BUSH re-election will cause Stock Marketl rally!!

CHARLESMANSON

Hated
Forum Member
Jan 7, 2004
2,651
15
0
89
CORCORAN, CA
You guys can save this post and then tell me how right I was ok..... :) DO IT!!

As more and more people face the facts and realize that John Kerry and the whining crying democrats are going to lose this election, the market will experience a SHARP RALLY.

Expect the S & P 500 to end the year well above 1250, up at least 12% from year end 2003.

I'm not even going to argue with you liberals on this one.....I know I am right. Say what you want people. I'm just going to sit back and wait for my prediction to come true, then garcefully point up to the scoreboard. Enjoy!

:moon:
 

CHARLESMANSON

Hated
Forum Member
Jan 7, 2004
2,651
15
0
89
CORCORAN, CA
So I'm right?? cool I thought so....

Also I hate to burst your bubble ClemD but Bush inherritted this economy from Clinton and we also had the most financially devistating terror attack of all time.

I anxiously await your response to these two factors.
 
Last edited:

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,899
133
63
16
L.A.
I will bet against your prediction. The market will struggle.

The outsourcing of middle class jobs will eventually bite the economy very bad. The consumer base's purchasing power in this country continues to decline. It takes a while, but this eventually trickles up to the investor.

Since Bush offers nothing in the form of carrots or sticks to keep companies in this country, the declining wages of what used to be a working middle class which alter the structure of our economy completely. Even if there was a rally, many fewer people would be beniffiting from it.

Save my email and check it 4 years from now.
 

CHARLESMANSON

Hated
Forum Member
Jan 7, 2004
2,651
15
0
89
CORCORAN, CA
YOU GOT IT SMURPHY!!! I ALSO THANK YOU FOR BACKING UP YOUR STATEMENTS WITH REASON, SOMETHING ALL THE LIBERALS ON MADJACKS FAIL TO DO. :clap:

TIME WILL TELL!!

Where'd ClemD go??? lol...is he hiding?
 

Kdogg21

who?
Forum Member
Dec 8, 2001
5,364
0
0
47
Chicago,IL
i'll take that bet as well....

In a sign of persistent weakness in the U.S. economy, a widely watched measure of business activity declined in August for the third consecutive month.

Other clouds also appeared on the economic horizon. The number of new claims for jobless benefits rose last week in the wake of hurricanes pummeling the southeastern United States. Meanwhile, oil prices soared again, nearly reaching their all-time highs.

The Conference Board reported its Composite Index of Leading Economic Indicators fell 0.3 percent in August, to 115.7, following a 0.3 percent drop in July. The index measures a variety of economic factors, including manufacturers' orders, interest rates, and building permits. It had not fallen three months in a row since the first quarter of 2003.

''Consumers worry about their wages and salaries, which could limit spending. Businesses worry about their ability to raise prices and to cover rising costs,'' said Ken Goldstein, an economist for the Conference Board, a private research group based in New York.

The stock market seemed put off by the signs of listlessness in economy. The Dow Jones industrial average fell 70.28, or 0.7 percent, to 10,038.90, logging its second straight day of losses. The Dow plunged more than 135 points on Wednesday.

The broader Standard & Poor's 500 index slipped 5.20, or 0.5 percent, to 1,108.36. But the tech-dominated Nasdaq index eked out a gain of 0.72, or 0.04 percent, closing at 1,886.43.

Oil prices continued to be a concern to investors, posing a possible threat to corporate profits and consumer spending. A barrel of light crude closed at $48.46 Thursday, up 11 cents on the New York Mercantile Exchange, after reaching a high of $49 during the day. Crude futures closed at a record high of $48.70 on August 19, and hit their record price of $49.20 a barrel on August 20.

"Oil prices are a huge uncertainty," said Lou Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson Associates in New York City.

Still, the stocks of oil companies were among those leading Thursday's stock market decline, perhaps in anticipation of when oil prices fall again. Exxon Mobil, the biggest oil company, was the Dow's biggest decliner. It lost $1.10, closing at $47.76, after an analyst at Deutsche Bank cut his rating of the stock. Other oil stocks also fell. ChevronTexaco fell 82 cents, closing at $52.32. Baker Hughes slipped 56 cents to $42.63.

Other stocks that lost ground included Bed Bath & Beyond, which tumbled $1.99 to $37.59. The home-furnishings retailer said second-quarter sales fell short of consensus estimates. Appliance makers Maytag and Whirlpool also lost ground. Maytag fell 95 cents to $18.54, and Whirlpool slid $1.23 to $61.80

On the jobs front, the U.S. Labor Department Thursday reported that the number of people filing first-time claims for unemployment insurance increased to 350,000 -- a jump of 14,000. But most of those new jobless claims resulted from the Florida hurricanes, analysts said. And the number came in lower than the 387,000 new jobless claims in the same week a year ago.

"Employment still isn't where we want it to be," said Carl Tannenbaum, chief economist for La-Salle Bank in Chicago.

The Conference Board's Index purports to forecast the state of the economy over the next three to six months. But several economists took exception to that Thursday, saying growth would continue into next year.

The index "is definitely capturing the fact that we had a soft patch in the economy this summer. [But] it tells you very little about what's going to happen next," Crandall said.

"The past few years have been characterized by a series of bursts of growth punctuated by periods of soft patches."

"There are a lot of uncertainties out there right now, and those uncertainties are threatening to hold back consumers and businesses," Tannenbaum added.

in my opinoin, the tech market will boom if anything, but everything else is gonna preety much stay where it has. the market hasn't done anything but squat these last few years.
 

