Buy at Amazon

Saturday, January 05, 2008

Huck/Obama Win and Wall Street Tanks

OK . . . so there are other factors too, but the Dow Jones dropped 2% today (257 pts) on the heels of two populist candidates winning the Iowa caucuses.

Coincidence?

I report . . . you decide.

Update: I was watching Kudlow & Company from yesterday on my DVR (OK, so I'm a nerd) and this same question/idea was presented to the panel by Kudlow. Kudlow himself seemed to think there was an effect as did 2 of the 3 people on the panel he presented the question to. So whoever in the comments called me a "dolt" for suggesting such might need to look in the mirror.

7 comments:

open slather said...

No, it dropped that much because oil went up that day to $100 a barrel, you dolt.

Anonymous said...

open slather--

Actually oil only peaked at $100 a barrel because one guy sold at loses to do it. He got 15 min of fame and lost some $10,000, but hey he got it over $100..for a few minutes. Another reason was for the increase in joblessness up to 5%.

Nealie Ride said...

Regardless of the causes, Mitt is the best for the economy. All investment types know this.

Remember Jim Cramer's "Best businessman in North America" line? He was serious.

After all, nobody else in the field has experience handling business the way Mitt has. Nobody's even ran a corner store.

Everyone has lost sight of this. Mitt lost to many zealous evangelicals in Iowa, though he won over many himself. He's still the best candidate. And one vital reason is his business background.

Go, Mitt!

Nealie Ride said...

New story of McCain's lack of committment to securing the border:

http://nyformitt.blogspot.com/2008/01/us-senate-mccain-turns-back-on-border.html

Anonymous said...

After outspending Huckabee by an outrageous margin, your man Mitt found that the voters of Iowa, in the end, could not be bought. Nor could they be fooled by a man who oozes insincerity from every pore.
After all the wasted money, and after all the weeks of relentless Huckabee bashing by people like you, your man doesn’t simply get beaten, he gets hammered, crushed. It was like a fight between the schoolyard bully and a 98 pound weakling that ends with the bully suffering a hellacious beat down. Of course the flaw in that analogy is that it is really Romney who is the weakling—a moral weakling, that is. After 7 years of Bush, Americans are used to being lied to and taken for fools. But it seems that they can’t stomach smarmy insincerity; given that this is the stock in trade of the Romney candidacy, therein lies the problem for the plastic man from Massachusetts.
You Romney folks are right about at least one thing, however. Huckabee is indeed a flawed candidate; if nominated it’s hard for me to believe that he has a chance in hell of winning the general election. Most Americans are far too open minded for the over-the-top super-Christianity that seemed to play well with the self-styled moralists in Iowa. But in your frantic search for Huckabee’s flaws as a candidate, the thing that you folks continue to ignore is Romney’s obvious flaws as a human. The ethical and moral lapses, combined with his peculiar penchant for just plain lying, all the while portraying himself as the wholesome candidate of truth, justice and the American way…well in the end even the Republicans who continue to deny themselves the truth about the Bush Administration could not be fooled by Mitt.
So now it’s on to New Hampshire where Mitt is already backpedaling furiously in an attempt to lower expectations. What’s clear, however, is that if the people of New Hampshire see Romney as clearly as Iowans did, all your frantic attempts to discredit Huckabee and McCain will be fruitless. It’s about Mitt now; people don’t trust him, they don’t believe him, they don’t like him. No amount of Huckabee and McCain bashing by the frantic legions of Romney supporters will obscure these simple facts…Mitt’s moral and ethical dwarfism will, in the end, doom him. Evidence, it seems, that primary voters are not as stupid as you and Mitt take them for. The system works!

Have a nice day

Phil

Nealie Ride said...

Phil,

Look at the entrance and exit polls.

Mike's evangelical base brought it home for him. Mitt was powerless against that level of religious zeal. Fortunately, Mitt got some evangelical support.

For Huck to get no more than 14% of his support from non-evangelicals is not indicative of a full-spectrum candidate.

In fact, it only tells me he's reliously divisive and polarizing. In most states, that's a negative.

Big Jay said...

Nealie Ride,

One more thing to add to the explanation. Huck's supporters came from two main categories.

People with a household income of less than 30K.

People who live in communities of less than 10,000.

Evangelicals with some education didn't buy Hucksters act.