Rachel noted on the show on Friday that the Dow Jones Industrial Average "hit a five-year high" at the end of the day's trading. It got me thinking about just how much we've seen the markets improve over President Obama's first term. Indeed, since Wall Street is closed today, it's easy to pause and take stock (so to speak).
I added some arrows to this chart, one showing where the Dow Jones closed when the president was first inaugurated, and the other showing where the index stands today. You'll notice that the arrow on the right is much higher, and that's because the value of the Dow grew by about 72% over the course of Obama's first term.
To put that in perspective, the New York Times recently found that over the last half-century, the president who's overseen the strongest performance on Wall Street was Bill Clinton, and the second best, by a wide margin, is Barack Obama.
As we talked about in April, this also suggests Obama is the worst socialist of all time. A soaring stock market, record high corporate profits, private sector job growth ... it's almost as if the president didn't listen to Karl Marx at all.
And as we discussed in October, the real fun begins when we reminisce about what Obama's Republican critics were saying in early 2009.
As long time readers may recall, the Wall Street Journal ran an entire editorial in early March 2009 arguing that the weak Dow Jones was a direct result of investors evaluating "Mr. Obama's agenda and his approach to governance."
Karl Rove and Lou Dobbs made the same case. So did Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Fred Barnes. For a short while, it was one of Mitt Romney's favorite talking points, too. Even John Boehner got in on the larger attack.
I don't think a strong stock market is necessarily proof of a robust economy, but the right shouldn't try to have it both ways. If a bear market in 2009 is, in the minds of conservatives, clear proof that Obama's agenda is misguided and dangerous, then soaring Wall Street indexes shouldn't be dismissed by those same detractors as politically irrelevant.
In 2004, a Bush cabinet official said job creation and GDP numbers matter, but "the stock market is ... the final arbiter" of economic success. If that's true, Republicans have some explaining to do.
Leave a Comment:
Lolol. I was waiting for this day...just to show all my Right wing friends how terribly wrong they've been with the whole 'socialist/fascist' meme.
It was getting old.
well if we can get them to raise wages, and hire more people, their profits would grow even more.
Isn't it just amazing that when stuffing banks full of money, when most people don't want it, it actually leaks out somewhere? Like the stock market?
The irony here is the celebration of rich people getting richer. Did anyone notice hedgies are still paying cap gains rate on their incomes? It's good to know that not only is Obama giving billions to banks, he's preserving his donor base. Sadly he still isn't doing much for the average homeowner.
Actually if you look back over history the markets have always done better under Democratic administrations Just like government spending has been lower under Democratic administrations since Carter.
Talking points are great things but sometimes fact gets in the way of ideology.
@Dragoon21b
You would think Dems would be trumpeting the facts every chance they get to remind voters which party is better at running the government. They are really awful at messaging.
Actually it is very simple. Wall Street is about confidence. The graph shows that investors were worried that Obama was going to do something that would adversely effect them. As soon as they figured out that it would be business as usual, their confidence returned.
Inspector,
Kinda glossing over that whole financial crisis of 2008, eh? Funny how GOP shills tend to forget that.
Lots of misunderstanding about Wall Street going on here. By damn near everybody.
A) "Stuffing banks full of money" - Huh? We SAVED the banks from collapsing because t hey didn't have ENOUGH money... Then they paid us back the money we lent them...
B) So now you are for cap gains being treated as regular income? HOORAY!!!
Have you looked at your investment statements? Do you even understand them? YOUR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO IS WORTH LESS NOT MORE THAN IT WAS IN 2008!!!!
Wall Street never likes hard left administrations or congresses.The exception is the Cronies who lobby for favorable taxation and regulation and get it.They give to campaign war chest and in return they get petted.A practice Obama himself said he would end in his bi-partisian soaring rhetoric of 2008.Turns out he's a politician's politician.The problem is even worse.Bush started this mess and Obama has extended it.The first TARP and stimulus bill signed by Bush, then Sen. Obama voted for yet he tries to distance himself from these failures.You media people put more english on a story than Minnesota Fats put on a cue-ball !!
When was the last time we had a hard left adminstration? Johnson? Truman? FDR?
The fundamental failure in your thinking, unless you are a fully prepared doomsday prepper who just can't wait to live in the wilderness on turnips, is the idea that the stimulus didn't work. Stimulus worked. It could have worked better if it were larger.
My mother was a victitm of the great depression. She told of the real hunger and deprivation that she and everyone she knew suffered prior to FDR's election.
Hey Will! That Share button is gone, and the FB button still doesn't work correctly (Chrome). Even with no Flash or video at the top of the post, the FB button goes in the div behind the copy, so can't press the button.
I had used the Share Button as a workaround because of the broken FB Button, but now that is gone.
Crony Capitalism is a form of Socialism. The bullies of the beltway pick the winners and you have to pay tribute to them to be left alone.Mongols like Ghengis Kahn rolled like that. Buncha sticky fingered varmits !!!
Republicans operate on the "Heads, I win; tails, you lose" rule.
Well, there is one thing that can be said for the Obama-Geithner regime: no banker need fear being inconvenienced. No matter how insulting they were to the country, world, and all economies and no matter how personally insulting they were to Obama himself, he just couldn't be troubled to have the least amount of responsibility or pride in dealing with his Masters.
WealthCare: Steady as she goes.
Those bankers were secretly for Obama when they donated millions to Karl Rove and others to defeat him? Or maybe you are suggesting the bankers were just stupid to donate so large to right wingers in 2012? If Obama is so gosh darn nice to bankers as you suggest, imagine how it would be if the other guy won, the one they were all-in behind...
Wall Street's success is proof that Obama's policies have been good for Wall Street. That is they have been good for the very top of our society. If you read carefully, however, you have to wonder just what the administration has done to deal with the declining middle class? We need a strong vibrant middle class. Is that possible in a world of robots and job outsourcing? Is America doomed to a Mexican style economy?
You could always stop buying Chinese made goods. But i dont anyone would, even if it meant saving the US from collapse.
Funny you should mention not buying Chinese goods, but last week there was piece on industrial robots and the recent reinvigoration of American manufacturing. It seems industrial robots are cheaper than Asian workers, making it cheaper to manufacture a lot of things in the US than in China.
We are manufacturing more stuff in America these days, but we haven't added many manufacturing jobs. Robots don't form unions, they don't ask for vacations, and they don't need health care. To be successful American business still needs customers. How do we get money into the hands of consumers? We all assume "jobs," but is "jobs" the real solution?
Obama deserves some credit for this with his stimulus policies, but remember, most of the credit for this rebound on the stock market should go to Bernanke. The Fed has been carrying the bulk of the load when it comes to stimulating the economy.
This wouldn't be necessary if Obama pushed for and got an increase in the minimum wage.
Sure Alva... piece of cake... Republicans love workers... see you at the signing ceremony...
Even better than this chart would be one that superimposes the unemployment rate -- showing that as the market goes up, the unemployment rate goes reciprocally down. So maybe it isn't just about Wall Street after all, ye doubters.
A "five year high"? Who in the hell is excited over that? I'd just like to see a return to the good 'ol 1990's, please!!
The other side of this topic is that those who keep calling Obama a socialist don't know the definition of the term.