Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Soultrader

US Election: Obama Vs McCain

Who will win the US election?  

18 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win the US election?

    • Obama will win
      15
    • McCain will win
      3


Recommended Posts

Parker and Stone had to have created two versions. I hope they make the other one available someday.

Yeah, I hear they have episodes on some schedule, but then within a week, can produce new ones based on current events. They could have just bet on Obama winning (and had a backup in case he didn't), or truly created two shows for both results.

 

edit: Then again, they poke fun at his grandmother dying, which was Monday. Damn they're fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While he's entitled to his opinion, I don't know that I'd call it "very understanding". The Republican experiment of the last forty years hasn't exactly been a screaming success. If Obama's approach is a recipe for failure, then I guess the Founding Fathers got it all wrong to begin with.

 

By recipe for failure, I'm talking about the phenomena based on pandering to hope. The world is very complex and few things move in a straight line, except disappointment. This doesn't mean Obama will fail, I don't think he will. But many people who were wrapped up in the idea of change and hope, could be disappointed in the years to come. Obama did well to sell security and hope to his base (the youth) and that's what won him the election. Bush did the same thing, he energized his base and won both elections. A huge majority of people vote based on emotion, and Obama's way of speaking, and his campaign for change did a great job to spark emotion in his favor. If McCain ran a more disciplined campaign, and had a vision, I firmly believe he would have won. McCain dropped the ball when it came to the economy, so bad that it hid the mistakes Obama made. Obama's organization on the ground was also much better, he even beat the Clintons at their own game. So in a sense, Obama is a political genius.

 

I do think Obama will be a good president. I think his diplomatic approach on foreign affairs will boost our image and get more accomplished with the aide of the EU and UN. I think this will be a true test for Democratic demand-side (or Keynesian) economics. But most importantly, in times such as these, I think Obama will be able to inspire the people. So while many problems will remain unsolved (not because of him, just the nature of the problems) his ability to inspire will allow for many people to love and hate him. I also think he will listen thoroughly to his advisors, and those against him, before making decisions. His nature to stay calm during a crisis (even the WSJ made this claim) will benefit his ability to make sound decisions. So while he may raise Brownsfan taxes, I think the country as a whole will benefit. And hopefully in the next 4-8 years the Republican party will re-establish itself, with a better vision, and hopefully learn from their mistakes.

 

Maybe Karl Rove was right, a war and economic downturn would force most of the partisanship in Washington to end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if one were to agree that Obama "pandered to hope", surely that is preferable to pandering to fear, suspicion, hatred, and intolerance.

 

And if Republicans agree with you that "selling security and hope" to his base is what won him the election, it is unlikely that they will re-establish themselves in four years, or eight, or perhaps ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name=DbPhoenix;51774

And if Republicans agree with you that "selling security and hope" to his base is what won him the election' date=' it is unlikely that they will re-establish themselves in four years, or eight, or perhaps ever.[/quote]

 

Republicans don't agree with me on that; Plato wrote that in The Republic. I'm sure Machiavelli mentioned it too. It's a common way to gain (or preserve) power over others. You sell security in an insecure world, and people will follow you. Leaders have been doing that for hundreds of years, not just Republicans and Democrats.

Edited by james_gsx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So far, the markets are not thrilled that Obama won.

 

;)

 

Who suggested that? Smart cookie.

 

 

Again, you're smarter than that Chris. Now, everyone knows if McCain won this same thing would have happened and you would have called it a technical move.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=8538&stc=1&d=1226035478

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=8539&stc=1&d=1226035478

 

I'm starting to sense I'm just going to piss everyone off in this thread. So maybe I should stop posting.

spynov6.jpg.2b15d33da32962c74620d5a0a01933c3.jpg

spyvol.jpg.c568e7ddf0537b74f2ca3b3b16e76f6c.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not that the market is not thrilled about Obama, I think now that the focus on elections is over, now it's back to earnings and economy that takes the front seat again. That means, the crisis ain't over, not that the Obama or McCain will make the crisis go away overnight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if its been mentioned, but markets are statistically more inclined to move higher under democrat presidents than repub. That was first noted in 1950's (analysis of stock market trends was the book I think - a classic) and has been true ever since, or so I've read - haven't actually tested that one.

Markets do climb the "wall of worry".

Torero's right, this was a case of sell on the news. I doubt the markets would have rallied from an low volume overbought condition should McCain have won.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, you're smarter than that Chris. Now, everyone knows if McCain won this same thing would have happened and you would have called it a technical move.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=8538&stc=1&d=1226035478

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=8539&stc=1&d=1226035478

 

I'm starting to sense I'm just going to piss everyone off in this thread. So maybe I should stop posting.

