Markets want clear decision from pres...

Markets want clear decision from presidential vote

There are 56 comments on the Reuters story from Nov 6, 2012, titled Markets want clear decision from presidential vote. In it, Reuters reports that:

Traders and investors seem to agree on one thing about Tuesday's U.S. presidential election: The markets want a clear winner by Wednesday morning.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Reuters.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#1 Nov 6, 2012



Obama is the most Destructive & Divisive POS president we've ever seen. The Markets and all good Americans want his azz GONE!

We've had enough of Obama's million Excuses and Lies.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#2 Nov 6, 2012

Prediction: Romney 325, Obama 213

By Dick Morris
11/05/12

Yup. That’s right. A landslide for Romney approaching the magnitude of Obama’s against McCain. That’s my prediction.

On Sunday, we changed our clocks. On Tuesday, we’ll change our president.

Romney will win the states McCain carried in 2008, plus: Florida, Indiana, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Iowa, Ohio, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Minnesota.


In the popular vote, Romney will win by more than 5 points.

The Obama campaign made the following key mistakes:

• It bet the farm on negative ads in swing states. It didn’t realize that Mitt’s convention speech and the three debates would give him the chance to live down the charges and demonstrate — through facts and his demeanor — that they were baseless.

• Obama had no Plan B if the negatives didn’t work. He never really laid in a convincing defense of his record, except to recall the mess that he inherited and to try to make people believe things were better. He had no vision for his second term, except more of same. He never moved to the center — the shift that reelected Bill Clinton.

• By focusing on the negative, Obama sacrificed first his personal popularity and then his dignity and presidentiality. No longer was he the hope and the change. He became nothing more than a nasty partisan, throwing epithets at his rival. A president does not let himself be quoted as saying that his opponent is a “bullsh--ter” or that voting is the best “revenge.” Even his dress was wrong. Instead of appearing in a dark suit, he dressed in an open-neck white shirt, trying to be everyman but succeeding only in not looking like a president.

• Since he offered nothing more than a negative campaign and a grab-bag of special-interest pleadings for single women, unions, college kids and minorities, Obama failed to inspire the turnout that he needed.

• In the first debate, Obama was terrible. We’ll likely find out what his excuses are after the polls close. Did he have the flu? Was it the altitude? Had he, as Bob Woodward suggested, just received a dose of bad news? Why did he appear distracted?

• Obama should have gotten the facts out quickly about Benghazi rather than let them drip, drip, drip out over six weeks. He could then have handled the crisis and won points for determination and toughness. Instead, to the very end, he looked like he was covering up the fact of a terrorist attack.

Because he was.

None of this should take away from Romney’s brilliant campaign. By staying on the economy and not being tempted into side issues like Libya, Mitt kept the focus where it needed to be and never let up. His campaign’s foray into Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Wisconsin was vital to his chances of victory. More about what Mitt did right in my post-election column on Thursday. But for now, let’s celebrate the new president we are about to elect.

http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-mo... -

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#3 Nov 6, 2012
Obama win would sink markets

By David Hill
10/30/12


What will individual investors do next week?

I am speaking of genuine personal stock and bond owners, ordinary people who manage their own investment portfolios and retirement accounts, not institutional investors and account managers.

I fear that many will make big mistakes. If the election outcome hangs in the balance over the weekend and into Monday’s trading, it would not surprise me to see many sell off equities and hold cash or buy gold.

If Obama wins, I think many individual investors will immediately sell out of all equities, fearing that the recession will continue unabated. If that occurs, institutional investors might have to follow suit. An Obama win could do far more damage to our markets next Wednesday than Sandy ever mustered.


http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/david-h...
whosaid

Menard, TX

#4 Nov 6, 2012
The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them...

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#5 Nov 6, 2012


An Explanation into Why Obama Sucks

Barack Obama the not-so-happy warrior

By GLENN THRUSH
11/5/12

Barack Obama’s enthusiasm gap began at home.

There is a surprisingly simple explanation for Obama’s up-and-down performance as a candidate during his reelection grind in 2012, for those lackluster TV appearances, for that epic flop Oct. 3 on the Denver debate stage that might yet cost him his presidency on Tuesday.

Until the final sprint, he just wasn’t that into it.

The key to understanding the Obama enigma of 2012, according to more than a dozen Obama associates interviewed by POLITICO during the campaign, is that:

1) The president enthusiastically approved the message of relentless attacks against Mitt Romney.

2) But until the last week of the campaign — when optimism made a major comeback — Obama executed it mirthlessly and mechanically, at times reinforcing the “meh” vibe of his supportive but uninspired base.

