President Trump

[morekaos]

From my January letter to clients that I posted in the Dow thread...

"As I told many of you during the year. Presidents inherit the business cycle they inherit.  If there is recession he gets the blame. If expansion he tries to take credit.  This market was going to rise no matter who won. The influence of an executive policy comes in the form of magnitude.  He can throw water on it and slow it down, or gas on it and increase the reaction.  This President is throwing gas in the form of lower taxes and regulations.  I feel this is net positive for our markets this year and they will again advance. "

 

[morekaos]

Nobody wants to give Trump credit for stocks being up 25% but you can bet if stocks had crashed 25% he would be getting credit.

Before the election they were more than happy to hang a market crash round his neck...now he has nothing to do with the market gains...which is it?

A win for Donald Trump in next week's election could take a big bite out U.S. stocks, according to the latest forecast from Citi.

In a note to clients late Thursday, the bank said the S&P 500 will fall by 3% to 5% immediately if Trump is elected. A victory by Hillary Clinton wouldn't move stocks significantly, it predicted.
The outlook is based on the bank's belief that investors would be surprised by a Trump victory, despite the fact that the polls have tightened in the last week. And Wall Street does not like surprises or uncertainty.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/04/investing/donald-trump-stock-drop-citi/

Column: The stock market doesn?t like the idea of a Trump presidency

In a recent working paper, Justin Wolfers and I examined how financial markets have reacted to recent ups and downs in the Clinton versus Trump contest. We found that markets expect stock prices to be at least 10 percent higher under a President Hillary Clinton ? in the U.S. and globally. Markets also expect higher energy prices under Clinton and stronger currencies for trading partners such as Mexico and Canada. Under a President Donald Trump, markets expect higher volatility and higher prices for safe haven assets such as Treasuries, precious metals and the Japanese yen.

Taken together, the results suggest that market participants expect a stronger economy under Clinton and more risk under Trump.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/column-stock-market-doesnt-like-idea-trump-presidency

Wrong, wrong and still wrong...Winning!

 

[Liar Loan]

Yep, there were a ton of predictions that stocks would crash if Trump were elected.  Even supposedly smart investors like Mark Cuban predicted it.

 

[morekaos]

Cool story... If only it was true.  ;D

Time to read a little bit more about it I think.

Well I have done a bit  more "reading" and I found that even USA Today (no friend of the president) concedes Isis is being defeated.  It is a cool  story and it is true.

Islamic State is on the ropes

So the collapse of the caliphate ? marked by the fall of its capital in the Syrian city of Raqqa and the liberation of money-producing oil wells in recent days ? represents a remarkable victory for humanity over barbarity.

It's also a testament to the U.S. military's growing prowess with what it calls a "by, with, and through" waging of war: combat conducted by local forces, with U.S. and allied support, through an offensive plan designed by the American military

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/10/22/isis-ropes-challenges-remain-our-view/779711001/

 

[Liar Loan]

When are you going to cease presenting these "alternative" facts and just stick to the real facts? 

 

[irvinehomeowner]

Isn't defeating ISIS like defeating patriotism?

No wonder Trump is so against Kapernick and company... because they are waging a war against 'Merica!!!

 

[Liar Loan]

Isn't defeating ISIS like defeating patriotism?

No wonder Trump is so against Kapernick and company... because they are waging a war against 'Merica!!!

Are you serious?  ISIS is a political entity trying to establish a caliphate.  Losing the capital is a big deal because it means their sole reason for existence has failed.  In the view of jihadist Muslims it shows that Allah is not on their side.  Without the aura of inevitability they once had, their recruiting has dropped way off and the existing fighters are surrendering in droves.

The reactions of marmott and IHO on this issue are classic examples of cognitive dissonance.

In their minds:

1. Trump is incompetent.
2. An incompetent leader can't defeat ISIS.

Does not jive with:

3. Trump has defeated ISIS.

That means either accepting the difficult truth that Trump is not incompetent after all, or creating some other mental justification (cognitive dissonance) as to why this can't be for real to comfort themselves.

