September 23, 2008

Want to make money? Vote Democratic.

It's hard to argue with success.

President George W. Bush inherited the lousy end of the business cycle. The stock market has been falling throughout his entire term, battered by war, a feeble economy, and corporate scandals. Yet this decay still hasn't shaken Americans' faith that Republicans are better for the economy and the market. Poll after poll shows that when Americans divide up the chores of running the country, they tend to think of the economy and stock market as Republican domain and delegate softer issues, like the environment, to Democrats.

But Democrats, it turns out, are much better for the stock market than Republicans. Slate ran the numbers and found that since 1900, Democratic presidents have produced a 12.3 percent annual total return on the S&P 500, but Republicans only an 8 percent return. In 2000, the Stock Trader's Almanac, which slices and dices Wall Street performance figures like baseball stats, came up with nearly the same numbers (13.4 percent versus 8.1 percent) by measuring Dow price appreciation. (Most of the 20th century's bear markets, incidentally, have been Republican bear markets: the Crash of '29, the early '70s oil shock, the '87 correction, and the current stall occu! rred under GOP presidents.)

According to almanac editor Jeffrey Hirsch, the presidential party figures are among the most significant he's found. If the stock market were random, we'd expect such a result only one-quarter of the time. "I don't know why people are convinced Republicans are good for the stock market," Hirsch says.

Nor does having a Republican Congress help the market. A Democratic Senate showed returns of 10.5 percent (versus 9.4 percent for a GOP upper chamber), and a Democratic House returned 10.9 percent versus 8.1 percent for the Republicans.
Republicans are no doubt muttering that that's just the stock market, not the whole economy. But real GDP growth follows the same pattern. Since 1930 (the first year decent data is available), GDP growth was 5.4 percent for Democratic presidents and 1.6 percent for Republicans.

Yet another con job by Republicans..... they're better on economic issues. Not if you value facts and reality... or having money in the bank.


At 9/23/2008 10:51 AM, Blogger Saul said...

Some people can put more money in the bank under the Republicans. The wealthiest 1% experience a LOT of growth under the Republicans.

At 9/23/2008 6:54 PM, Blogger nicodemus said...

Okay, now tell me again, I must have missed it..what's Obama done???

At 9/25/2008 2:18 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Is this about Obama? Didn't realize it. But since your world revolves around him, let's ask what he HASN'T done, shall we?

He hasn't spent his life in congress working to deregulate Wall St. and voting with Bush 95% of the time while never seeing a war he didn't like. He hasn't endorsed sending thousands of U.S. troops to die needlessly.

He didn't graduate from college third to the bottom of a class of over 500, and didn't crash 4 multi-million dollar planes before getting shot down and captured.

He didn't then dump his wife because she had been crippled while he was in Viet Nam and hook up with a beer heiress before he was divorced.

He hasn't constantly voted against equal pay for equal work for women or voted 17 times against raising the minimum wage.

Barack Obama didn't vote against a public holiday for Martin Luther King Jr. as McCain did in Arizona.

Obama hasn't lost track of how many million dollar plus homes he owns.

Obama wasn't joking around at Bush's ranch while New Orleans was drowning.

Obama wasn't in Montenegro celebrating his birthday on the yacht of an actress and her now convicted felon husband (who was convicted of conning the Vatican out of millions.) only a whle ago.

He didn't get mixed up in a bribery scandal involving the savings and loan industry, and he hasn't spent decades trying to become president.

And Obama didn't mix up Sunnis and Shias, forget that Iraq doesn't border Afghanistan, vote against the Veterans Bill, say that as president he'd fire someone he couldn't fire as president, or hire as his chief economic advisor the guy who authored the very deregulation that led to the mortgage crisis, and hasn't filled the top spots on his campaign with the biggest lobbyists in D.C.

If you want to know what Obama HAS done, as apparently you're completely uninformed on the subject, I might suggest checking out this as a start.

And you know, it's not as much what Obama has done, as what McCain HAS done. We know what he'll be like, and it's not that different from the disaster we're trying to survive.

Thanks, but no thanks.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home