3) Obama’s pollster, Joel Benenson, told him early on that hope and change couldn’t be recycled in a country enduring three years of grim recovery, and the campaign’s highly effective June and July anti-Romney blitz in battlegrounds was brutally effective.

That unease with his own campaign not only drained energy from his reelection effort but could have nasty, knock-on consequences if he wins.

A scorched-earth victor won’t do much to heal Washington’s divisions, with a probable GOP House and Democratic Senate set to be at loggerheads, regardless of who wins the presidency.

“I get why he had to do what he did. It was smart politically. But he’s become the embodiment of the partisanship he once decried,” said The New York Times’s David Brooks, one of the few journalists to strike up a real relationship with Obama during his first term.“The dissonance [between Obama in 2008 and 2012] is so obvious.… Can you think of a president who ran more different campaigns the first and second times? I’ve tried. I can’t.”


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/833...
Sheik Yerbouti

Richmond, IN

#6 Nov 6, 2012
The laughing liberal wrote:
An Explanation into Why Obama Sucks
Barack Obama the not-so-happy warrior
By GLENN THRUSH
11/5/12
Barack Obama’s enthusiasm gap began at home.
There is a surprisingly simple explanation for Obama’s up-and-down performance as a candidate during his reelection grind in 2012, for those lackluster TV appearances, for that epic flop Oct. 3 on the Denver debate stage that might yet cost him his presidency on Tuesday.
Until the final sprint, he just wasn’t that into it.
The key to understanding the Obama enigma of 2012, according to more than a dozen Obama associates interviewed by POLITICO during the campaign, is that:
1) The president enthusiastically approved the message of relentless attacks against Mitt Romney.
2) But until the last week of the campaign — when optimism made a major comeback — Obama executed it mirthlessly and mechanically, at times reinforcing the “meh” vibe of his supportive but uninspired base.
3) Obama’s pollster, Joel Benenson, told him early on that hope and change couldn’t be recycled in a country enduring three years of grim recovery, and the campaign’s highly effective June and July anti-Romney blitz in battlegrounds was brutally effective.
That unease with his own campaign not only drained energy from his reelection effort but could have nasty, knock-on consequences if he wins.
A scorched-earth victor won’t do much to heal Washington’s divisions, with a probable GOP House and Democratic Senate set to be at loggerheads, regardless of who wins the presidency.
“I get why he had to do what he did. It was smart politically. But he’s become the embodiment of the partisanship he once decried,” said The New York Times’s David Brooks, one of the few journalists to strike up a real relationship with Obama during his first term.“The dissonance [between Obama in 2008 and 2012] is so obvious.… Can you think of a president who ran more different campaigns the first and second times? I’ve tried. I can’t.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/833...
What will you paid per post morons do once your boy is defeated?

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#7 Nov 6, 2012
Sheik Yerbouti wrote:
<quoted text>
What will you paid per post morons do once your boy is defeated?



We all Hope Fake Marine, Sh*tplate and other morons like yourself will just vanish.


:)

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#8 Nov 6, 2012
Some Jackass Dirty Tricks Foiled: Judge Orders Obama Mural Covered At Northeast Philadelphia Polling Place

November 6, 2012

PHILADELPHIA (CBS)– Local Republicans went to court to have a judge order a mural of President Obama covered up at the Ben Franklin Elementary School polling place in the Northeast Philadelphia.

“The Obama campaign is 0-for-2 today in trying to get away with their disgusting attempts to suppress Republican voices in Philadelphia,” Chairman Rob Gleason said.“Whether it’s blocking Republican Election Day workers form doing their job or violating Pennsylvania law by electioneering in the polling place, it is clear the Obama campaign has taken their campaign in the gutter to manipulate this election however they can.

Based on the Obama campaign’s behavior today, it certainly raises the question: what are Democrats doing in the polls that they are working so hard to shield folks from monitoring this election?”

Officials with the City Commissioner’s Office say the mural has since been covered.

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2012/11/06/j...

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#9 Nov 6, 2012
More Obama LIES

Grassley demands waivers and recusals on former lobbyists in the Obama administration

Updated: Friday, June 12th, 2009
By Angie Drobnic Holan

It's been about three months since we gave a Promise Broken to Barack Obama's pledge to restrict former lobbyists from serving in his administration. We found that the administration has granted waivers to several former lobbyists, allowing them to serve. The administration also allows recusals, where former lobbyists simply recuse themselves from discussions concerning whatever interest it is for which they used to lobby. The recusals have not been made public, and we don't know how many have been issued.

