Cramer Blaming Obama

[windsurf]

I'm sitting here listening to Cramer for the first time in months and here he is blaming the current President for the state of the stock market. I'm switching him off and hope I never ever get the morbid urge to listen to this idiot again.

 

[Dawg52]

I'm sitting here listening to Cramer for the first time in months and here he is blaming the current President for the state of the stock market. I'm switiching him off and hope I never ever get the morbid urge to listen to this idiot again.

Turn on The Nightly Business Report on PBS. On right now, here anyway. It's the only business report that doesn't try to sensationalize the news. Oh yes......Cramer is just another CNBC idiot.

 

[lightwaves]

I agree 100%. I am disgusted by him now. I guess he just wants Wall Street to stay the way it has been. As I said in an earlier post on another thread...the more these fools on Wall Street squeal, the more bullish I get. Obama's change movement is starting to bite on the Street and I could not be happier about that.

 

[W2R]

I agree with you and suggest you do not listen to Cramer, except for entertainment value. Most of us seem to agree that he is not good for financial advice and commentary.

 

[jrobb45]

I don't think he even makes good entertainment; I can't stand his antics.

jr

 

[audreyh1]

I haven't been able to watch CNBC anymore either. All I hear is a bunch of whiners and criers bellyaching because the world has changed and they can't keep partying like it was 2005/2006. They fouled their own nest and the bill and suffering has been handed to main street. Some of the wall street folks try to point out that it was just a few bad apples that brought down the system, and so the rest of wall street shouldn't be blamed. I'm not sure what to say to that - it seems to me that it was much more the wall street culture that evolved in the last 10 years that brought down the system. I'm sorry if the remaining "good" wall streeters feel like they are being unfairly blamed, but the rest of us "non" wall streeters are hurting so I don't see how anyone can get a pass.

Audrey

P.S. Obama is doing what he said he would do. The shock, outrage and despair seem a little silly. What were they expecting? Him NOT to do those things? Where is the surprise? Maybe they were hoping he would take a long time to get around to them.

 

[Rustic23]

If he is right, you certainly would not want to hear it!

 

[lightwaves]

"P.S. Obama is doing what he said he would do. The shock, outrage and despair seem a little silly. What were they expecting? Him NOT to do those things? Where is the surprise? Maybe they were hoping he would take a long time to get around to them."

Isn't this amazing. A politician actually doing what he said he would do. That is a real shocker to some I guess.

 

[saluki9]

"P.S. Obama is doing what he said he would do. The shock, outrage and despair seem a little silly. What were they expecting? Him NOT to do those things? Where is the surprise? Maybe they were hoping he would take a long time to get around to them."

Isn't this amazing. A politician actually doing what he said he would do. That is a real shocker to some I guess.

I agree with Cramer (on this issue at least) There is nothing our president is doing that should inspire confidence in the market. He picked a treasury secretary that failed miserably at his job of supervising the banks under his watch. He supported the lamest attempt at a "stimulus" bill I've ever seen. Now when we need to inspire hard work and innovation among our financially most productive citizens he wants them to pay even more to support more social programs. Gosh, I just can't figure out what the market doesn't like.

While I'm not happy with what he's doing (disgusted actually) I am at least happy he's doing it before he comes up for re-election.

November 2010 elections are going to be a bloodbath for his minions in congress (you heard it here first)

 

[JPatrick]

I agree with Cramer (on this issue at least) There is nothing our president is doing that should inspire confidence in the market. He picked a treasury secretary that failed miserably at his job of supervising the banks under his watch. He supported the lamest attempt at a "stimulus" bill I've ever seen. Now when we need to inspire hard work and innovation among our financially most productive citizens he wants them to pay even more to support more social programs. Gosh, I just can't figure out what the market doesn't like.

While I'm not happy with what he's doing (disgusted actually) I am at least happy he's doing it before he comes up for re-election.

November 2010 elections are going to be a bloodbath for his minions in congress (you heard it here first)

You seemed a little lonely on this thread, so I thought I'd drop by and offer a big

 

[harley]

November 2010 elections are going to be a bloodbath for his minions in congress (you heard it here first)

It would be interesting to have a thread tracking our members' various predictions (financial, political, sports, etc) so we can later go back and make fun of them. Of course, maybe we'll find the next Nostrodamus.

