US election-Investment opportunity?

srcandas

I was looking at the impact of the US election. I concluded that if Obama wins there will be a slight positive reaction based on stability and if Romney wins there will be a lesser positive reaction while everyone awaits to see his plan!

But I am interested in seeing how big political changes influence markets.

Anyone care to offer any thoughts? :beer:

Lokolo

Green tech = boost if Barack gets it

Green tech = massive drops if Mitt "Wake the F*** Up" Romney wins

N1AK

Be very careful about assuming too much. Firstly, chances are that markets have already adjusted to account for the risks inherent in obvious changes. If their is a high chance the green tech sector will be badly hurt by Romney winning then the prices likely reflect it for example. Secondly, what candidates campaign on and what happens if they win aren't always, or even often, in direct relation.

I honestly don't think that either candidate will affect the entire stock market greatly however I think a strong win for either candidate may help. Investing in American has been risky for years because of political deadlock; having a leader who can effectively 'lead' could help the economy and encourage greater investment and more growth.

Personally I have kept 2/5ths of my portfolio in US based trackers and don't expect to change that ratio for a few years.

srcandas

N1AK wrote: »

Be very careful about assuming too much. Firstly, chances are that markets have already adjusted to account for the risks inherent in obvious changes.

Are you suggesting that the market has already decided the winner? The market can try and predict just like you and I but it cannot take two positions at the same time. That said I believe Obama will win just, but I won't be buying into green tech

I think you are right about a 'strong win' but that looks very unlikely. And also about little movement

But should be a great show and good TV :beer:

JohnRo

I very much doubt that it matters one jot who wins, other than to those invested in the puerile trench warfare of flag waving party politics.

srcandas

JohnRo wrote: »

I very much doubt that it matters one jot who wins, other than to those invested in the puerile trench warfare of flag waving party politics.

:rotfl: John I think you may be right except for when MR unleashes nukes on Iran. Bet shorting the market a day before will pay well

JohnRo

I don't know how much more control AIPAC would have over Romney, I don't think he'll win, I don't want him to either for the reason you mention but that doesn't mean I rate obama. I'm sure AIPAC has a little less control with obama in the hot seat though.

Perhaps they're planning on using seized I-ran oil money as they did in I-raq, to help prop up the US economy, maybe it'll help service the interest on the national debt and delay total bankruptcy for a few days longer. Who knows.

Ifts

Saw this over on citywire.co.uk:

US election: 11 graphs on how the $10 trillion club view Obama & Romney

http://citywire.co.uk/money/us-election-11-graphs-on-how-the-10-trillion-club-view-obama-and-romney/a630768#i=1

Nicholas-bloody-Parsons

Its a bit of a farce; like electing the captain of the Titanic. Romney and Obama are two sides of the same a*s cheeks. Makes no difference; full steam ahead into the iceberg which is the national debt and off fiscal cliff.

JohnRo

Shades of 2000, maybe they're trying to engineer a result again.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/04/florida-early-voting_n_2073119.html

most telling comment for me is

"This kind of thing would not happen if only land owning free white males were permitted to vote."

innovate

It's hard to comprehend that in the US people shouldn't be able to vote if they wish to. You'd associate this sort of thing with some corrupt dictatorship, not a nation that likes to stress it's a democracy.