We haven't seen anything to make us change our ruling. But there's been a new development: Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa recently sent a letter asking for accountability about the recusals and waivers.(Grassley is one of four senators who voted against the nomination of William Lynn as a deputy secretary for defense; Lynn was a lobbyist for the defense contractor Raytheon.)

Grassley has asked Robert Cusick, director of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, to require the Obama administration to release all waivers and recusals as they are issued and post the documentation to the Internet. Grassley said Cusick has that authority under the Ethics in Government Act.

"The American people deserve a full accounting of all waivers and recusals to better understand who is running the government and whether the administration is adhering to its promise to be open, transparent, and accountable," Grassley wrote. "I urge you to take immediate action to make any waivers and recusals public and ask for your response to my requests no later than June 19, 2009." (You can read Grassley's letter in its entirety here.)

We'll be watching for a full accounting of waivers and recusals in the Obama administration. Meanwhile, we're sticking to our ruling: Promise Broken.

Sources:

Letter from Sen. Charles Grassley to Office of Government Ethics Director Robert Cusick , June 10, 2009


http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promi...

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#10 Nov 6, 2012
The Obameter = PROMISE BROKEN

Allow five days of public comment before signing bills

To reduce bills rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them, Obama "will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days."

Still no "Sunlight before Signing"

Updated: Wednesday, February 4th, 2009
By Angie Drobnic Holan

When President Obama signed his first bill without posting it to the Web for five days of public comment, we gave him his first Promise Broken.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promi...

Since: Oct 08

Alpharetta, GA

#11 Nov 6, 2012
the last time obama was elected, the market crashed for weeks, right up until he has installed as pres. probably happen again. stock market players figured rightly that he would be bad for business, investment, taxes etc.

If you've got a business, you didn't build that, somebody else made that happen.

this from a man that has never had a job in a real business.
conservative crapola

Allentown, PA

#12 Nov 6, 2012
The laughing liberal wrote:
rugby 600+ crampaign lies. con-nie filth will lie at all costs.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#13 Nov 6, 2012
"Reduce earmarks to 1994 levels"

The Obameter = PROMISE BROKEN

"Barack Obama is committed to returning earmarks to less than $7.8 billion a year, the level they were at before 1994."

Sources: "The Change We Need in Washington"


Earmarks continue unabated

Updated: Friday, February 19th, 2010 | By Louis Jacobson

The final numbers are in, and as expected President Barack Obama was unable to keep his promise to hold earmarks to less than $7.8 billion a year, the level they were at before 1994.

An earmark is a requirement that money approved by Congress be spent in a specific way at the request of a lawmaker. Critics have long argued that earmarks are likelier to serve the interest of a particular congressional district or constituent group than the national good. That's why Obama promised to curb their use.

On Feb. 17, 2010, Taxpayers for Common Sense, a leading watchdog group, released its study of congressional earmarking for fiscal year 2010. For that fiscal year, the group says, appropriations bills contained 9,499 congressional earmarks worth $15.9 billion. The group's "apples-to-apples" comparison found that earmarking increased slightly from the prior year -- from $15.6 billion to $15.9 billion.

So the group's study found that the amount earmarked in fiscal year 2010 was more than twice as large as it was in 1994.

And according to the Taxpayers for Common Sense study, the value of earmarks in fiscal year 2010 was well above $7.8 billion. So our rating remains Promise Broken.

Sources:

Taxpayers for Common Sense, "TCS FY2010 Earmark Analysis: Apples-to-Apples Increase in Earmarks," Feb. 17, 2010

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promi...

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#14 Nov 6, 2012
Sheik Yerbouti wrote:
<quoted text>
What will you paid per post morons do once your boy is defeated?
Flash: MORE GOOD NEWS……INITIAL NUMBERS FROM HAMILTON AND BUTLER COUNTY OHIO………both counties are performing at 2010 and exceeding 2004 numbers that went to Bush, obama’s numbers are down by thousands of votes projected by a lying MSM.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#15 Nov 6, 2012



"If you have a Business, YOU DIDN'T BUILD THAT! "
Government Did!
- Jackass Obama
conservative crapola

Allentown, PA

#16 Nov 6, 2012
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>
fux pretend news chum for the suckers.

Bwahahahahahahahahaha

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#17 Nov 6, 2012
Obama: The Filthy Hypocrite without a messsage


Even Brooks, a right-leaning centrist whose critique annoys Obama’s team, acknowledges that Obama’s 2008 theme needed a makeover for 2012, given the initial lack of enthusiasm of his base and the country’s larger anxieties about the possibility of a long, slow national decline.