Hence, they will try to say that ISIS was not such a great enemy after all, or that Trump was simply benefiting from Obama's leadership, or that Russia/Syria actually defeated ISIS.

Anything but admitting that Trump was successful against ISIS because it would be admitting he isn't incompetent.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

Isn't defeating ISIS like defeating patriotism?

No wonder Trump is so against Kapernick and company... because they are waging a war against 'Merica!!!

Are you serious?  ISIS is a political entity trying to establish a caliphate.  Losing the capital is a big deal because it means their sole reason for existence has failed.  In the view of jihadist Muslims it shows that Allah is not on their side.  Without the aura of inevitability they once had, their recruiting has dropped way off and the existing fighters are surrendering in droves.

The reactions of marmott and IHO on this issue are classic examples of cognitive dissonance.

In their minds:

1. Trump is incompetent.
2. An incompetent leader can't defeat ISIS.

Does not jive with:

3. Trump has defeated ISIS.

That means either accepting the difficult truth that Trump is not incompetent after all, or creating some other mental justification (cognitive dissonance) as to why this can't be for real to comfort themselves.

Hence, they will try to say that ISIS was not such a great enemy after all, or that Trump was simply benefiting from Obama's leadership, or that Russia/Syria actually defeated ISIS.

Anything but admitting that Trump was successful against ISIS because it would be admitting he isn't incompetent.

Relax Liar Loan.

I know what ISIS (ISIL) is.

This is a classic example of taking a joke too seriously. Or shall I post an analysis of what I think is in your mind?

Sheesh, you would think the reference to Kapernick and 'Merica would tell you how serious I am.

 

[morekaos]

It is an interesting reaction though. I have long said that the left's biggest fear is that Trump may actually succeed...at anything.  I think this is why the press and Dems always try to obfuscate or diminish any good news as either dumb luck or a byproduct of older Obama policies.  They can't EVER give him credit as it would admit defeat.

 

[Liar Loan]

I did ask if you were serious, didn't I? 

Don't get too upset about cognitive dissonance.  Everybody that's human does it, but Trump has a unique ability to bring it out of people.

Trump's opposition to Kaepernick is just savvy media strategy.  It rallies his base, persuades others that might be disgusted with Kaepernick to support Trump, and only alienates those that already didn't like Trump.

 

[marmott]

I don't think Trump's incompetency is the question here.

I just doubt that Isis is defeated just because they've be kicked out of Syria.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

I did ask if you were serious, didn't I? 

Don't get too upset about cognitive dissonance.  Everybody that's human does it, but Trump has a unique ability to bring it out of people.

Trump's opposition to Kaepernick is just savvy media strategy.  It rallies his base, persuades others that might be disgusted with Kaepernick to support Trump, and only alienates those that already didn't like Trump.

If you had to ask, you missed the joke.

I do think Trump is incompetent in many things (as we all are)... but I don't think he is incapable of getting things that he really wants done.

My characterization of Trump is he is a bully... and while there are things in his platform I support (repealing Obamacare), I just don't agree with his methods.

The one trait I admire, if you can call it that, is he is who he is. No polish, no poise, no political correctness... it's entertaining and embarrassing at the same time.

Watching Trump try to pull other leaders' arms off (aka The Trump Shake) is much more fun than looking at Hillary's fake smile.

 

[Liar Loan]

My characterization of Trump is he is a bully... and while there are things in his platform I support (repealing Obamacare), I just don't agree with his methods.

I agree that he is a highly effective troll that probably feels like bullying to his recipients.  Still, many of the people on the receiving end are despicable characters in their own right, so I don't really feel too bad about it.  In an ideal world, he would conduct himself more like Obama or Bush, with class and grace, but those guys did untold damage to this country.