CHARLESMANSON

Hated
Forum Member
Jan 7, 2004
2,651
15
0
89
CORCORAN, CA
You didn't read my post correctly......I said that once the president is re-elected it will cause a rally. Don't try and twist words dude.

Thanks for the cut n paste job too.....shows how smart you are as a free-thinking individual.
 
Last edited:

Kdogg21

who?
Forum Member
Dec 8, 2001
5,364
0
0
47
Chicago,IL
wants not there to really like about Clinton. The defecit was at a alltime low, we had no wars going on with any country, no troops died under his leadership, if there were they were very minimul. Jobless rate was at a all time low. were there ups and downs yes no doubt about it, but the country as a whole was a hell of a lot better.
 

ocelot

Registered User
Forum Member
May 21, 2003
1,937
0
0
Mount Shasta
Stock markets have done better under Dems than Reps historically and both the Bushes contributed mightily to keeping their party's record intact.

Wall Street wanted Bush last election putting out the impression that Bush would be good for business. They set the little retail investor up with high expectations while at the same time insiders were selling their asses off and Wall Street Big Boys were pouring money into hedge funds. The market promptly collapsed under Bush and conveniently used the 911 attack as a cover.

Be ready for a repeat of 2000 as Wall Street puts out the idea that a Bush win will be good for the market while they themselves begin short-selling. The market will only recover if Bush is defeated. Look at history and the records of both Bushes.
 

CHARLESMANSON

Hated
Forum Member
Jan 7, 2004
2,651
15
0
89
CORCORAN, CA
That's all fine and well but you keep talking about the past. Bush inherrited the recession from Clinton and you totally ignore that. Typical liberal. I'm talking about my predictions for when Bush gets re-elected so please stick to the topic.
 

Kdogg21

who?
Forum Member
Dec 8, 2001
5,364
0
0
47
Chicago,IL
funny thing is you refer people like me as liberal. i voted for bush in 2000, i dont like they things are going so im voting for Kerry. get a grip. and another thing is you contradict everything you say. you talk about cut and paste, well you have to cut a post a new topic off that paste :142lmao: . thank you say people attack you and you attack them in the first place over all. :142lmao: have you ever gotten laid because man, i'll be happy to pay a lapdance for you or something so you can bust a nut.
 
Last edited:

CHARLESMANSON

Hated
Forum Member
Jan 7, 2004
2,651
15
0
89
CORCORAN, CA
More personal attacks on me lol???? ....talking about my sex life now???? YOU ARE DESPERATE!!!!!!!!!

This is what the liberals do when they know they are wrong. It gets sooooooo old. Kerry and the liberals spend 100% of their time ignoring issues and resorting to PERSONAL ATTACKS EVERY DAY!!! Why do you think America has no clue what Kerrys plans are for fighting terror?? KERRY NEVER TELLS US!!

KDogg...did Bush inherrit a recession?
 
Last edited:

gambinoshark

Registered User
Forum Member
Apr 21, 2004
725
1
18
Oakwood, OH
lol, charles, you say that ocelot is talking about the past, yet every chance you get you blame everything on clinton.....seems like everytime someone rebuffs your childish antics you either:

a) call names and whine....or
b) blame clinton.....
 

CHARLESMANSON

Hated
Forum Member
Jan 7, 2004
2,651
15
0
89
CORCORAN, CA
You are wrong!!!

The only thing I blamed Clinton for was passing on a recession and not taking out Bin Laden when he had the chance.

If you're going to exagerate don't even bother posting in my threads. Thanks.
 
Last edited:

gambinoshark

Registered User
Forum Member
Apr 21, 2004
725
1
18
Oakwood, OH
your right charles manso, i apologize you don't refer to bill clinton at all, i was just seeing things in your other threads:

"Eddie...Clinton & Sandy Berger had Bin Laden in their crosshairs about 4 or 5 times!!!! Each time THEY DIDNT PULL THE TRIGGER...you have no clue what you are even saying! Clinton made the decision to let Bin Laden go!!! Now look what happened - that's right, 9/11 my friend.

One time they let him go because they were afraid that we wouldn't be able to give Bin Laden a fair trial!! You liberals are sick. You just throw up a smoke screen, ignore the facts, and avoid pressing questions.

The CIA and the Military called Clinton and Berger at least 5 times and said "OK we know where Bin Laden is...can we bomb now??

EACH TIME CLINTON AND BERGER SAID "NO...NOT YET"!!!!

KDOGG -- If Clinton would have bombed Bin Laden when he had the chance, he wouldn't have been able to orcestrate 9/11. Think about it!!"

i knew i needed new glasses but damn i didnt think my eyes were this bad!!!!
 

Kdogg21

who?
Forum Member
Dec 8, 2001
5,364
0
0
47
Chicago,IL
i can understand that point, it can go both ways though. the CIA knew there was going to be attacks on the US leading up to 9/11 and even one of the guys in on it contacted the US about it the attack. Should Clinton have gotten him yes, but Bush is as much to blame for not putting up the defenses putting out warnings.

thats like me saying well if Senior Bush would of gotten Saddam out in the first war we would never be where we are at today.
 

CHARLESMANSON

Hated
Forum Member
Jan 7, 2004
2,651
15
0
89
CORCORAN, CA
I accept your appology gambino...it's all good bro. Nice to see someone in here with a good head on thier shoulders admit when they are wrong once in a while. :) you have my respect :clap:

Sure KDogg....you have better stuff to do........thats why you respond to everything I type right?

Have fun with your plays tonight and good luck. :)
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top