Obama Gives America One Of Worst Post-Presidential Market Plunges In History As Businesses And Investors Say Sayonara To Economic Growth, Jobs

Businesses and investors told America what they thought of their idiotic choice for president yesterday with the biggest market plunge in a year the day after Obama was reelected.

The Dow dropped 313 points, or 2.4% of its total value on the trading day immediately following the Obama reelection.

Interestingly, Obama has two of the five worst market plunges on the day after a presidential election, and you’ve got to go back to the 1930s and 1940s to see worse market disasters:

Other post-election plunges in the stock market
Posted: Nov 07, 2012 2:35 PM PST Updated: Nov 07, 2012 2:35 PM PST
By The Associated Press

The Dow Jones industrial average fell 2.4 percent, giving it its fifth worst one-day drop following a U.S. presidential election. The biggest, in 2008, came in the midst of the financial crisis on the day after President Barack Obama won his first term. Here are the worst five one-day post-election drops since 1900, according to Bespoke Investment Group:

Election Day: Nov. 4, 2008.

Winner: Barack Obama.

One-day loss in the Dow Jones industrial average: 5 percent.

Election Day: Nov. 8, 1932.

Winner: Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

One-day loss in the Dow Jones industrial average: 4.5 percent.

Election Day: Nov. 2, 1948

Winner: Harry Truman

One-day loss in the Dow Jones industrial average: 3.8 percent.

Election Day: Nov. 5. 1940

Winner: Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

One-day loss in the Dow Jones industrial average: 2.4 percent.

Election Day:

Winner: Barack Obama.

One-day loss in the Dow Jones industrial average: 2.4 percent.

Notice that all five of these turd presidents whom the market rejected were Democrats.  And notice that the only OTHER winner of two “Turd of the Year Awards for Market Disaster” was the guy who kept America in the Great Depression.  You would have thought that America would have learned from the LAST time we got Obama and the market collapsed the most in presidential election history.  Oh, well.  Why not just blame this time on Bush, too?

I don’t know.  Maybe my schadenfreude slip is showing, and maybe I just don’t give a flying damn what happens given that I know Obama will plunge America into the worst economic disaster in the country’s history and figure it might as well happen sooner rather than later.  That and the fact that, given that America voted to collapse in voting for Obama, we might as well get what we actually voted for.  I mean, we sure as hell didn’t get what we voted for the LAST time we voted for “Mister hope and change,” did we?  Rather, we got four years of blame and excuses, which doesn’t even kind of sound like hope and change.

If liberal ideologue MSNBC moron Chris Matthews can be glad Hurricane Sandy hit America so Obama could win, well, I suppose I can pretty much be happy for damn near any disaster and liberals can’t bitch without being hypocrites.  Mind you, that won’t stop them from bitching at me BECAUSE THEY ARE HYPOCRITES.

A lot of your more stupid Americans are still blaming Bush for the terrible economy while exonerating Obama, according to exit poll data.  Don’t worry if you think that trend can’t possibly continue: because those people will be just as stupid in four years when they’ll STILL be blaming Bush for the bad economy as they are now.  Apparently Bush is to stupid people what Bogeyman is to naive children.

The beast is coming after the economy completely collapses.  I really want to make sure everybody knows that.

In other news the deadline for America to fall off the fiscal cliff that Obama set up for us is January 1, 2013.

It gives me great comfort to know that I’ll be singing praises to the name of Jesus Christ in heaven before very much longer.  And it frankly bothers me very little that on that day liberals on earth will be simultaneously cursing the day they ever heard the name of Barack Hussein Obama.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

13 Responses to “Obama Gives America One Of Worst Post-Presidential Market Plunges In History As Businesses And Investors Say Sayonara To Economic Growth, Jobs”

  1. JF Says:

    I feel as though they will never realize it was him, they will continue to blame someone else.

  2. shelley Says:

    To save my soul, I cannot fathom what this country is thinking. I am so glad that there are still people like you defending their beliefs without apology. I agree that fear is going to replace their pompous attitudes quite soon. I want to say I will laugh in their faces, but honestly, I feel sorry for them. Thanks for the blog. I love it.

  3. Dog Walker Says:

    I sold a good bit yesterday on market open. Went to cash. The administration ain’t no friend of capitalism or friend of capital markets. Then if that ain’t bad enough, they ain’t no friends to the rule of raw either. So what troubles me is that wolves will enter the exchanges and ravage. Millionaires will be born out of a rule change or a glitch. There will be no culpability.

    These are people that hate that other people worked and saved and invested. They look at that and say “oh, that money should go to my retirement.”

    I am going to go hang out with a buddy of mine today. We are thinking about taking a resolution of not talking or thinking politics.

    Maybe I will start tomorrow.

  4. Lawrence Mulder Says:

    It just makes you wonder how bad it has to get before people realize they made the wrong choice, not only once, but TWICE! *face palm*

  5. Michael Eden Says:

    I want to say I will laugh in their faces, but honestly, I feel sorry for them.