Bush was completely incompetent when it came to almost anything:  Iraq, catching Bin Laden, Hurricane Katrina, the Great Recession, Medicare D without any funding.

Obama wasn't nearly as incompetent, but he did make foreign policy mistakes that were costly (Libya, Syrian red line, the rise of ISIS), and did everything he could to push this country in a Marxist direction.  Republican stonewalling prevented most of that from being written into law, thankfully.

So if I have to choose between a nice guy that I think is going to wreck the country, or a mean, nasty guy that is going to take things in a better direction, I'm going to choose the mean, nasty guy.  Sure, having a dignified head of state would be ideal, but I can live without it.  I think most Trump supporters feel the same way.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

I don't think Trump's incompetency is the question here.

I just doubt that Isis is defeated just because they've be kicked out of Syria.

This.

It's not cognitive dissonance on our part, it's on Trump's.

 

[peppy]

Obama wasn't nearly as incompetent, but he did make foreign policy mistakes that were costly (Libya, Syrian red line, the rise of ISIS), and did everything he could to push this country in a Marxist direction.  Republican stonewalling prevented most of that from being written into law, thankfully.

You are right, he tried really hard to give the means of production to the proletariat. /s

It's amazing how skewed the perception of democrats has become. By most measures, Obama has been one of the most (if not the most) moderate Democratic president since in the post-war era. You can hate the guy as much as you want, but he is not the extreme leftist certain news outlets make you want to believe.

 

[morekaos]

I don't think Trump's incompetency is the question here.

I just doubt that Isis is defeated just because they've be kicked out of Syria.

This.

It's not cognitive dissonance on our part, it's on Trump's.

Defeated is not the word I would use but you have to admit the ball has been advanced.  After 8 years of watching these a-holes execute people in the open square from drones and doing NOTHING we have at the very least weakened their cause.

 

[peppy]

I don't think Trump's incompetency is the question here.

I just doubt that Isis is defeated just because they've be kicked out of Syria.

This.

It's not cognitive dissonance on our part, it's on Trump's.

Defeated is not the word I would use but you have to admit the ball has been advanced.  After 8 years of watching these a-holes execute people in the open square from drones and doing NOTHING we have at the very least weakened their cause.

Who is "we"? None of this could have been done with out the SDF/YPG. They are aligned with the PKK, an extreme left group (some may say Marxist) also currently deemed a terrorist organization by the USA.

 

[Liar Loan]

You are right, he tried really hard to give the means of production to the proletariat. /s

It's amazing how skewed the perception of democrats has become. By most measures, Obama has been one of the most (if not the most) moderate Democratic president since in the post-war era. You can hate the guy as much as you want, but he is not the extreme leftist certain news outlets make you want to believe.

You think he was more moderate than Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter?  I don't hate Obama and I was complimentary of his character, but his record speaks for itself.

Edit:  JFK would be considered a Republican by today's standards.

 

[peppy]

You are right, he tried really hard to give the means of production to the proletariat. /s

It's amazing how skewed the perception of democrats has become. By most measures, Obama has been one of the most (if not the most) moderate Democratic president since in the post-war era. You can hate the guy as much as you want, but he is not the extreme leftist certain news outlets make you want to believe.

You think he was more moderate than Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter?  I don't hate Obama and I was complimentary of his character, but his record speaks for itself.

Edit:  JFK would be considered a Republican by today's standards.

By all measures Obama ranks as more moderate than both Clinton and Carter. JFK would be considered a leftist extremist by Republicans these days, not a conservative. Recall what happened during his tenure: expansion of welfare/Medicare and Peace Corps.

 

[Liar Loan]

By all measures Obama ranks as more moderate than both Clinton and Carter. JFK would be considered a leftist extremist by Republicans these days, not a conservative. Recall what happened during his tenure: expansion of welfare/Medicare and Peace Corps.

What measures are you talking about?  Medicare started 4 years after JFK died?