me that you might be looking to go down that road with your statement about the 2004 rally.
I personally won't be basing any investment decisions upon the forthcoming election results.
I personally won't be basing any investment decisions upon the forthcoming election results.
I put 2004-07 right there with FDR. Relief rally. Nothing more. And most certainly no arbiter of increased economic health.
...to 43...
IMO MAC just kicked his ass in public opinion.....who the hell is advising him???? " I want to call off the debates for now so we can focus on doing our jobs"....OB says NO??? The guy has been in Senate for about 5 minutes before he started running for Prez....can you take three days off to actually DO YOUR JOB???
Mac is a wiley ol' vet in DC and right now he is taking him to the shed....as for polls....Al gore and Kerry had easy victories according to polls right???
the biggest problems with many of these polls is that they focus on ONE city in a state...Kerry and Gore won a lot of liberal cities but the surrounding counties and cities were lost and thus, they lost the state
Mac is a wiley ol' vet in DC and right now he is taking him to the shed....as for polls....Al gore and Kerry had easy victories according to polls right???
the biggest problems with many of these polls is that they focus on ONE city in a state...Kerry and Gore won a lot of liberal cities but the surrounding counties and cities were lost and thus, they lost the state