 

[Texarkandy]

I agree with Cramer (on this issue at least) There is nothing our president is doing that should inspire confidence in the market. He picked a treasury secretary that failed miserably at his job of supervising the banks under his watch. He supported the lamest attempt at a "stimulus" bill I've ever seen. Now when we need to inspire hard work and innovation among our financially most productive citizens he wants them to pay even more to support more social programs. Gosh, I just can't figure out what the market doesn't like.
......

Cramer's good entertainment for me - when I'm in the mood for him.

In addition to your comments, I think what the market really doesn't like is Obama's idea of:

"If we once again guide the market's invisible hand with a higher principle, our markets will recover, our economy will once again thrive and America will once again lead the world in this new century as it did in the last,"

If the government is "guiding" the "invisible hand" - do we still have an "invisible hand"?

 

[2B]

I agree with Cramer (on this issue at least) There is nothing our president is doing that should inspire confidence in the market. He picked a treasury secretary that failed miserably at his job of supervising the banks under his watch. He supported the lamest attempt at a "stimulus" bill I've ever seen. Now when we need to inspire hard work and innovation among our financially most productive citizens he wants them to pay even more to support more social programs. Gosh, I just can't figure out what the market doesn't like.

While I'm not happy with what he's doing (disgusted actually) I am at least happy he's doing it before he comes up for re-election.

November 2010 elections are going to be a bloodbath for his minions in congress (you heard it here first)

Me too!

Obama had the most liberal senate record in the short time he was there. His short Illinois record was also uber-lib. Despite his vague move to the center during the campaign, we are getting what we should have expected. We will take a strong dose of socialism over the next four years. I can only hope you're right about 2010. The repubs had better get their act together. They hadn't exactly been doing too great a job which is why they lost out in 2006.

 

[Tadpole]

I agree about Cramer; just a cartoon.

But I have a more serious question about the US dollar. Let's say that the total leverage/never paid debt is 2x the number of dollars, doesn't that mean that ultimately the dollar will need to be worth 1/2 its value without a 2x increase in the value of the US assets/economy.

I hope someone understands the above as I am not an economist/financial expert. But I don't see how the debts can be accounted for without the devaluation I described. So if someone can explain in main street language why this is not the case, I would appreciate it.

 

[2B]

If the government is "guiding" the "invisible hand" - do we still have an "invisible hand"?

We still have the "invisible hand." The government can think it's "guiding" but the "invisible hand" has more power than the government.

 

[saluki9]

It would be interesting to have a thread tracking our members' various predictions (financial, political, sports, etc) so we can later go back and make fun of them. Of course, maybe we'll find the next Nostrodamus.

That's fairly common around here. It's always interesting to see how accurate our guesser were.

It has to be more entertaining than the thread from last year guessing where the S&P would end the year at

 

[bubba]

I agree with Cramer (on this issue at least) There is nothing our president is doing that should inspire confidence in the market. He picked a treasury secretary that failed miserably at his job of supervising the banks under his watch. He supported the lamest attempt at a "stimulus" bill I've ever seen. Now when we need to inspire hard work and innovation among our financially most productive citizens he wants them to pay even more to support more social programs. Gosh, I just can't figure out what the market doesn't like.

While I'm not happy with what he's doing (disgusted actually) I am at least happy he's doing it before he comes up for re-election.

November 2010 elections are going to be a bloodbath for his minions in congress (you heard it here first)

Thanks for saying what I suspect lots are starting to think, and I certainly hope your prediction is on the money as I sit here and watch what's left of my 401K go down the drain.

 

[RAE]

Thanks for saying what I suspect lots are starting to think, and I certainly hope your prediction is on the money as I sit here and watch what's left of my 401K go down the drain.

So I guess your 401k was doing just great before Obama took office, huh?

 

[jug]

I'm sitting here listening to Cramer for the first time in months and here he is blaming the current President for the state of the stock market. I'm switching him off and hope I never ever get the morbid urge to listen to this idiot again.

