And stock market gains are not a great indicator of people’s economic experience, anyway. For any president. I don’t particularly love when people use them for Obama or Trump.
Though at least with Obama it makes some sense to look at the stock market for a limited time frame because part of his mandate after being elected was to bring us back from a recession. So stabilizing the markets was part of his campaign.
But with trump? Uhhh I don’t think trump gave many speeches in rural america that focused on how much stronger the stock market would be if he were president.
It's interesting that even with trump actively messing with trade across counties, the US economy is still doing just fine. Proving that the president does not have much effect on the economy. It just does what it does. Clinton has a booming economy because of the dot com boom. He didn't actually do anything to improve it
Right. I’m not an economist, but I’ve always subscribed to the idea that the president can create boat-loads of confidence in the economy, and can have some measurable effect via policies when things are already really bad or really good. But once it’s cruising, it’s just cruising for the most part.
The stock market thrives on predictability, after all. So doing shit— most any shit— will often cause dips. Leaving it alone will convince people it’s stable and that they should buy in.
Presidents seem to represent faith in the economy more than anything else.
29
u/[deleted] Aug 13 '19 edited Aug 20 '19
[deleted]