    Your attitude is probably the most like Jesus looking at the people who were murdering Him and said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

    That’s a big reason, also, why I’m trying to get away from political blogging for the sake of political blogging: it affects your attitude about your opponents in ways that are not conducive to a flourishing Christian life. You cannot help over time to increasingly feel that your opponents are enemies whose arguments need to be destroyed and whose goals must be defeated. And that person is just no longer a person to you because you’re too busy fighting against them.

    I would like to be able to talk about political events and politics from a religious perspective that merely accepts the reality of evil ideas and agendas without making that my diatribe and defeating it my purpose. Rather what I want to do is write about political realities and ask, what does what is happening have to do with shaping the future – and particularly the future as recorded in Bible prophecy?

    And I agree with your assessment, that “fear” is increasingly going to become the most important causal factor governing what will happen politically and economically in both America and the rest of the world. We will increasingly see the marked increase of fear and uncertainty under this president.

  6. Michael Eden Says:


    That is my sense, as well.

    I get so many comments from liberals that reveal this trait: the ability to think however they want.

    A recent example was Stacey Dash. She is a black actress who endorsed Romney in a Tweet. And the left came unhinged in attacking her (because at their cores they are fascists who rabidly despise free speech and the right to consience). One of the primary ways they attacked her was to attack her appearance. They said she was ugly and called her an old hag.

    That woman is stunningly beautiful. What the hell are they talking about? And it turns out she endorsed Romney, and therefore she has to be an ugly old hag, and therefore she is in fact an ugly hold hag. I see that kind of thinking (or lack thereof) over and over again. And the simple fact of the matter is that I would NEVER do that. Yes, there are a lot of liberal actresses whose political views I hate. But I have the ability to recognize and affirm reality, so while I hate their politics I am somehow still capable of recognizing that they are beautiful women. A lot of liberals, however, just rabibly believe their talking points to the extent that if reality gets in the way of the liberal talking points, then so much the worse for reality.

  7. Michael Eden Says:

    Lawrence Mulder,

    I’m looking at this as an act of God. Because if it hadn’t been for Hurricane Sandy, which both broke Romney’s momentum, took him off the headlines for six days, and allowed Obama to parade around as the commander-in-chief, even most liberals agree that Romney would have won the election.

    I think of God hardening Pharaoh’s heart and I shudder. It’s time for “God damn America” to face the pain for the morally depraved condition of its because.

    There comes that moment when a nation is fully ripe for judgment. This is, in the words of Obama, “our time.”

    In the book of Revelation you see over and over a description of the people. It doesn’t matter what happens or how bad things get; they keep shaking their fists at God and they WILL NOT believe or repent. That’s what we saw on Tuesday.

  8. lawrence mulder Says:

    At the very least, Mitt Romney got to show the world he is a good a decent man. He probably wouldn’t have been able to solve all our country’s pressing issues and he didn’t deserve that heartache. I’m sure God has a better plan for him. In the mean time, we need to continue to ensure work to make America the best place it can be until Christ returns. Since we don’t know when that will be, we should live like it will be tomorrow and fight for his values in America like it will be never.

  9. Dog Walker Says:

    I started getting emails from this clashdaily website. I cam’t figure out who signed me on to it. It wasn’t you was it Mr Eden?


  10. Michael Eden Says:

    Dog Walker,

    Nope. I’ve never done that on this blog in my life, don’t even know how to do it if I wanted to, and don’t even forward very many links to my closets friends and family members.

    I didn’t have time to read the whole article, but I did skip to the end to see the conclusion and agreed. Should we give to the poor? Absolutely! Should we allow evil people to steal from us so we have to replace what they steal by depriving our own familes of what we could have and should have provided for them? Not. Thanks for the link!

  11. Michael Eden Says:

    lawrence mulder,

    I was actually rather surprised at what a truly good and caring man Mitt Romney repeatedly proved himself to be. I was surprised by all the many examples of people who came forward and told their stories about a Mitt Romney who helped them or cared for them and never asked for anything in return.

    Obama doesn’t have ANY stories like that. It is actually amazing how detached and distant Obama has actually been from people.

    And yet 80% say that Obama cares more about them while only 20% said Romney cares more about them.

    My view is that I don’t WANT a president caring about me. The last thing I would ever want is for the White House to be discussing “Michael Eden.” In fact I’d be QUITE concerned if I found out I was being discussed or considered. Maybe it’s just me.

    All I want is to have a president who cares about the actual economic health of this nation and therefore makes it easier for businesses and investors to create more investments and more jobs and build up the GDP of America and grow this nation.

    But the sentiment above is meaningless and all people want is the illusion that Obama goes to bed each night thinking about them personally. That’s why Obama is still president.

  12. lawrence mulder Says:

    “…and that’s why Obama is still president.”

    Well, that and conservatives not enthused enough to vote didn’t get out, thereby boting for Obama. Romney won the election on principle. Americans knew who the best man for the job was, but for some reason they either felt he had the election won and that their vote didn’t matter, or they were still moaning about Romney being the nominee and refused to support him. Either way, the GOP lost on votes. And I don’t think that means the GOP needs to redefine their party or their platform. It means they need to do a better job of getting out the vote. Its that simple. Would addressing different demographics and bringing them to the party hurt? Of course not, but it isn’t a matter of having to redefine the party to do so.

  13. Dog Walker Says:

    Is this plausible?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: