4 ms·

Yup, but the two events which US did face on it's soil (Pearl Harbour and 9/11) did boost the support for the sitting presidents though.

SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
Wasn't that due to steady, determined leadership? Hasn't the current commander in chief already pushed responsibility for this issue off onto his VP?
- BoorishBears 7y ago
  The conference that just ended was a big win for him and the market is responding well so far. He didn't necessarily take responsibility of anything, but he managed to suppress his usual behavior well enough for the people behind him to assure people
  - SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
    I sincerely and absolutely hope that he manages to pull himself together to see America through this storm. I doubt it, but I sincerely hope it happens.
  - joezydeco 7y ago
    How does the DJIA prevent future deaths from 2019-nCov?
    - BoorishBears 7y ago
      Kind of hard to unpack such a vague/terse comment... If you’re trying to say “who cares about money when lives are on the line”... in this case a strong, life-saving, response begets a positive market response. People drying en-masse is not good for the economy, or anyone really. Also, recessions are generally not good for people’s health.
      - joezydeco 7y ago
        I’m saying that using a leading indicator like the stock market is no metric for declaring that things are getting better. Trump going up there and making a bunch of positive statements means zero right now. The public and private sectors have no reason to trust the federal government during this situation.
        BoorishBears 7y ago
        > I’m saying that using a leading indicator like the stock market is no metric for declaring that things are getting better. Literally no one but yourself has implied the stock market going well means Coronavirus is going away. That’s so absurd I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed something was lost in your wording... The comment chain is about the effect of the virus on electability of an incumbent. The stock market’s performance is very much tied to that and while not the only indicator of an election's outcome, is a pretty strong motivator of political change. On that note... since his speech a ton of bad news has come out, some his claims were proven false, the fed hit the nuclear options, and futures hit a circuit breaker Sunday night which is a terrible indicator for this morning’s market. So it’s still a strong factor in his electability, just not in the direction it was Friday evening.
- yongjik 7y ago
  I'm too young to remember Pearl Harbor, but 9/11 definitely had nothing to do with "steady, determined leadership." On the other hand, it's much easier to rally people when your villain has an actual human face.
  - chanmad29 7y ago
    Not too hard for Trump to manufacture a villain here, if he had to- immigration etc..

SketchySeaBeast 7y ago

Wasn't that due to steady, determined leadership? Hasn't the current commander in chief already pushed responsibility for this issue off onto his VP?

BoorishBears 7y ago
The conference that just ended was a big win for him and the market is responding well so far. He didn't necessarily take responsibility of anything, but he managed to suppress his usual behavior well enough for the people behind him to assure people
- SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
  I sincerely and absolutely hope that he manages to pull himself together to see America through this storm. I doubt it, but I sincerely hope it happens.
- joezydeco 7y ago
  How does the DJIA prevent future deaths from 2019-nCov?
  - BoorishBears 7y ago
    Kind of hard to unpack such a vague/terse comment... If you’re trying to say “who cares about money when lives are on the line”... in this case a strong, life-saving, response begets a positive market response. People drying en-masse is not good for the economy, or anyone really. Also, recessions are generally not good for people’s health.
    - joezydeco 7y ago
      I’m saying that using a leading indicator like the stock market is no metric for declaring that things are getting better. Trump going up there and making a bunch of positive statements means zero right now. The public and private sectors have no reason to trust the federal government during this situation.
      - BoorishBears 7y ago
        > I’m saying that using a leading indicator like the stock market is no metric for declaring that things are getting better. Literally no one but yourself has implied the stock market going well means Coronavirus is going away. That’s so absurd I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed something was lost in your wording... The comment chain is about the effect of the virus on electability of an incumbent. The stock market’s performance is very much tied to that and while not the only indicator of an election's outcome, is a pretty strong motivator of political change. On that note... since his speech a ton of bad news has come out, some his claims were proven false, the fed hit the nuclear options, and futures hit a circuit breaker Sunday night which is a terrible indicator for this morning’s market. So it’s still a strong factor in his electability, just not in the direction it was Friday evening.
yongjik 7y ago
I'm too young to remember Pearl Harbor, but 9/11 definitely had nothing to do with "steady, determined leadership." On the other hand, it's much easier to rally people when your villain has an actual human face.
- chanmad29 7y ago
  Not too hard for Trump to manufacture a villain here, if he had to- immigration etc..