The movements in the market due to what influencial people say are fleeting at best. It's the long term effect that counts. The emotional highs and lows from day to day viewing one's fortunes going up and down is what Cramer is crying about. Cramer is just entertainment, he's been right, been wrong.

The president's job, or at least I hope it is, is to bring us into a better economic condition and not to worry much about the day to day fluctuation in the emotional state of people invested in the ponzi scheme on Wall street.

If the economy thrives, people are working, making money, then the suckers will come back to Vegas/Wall street in droves.

As a side note, the market was originally established to issue and trade securities, initially by rich or sophisticated folk, but through savoy marketing, it has become golden brick road to the fast lane, especially for those involved in bringing in the hoards and convincing them there is no other way. "you gotta be in it to win it"

Everyone wants a healthy return, along with an inflation adjustment. This is not the president's job. Giving people a safe haven for their money and establishing a sense of confidence in our primary institutions is most essential. We are coming to the point that if we are not careful, the most safe haven, our treasury issues, will lose confidence. The market is secondary at best.

Wall street through their mathematical models (derivatives) and packaging of mortgages into stuff they can sell as safe is the primary driver of this potential catastrophe facing us. Their willingness to buy up these notes gave mortgage brokers and banks the get go to write as much as they can to feed the converyor belt to wall street, goldman sachs, the lehman boys, citi financial and all the other places where narcisisstic amateurs posing as experts oversaw this insanity.

So don't worry about Cramer, he is a clown at best.

jug

 

[dex]

November 2010 elections are going to be a bloodbath for his minions in congress (you heard it here first)

I have nothing to base my agreement with you upon - just a feeling.
Just a feeling that the support for the POTUS is on the wane due to his actions not matching his words and the expectations for him were so high they couldn't meet reality. Also, it appears that Polosi and Reed are viaing for power with Obama and I don't think they are popular with the general American public.
However a large amount of the money being spent is in 2010 and 2011 - just before the election. So if things are better then he might get re-elected.

But I can not get that CNBC Rick Santelli rant out of my mind. Those in the middle class that were willing to give Obama a chance might not be willing to do it a second time.

Then again, if the Republicans don't have a good candidate and can not verbalize a new and inspritational strategy and learn to use the internet maybe Obama will prevail.

 

[saluki9]

So I guess your 401k was doing just great before Obama took office, huh?

Is your 401(k) worth more than it was on election day? FYI The S&P was about 27% higher then.

Market aren't about politics, just confidence about the future being better than the present. The market participants have spoken as to what they think of Obama's vision of our financial future is.

 

[2B]

So I guess your 401k was doing just great before Obama took office, huh?

I had a lot more money up until it became obvious Obama was going to win big and drag in lots of dems with him. That's when the sell off got in gear. Puny Paulson really started the slide by letting Lehman fail instead of brokering a $1 sale to someone. I can't help but think that was revenge for some old score.

Unfortunately, everything [moderator edit] and his administration (including the most vocal transition in history) has said demonstated that his administration will be decidedly anti-business, pro-union and tax happy. He's making a bad situation much worse.

 

[Westernskies]

I agree with Cramer (on this issue at least) There is nothing our president is doing that should inspire confidence in the market. He picked a treasury secretary that failed miserably at his job of supervising the banks under his watch. He supported the lamest attempt at a "stimulus" bill I've ever seen. Now when we need to inspire hard work and innovation among our financially most productive citizens he wants them to pay even more to support more social programs. Gosh, I just can't figure out what the market doesn't like.

While I'm not happy with what he's doing (disgusted actually) I am at least happy he's doing it before he comes up for re-election.

November 2010 elections are going to be a bloodbath for his minions in congress (you heard it here first)

What he said.

 

[pinetree64]

I am not a Cramer fan but he was right on the money when the housing bubble started bursting. Obama is not responsible for the mess, but his actions have done little to instill confidence in the markets. In fact the amount of government spending is sicking and to me focuses on the wrong things. I believe the current goverment interventions in the markets will prolong the pain and suffering.

tjg

 

[Lakewood90712]

The good thing about still working is not being able to watch during the day and too tired and angry to even turn the set on after 12 hours of comute plus work every day.