Will Obama Be Better Than Bush for Stocks?

A little market history for you care of the Dow Jones Wilshire 5000, the broadest measure of U.S. stocks. President Obama may have a troubled economy to deal with, but as the Bush team exits the White House they've set the bar low for the performance of equities compared to the past four administrations.

From Wilshire Associates:

*With the exception of President George W. Bush, the dates are inclusive of each President’s term. The data for President Bush (43) is as of Friday, January 16.

Comments

[JPDD:]

S&P Jan 22, 2001 = 1350
S&P Jan 20, 2009 = 850

Pretty low bar for Obama to meet.

Jan 20 02:11 PM

[Steve in Gr...:]

I moved 100% out of equities and into cash in July 2008, because of my growing certainty that we would have a President Obama (the most leftist member of the Senate) and both houses of Congress controlled by extreme leftists as well. Smarter people than me began selling out earlier, but for the same reason.

The bubbles in real estate and equities were created by Greenspan in 2001-2002 pumping money into the system. The real estate bubble were aggravated by the government-fostered lowering of mortgage lending standards. And the black swan was the violent lurch to the left in the elections of 2006 and 2008.

Jan 20 03:27 PM

[Chuch:]

so far doesn;t look so good for obama and wall street, except for these stocks this guy talks about crashmarketstocks.com

Jan 20 03:33 PM

[User 265729:]

Based on today:

Dow 7,949.09 -332.13 -4.01%
Nasdaq 1,440.86 -88.47 -5.78%
S&P 500 805.22 -44.90 -5.28%

Answer: NO

Jan 20 04:26 PM

[Lars39:]

No inauguration bounce, so it will be tough sledding.

Jan 20 04:50 PM

[Socialism c...:]

For those who take this seriously...we should also look at Congressional control...and consider that Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, et al. were responsible for the subprime mortgage fiasco. And yes, even Obama himself, no less than the messiah...had a direct role in pushing subprime lending:

www.mediacircus.com/20.../

If you're gonna give this a "thumbs down", at least post a reason why -- if you can't dispute the facts as outlined in the article above, then your "thumb down" is just an expression of bitterness. I am posting out of an attempt to inform and wake citizens up as to who the culprits are, and what we are in store for, thanks to the press having helped dupe the American people!!!

Jan 20 05:19 PM

[Jim Hawthorne:]

There is plenty of blame to go around, my friend!

Solutions, being painful, are somewhat more difficult items...
You pin the blame on a handful of individuals, while ignoring that what we have witnessed is very much a systemic failure with roots in mindless deregulation and repeated attacks on any reform that smacked of responsible oversight!

I read your 'circus' and hope that you mix those sources with others like;
www.ritholtz.com/blog/
www.ft.com/markets
globaleconomicanalysis.../
www.trivisonno.com/
www.minyanville.com/
mrmortgage.typepad.com.../

The web is crawling with second rate bloggers that are too lazy or ignorant to deliver more than cheap ad hominem distorted broadsides!

We are witnessing the results of narrow non-nuanced ideology-driven public and private policy! Leave it behind and move on!

On Jan 20 05:19 PM Socialism cannot compete! wrote:

> For those who take this seriously...we should also look at Congressional
> control...and consider that Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, et al. were
> responsible for the subprime mortgage fiasco. And yes, even Obama
> himself, no less than the messiah...had a direct role in pushing
> subprime lending:
>
> www.mediacircus.com/20.../
>
>
> If you're gonna give this a "thumbs down", at least post a reason
> why -- if you can't dispute the facts as outlined in the article
> above, then your "thumb down" is just an expression of bitterness.
> I am posting out of an attempt to inform and wake citizens up as
> to who the culprits are, and what we are in store for, thanks to
> the press having helped dupe the American people!!!

Jan 20 06:41 PM

[msoori:]

I think the solution for the Wall Street is to get Steve Jobs elected to be our next President! He did it for Apple, why not for the love of the country?

Jan 21 08:51 AM

[Conan the B...:]

Personally, I hope that a United Congress will do better than a divided Congress did over the last 8 years.

To get votes to pass anything, a divided Congress winds up with extensive amounts of "Pork".

Passage of the "line item veto" would give Obama the ability to really change the ways "Pork" is introduced into the system.

Obama's stimulus plan, as currently envisioned, will not affect the economy until the end of 2009(Liesman and others Msnbc tv. 01/21) at the earliest.

What Obama does regarding The Big Three Bailout will be my own Barometer of his leadership.

Jan 21 09:29 AM

[cocomurph:]

Why not look at phases of the moon as well....can you say "spurious correlation" ?

Jan 21 10:42 AM

[fireball:]

in the short term i am guessing an improvement on the widespread obamagirl mentality.
in a few months a harsh drop as reality sinks back in. then more reassurance from team obama and a better rise. then pesky reality will give a harsher drop.
the only stocks i plan to keep are the ones that doubled and selling half got my money back.
i don't imagine housing is done with us and commercial properties and credit cards are just getting rolling.
if i could find a redeeming quality in obama i would probably feel sorry for him.
this is just my own guess work and i really hope i am completely wrong. it would be better for all of us. massive inflation seems likely in a year or so, maybe sooner.
if you preserve your assets i think the best buying opportunity will come after the 2nd drop late fall or early winter.
it seems naive to give bush jr. such a huge share of the blame. this mess has been decades in its' formation right through many administrations and congresses. the president isn't king just yet.
i would hate this policy but it seems it would be simpler, cheaper and much more stimulating to give each u.s. citizen 1million$'s with the stipulation that debts must be paid first. let the bad banks and businesses die as they deserve and let what is sound rise to the top. i would hate it because something for nothing just goes against everything i believe.
ferdinand banks if i recall you are a professer or something in economics. my little idea seems so simple i am probably missing something. any comment would be appreciated.

Jan 21 11:14 AM

[AndrewBaker:]

With all the money - real, imaginery or freshly printed - being handed out, yes he will. With all the hype and promises, hell, I'm even buying financial stocks right now: they're going to go up, and as long as you sell them before they come down, you'll make a tidy profit. The market needs to go up for all our sakes, so: buy financials now to help it on the way. First in gets the most out before this little Ponzi collapses!

Jan 21 03:47 PM

[CLH:]

The president has little to do with the market. The market is run by the people. If the president screws up---his hand is slapped and he changes.

Jan 21 04:41 PM

[Conan the B...:]

BS D: "The market is run by the people."

What people? The President will propose and Congress will have to approve the Stimulus Plan.

Will the "People" jump in and buy, buy ,buy?

Or will the People continue to plan for an uncertain future as they see their 401ks decimated for the 2nd time in less than 10 years and the prospects for near term employment dwindle?

"We the People" have been ignored by Both parties since the Vietnam War. At least Reagan appealed to the People occasionally through his Tenure to get his way.

Who slaps the President's hand? The People made their call on Bush and on Congress in the form of approval ratings. What Changed?

Jan 22 10:05 AM

[Conan the B...:]

BS D: The first line above should have been

CLH says, "The market is run by the people."

Sorry, You have a much better rapport with CLH, I thought you would be interested. :)

Jan 22 03:38 PM

[Kunst:]

Socialism, you just don't get it, do you? All you do is rant and rave and say the same things over and over. I don't answer you, but I do hit thumbs down.


> If you're gonna give this a "thumbs down", at least post a reason
> why -- if you can't dispute the facts as outlined in the article
> above, then your "thumb down" is just an expression of bitterness.

Jan 22 07:32 PM