But the absence of such a powerful motivating message has contributed to the sense, among political professionals and regular voters, that Obama downsized his own aspirations to hold onto power, something he railed against in 2008.

Clearly that perception had an impact on Obama’s attitude, aides privately acknowledge.

“[Obama] found his voice in 2008. That voice has, for the most part, been missing in 2012,” said CNN contributor David Gergen, who counseled presidents Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton.

“This isn’t the kind of politics this man likes to practice.… Another factor is that he’s a moody person."

Obama biographer Jonathan Alter, who has been traveling with the president during the final week of barnstorming in the battleground Midwest, understands why Obama couldn’t rerun his 2008 campaign. But he thinks it was a major mistake to cede the optimistic high ground to Romney for much of the race.

“At this point, it’s a question of why he wasn’t making this argument, with this much passion, a lot earlier on.… I think he was so worried about over-promising, he wound up under-promising and under-performing,” Alter said after an Obama campaign stop in Ohio.
“I get where he was coming from. If you took a ‘Morning in America’ campaign you would have gotten hammered, but a hope-and-change message and more sober approach aren’t mutually exclusive,” he added.“They may have gone too far in the other direction. There weren’t enough aspirational ideas for a second term.”

“These guys do get pissy. That happens to all presidents running for a second term, but it’s especially true for Obama, given the kind of campaign he ran the first time,” said Richard Ben Cramer, author of “What It Takes,” a landmark chronicle of the trials of the 1988 presidential candidates, including President George H.W. Bush, a diffident politician accustomed to the trappings of power.

“It’s very hard to top the presidency.… It’s really hard to get into the mode of,‘Well, I have to talk to these guys in Medina, Ohio,’” he added.“For 3½ years, nobody tells the president,‘You f—ed up,’ and all of a sudden people are telling him what to do.

The tension took its toll. Obama infamously told a Nevada campaign worker that his Denver debate prep was “a drag,”

The reaction among the party faithful, and some of Obama’s own staff and volunteers, was rage, a sense that they were slaving 15-hour days, building a billion-dollar juggernaut — all for a man who hadn’t bothered to show up when it mattered most at the first debate.

“It’s not that he didn’t care, it’s that he was confused by the competing priorities,” said a Democrat close to Obama of his confounding performance in Denver.“That got him down.”

Reporters who have been with the president were less surprised by the flop. Obama’s performance on the trail has been so variable that reporters covering him seldom know quite what to expect.

“So for all you moms and kids out there, don’t worry, somebody’s finally getting tough on Big Bird,” Obama said, stumbling over the words.“Who knew that he was driving our deficit? So he decided we’re going after Big Bird, Elmo’s making a run for the border and Oscar’s hiding out in a trash can. Gov. Romney wants to let Wall Street run wild again, but he’s going to bring down the hammer on Sesame Street. Look, that is not leadership, that’s salesmanship. We can’t afford it.”

The contrast between that kind of message and the speech he delivered on Nov. 4, 2008, couldn’t have been more stark.

It's time for Real Change. Mitt Romney 2012!!!

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/833...
Aria

United States

#18 Nov 6, 2012
The market is up 140 right now and the polls haven't closed yet. Your article is, therefore, lame.
Sheik Yerbouti

Warrington, PA

#19 Nov 6, 2012
The laughing liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
We all Hope Fake Marine, Sh*tplate and other morons like yourself will just vanish.
:)
We will be here long after you right wingers are forced to go back to teabagging each other!

Since: Oct 08

Tucker, GA

#20 Nov 6, 2012
Aria wrote:
The market is up 140 right now and the polls haven't closed yet. Your article is, therefore, lame.
if Romney wins, the stock market will boom tomorrow, if obama wins, it will crash and burn. business people and investors know how obama feels about them.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Al Gore Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 11 min IB DaMann 60,194
News Al Gore's Daughter in Court After Arrest at Pip... 22 min Nu Wor Order 2
News Vice President's Daughter Karenna Gore Arrested... 1 hr Anita Bryant s Jihad 14
News Why Don't Jews and Asian-Americans Like the Rep... Jun 17 USidiotRaceMAKEWO... 5
News After 10 Years, 'An Inconvenient Truth' Is Stil... Jun 1 Into The Night 205
News Obama says climate change a matter of national ... (Dec '08) May '16 Be Careful What Y... 465
News Ben Affleck: Republicans 'had a chance' (Oct '12) May '16 Ronald RayGone 79
More from around the web