 

I disagree gsx. I honestly believe that if McCain won, the markets rally; and they fail on an Obama win. That's what I thought and I'm sticking to it.

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a little off topic but I hope Obama actually addresses the root of what caused this financial problem. I threw something together for my friends and family about what caused this crisis and attached it here. The first half of it is me explaining some things I'm sure you are all aware of, the 2nd part actually digs into the crisis.

Crisis1.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Be careful who you blame.   I can tell you one thing for sure.   Effective traders don’t blame others when things start to go wrong.   You can hang onto your tendency to play the victim, or the martyr… but if you want to achieve in trading, you have to be prepared to take responsibility.   People assign reasons to outcomes, whether based on internal or external factors.   When traders face losses, it's common for them to blame bad luck, poor advice, or other external factors, rather than reflecting on their own personal attributes like arrogance, fear, or greed.   This is a challenging lesson to grasp in your trading journey, but one that holds immense value.   This is called attribution theory. Taking responsibility for your actions is the key to improving your trading skills. Pause and ask yourself - What role did I play in my financial decisions?   After all, you were the one who listened to that source, and decided to act on that trade based on the rumour. Attributing results solely to external circumstances is what is known as having an ‘external locus of control’.   It's a concept coined by psychologist Julian Rotter in 1954. A trader with an external locus of control might say, "I made a profit because the markets are currently favourable."   Instead, strive to develop an "internal locus of control" and take ownership of your actions.   Assume that all trading results are within your realm of responsibility and actively seek ways to improve your own behaviour.   This is the fastest route to enhancing your trading abilities. A trader with an internal locus of control might proudly state, "My equity curve is rising because I am a disciplined trader who faithfully follows my trading plan." Author: Louise Bedford Source: https://www.tradinggame.com.au/
    • SELF IMPROVEMENT.   The whole self-help industry began when Dale Carnegie published How to Win Friends and Influence People in 1936. Then came other classics like Think And Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill, Awaken the Giant Within by Tony Robbins toward the end of the century.   Today, teaching people how to improve themselves is a business. A pure ruthless business where some people sell utter bullshit.   There are broke Instagrammers and YouTubers with literally no solid background teaching men how to be attractive to women, how to begin a start-up, how to become successful — most of these guys speaking nothing more than hollow motivational words and cliche stuff. They waste your time. Some of these people who present themselves as hugely successful also give talks and write books.   There are so many books on financial advice, self-improvement, love, etc and some people actually try to read them. They are a waste of time, mostly.   When you start reading a dozen books on finance you realize that they all say the same stuff.   You are not going to live forever in the learning phase. Don't procrastinate by reading bull-shit or the same good knowledge in 10 books. What we ought to do is choose wisely.   Yes. A good book can change your life, given you do what it asks you to do.   All the books I have named up to now are worthy of reading. Tim Ferriss, Simon Sinek, Robert Greene — these guys are worthy of reading. These guys teach what others don't. Their books are unique and actually, come from relevant and successful people.   When Richard Branson writes a book about entrepreneurship, go read it. Every line in that book is said by one of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time.   When a Chinese millionaire( he claims to be) Youtuber who releases a video titled “Why reading books keeps you broke” and a year later another one “My recommendation of books for grand success” you should be wise to tell him to jump from Victoria Falls.   These self-improvement gurus sell you delusions.   They say they have those little tricks that only they know that if you use, everything in your life will be perfect. Those little tricks. We are just “making of a to-do-list before sleeping” away from becoming the next Bill Gates.   There are no little tricks.   There is no success-mantra.   Self-improvement is a trap for 99% of the people. You can't do that unless you are very, very strong.   If you are looking for easy ways, you will only keep wasting your time forgetting that your time on this planet is limited, as alive humans that is.   Also, I feel that people who claim to read like a book a day or promote it are idiots. You retain nothing. When you do read a good book, you read slow, sometimes a whole paragraph, again and again, dwelling on it, trying to internalize its knowledge. You try to understand. You think. It takes time.   It's better to read a good book 10 times than 1000 stupid ones.   So be choosy. Read from the guys who actually know something, not some wannabe ‘influencers’.   Edit: Think And Grow Rich was written as a result of a project assigned to Napoleon Hill by Andrew Carnegie(the 2nd richest man in recent history). He was asked to study the most successful people on the planet and document which characteristics made them great. He did extensive work in studying hundreds of the most successful people of that time. The result was that little book.   Nowadays some people just study Instagram algorithms and think of themselves as a Dale Carnegie or Anthony Robbins. By Nupur Nishant, Quora Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/    
    • there is no avoiding loses to be honest, its just how the market is. you win some and hopefully more, but u do lose some. 
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.