Election Night 2008

[crunchtastic]

I'm not sure if someone has mentioned this b/c I've only read this last page. But I wonder how wall street and the market will react today to Obama's election.

Also, I work for an oil company as I'm sure many of you guys do. I'm not all doom and gloom but I must say that when I heard Obama won last night, I thought about job security for sure. Obama isn't the biggest fan of oil companies and big companies, both of which describe my employer. I know my managers are trying to fill in positions very soon before the ups say no more. I know a big reason for that was the financial crisis but I wonder if Obama is a reason now, too.

So far, the markets are favorable. Also telling were the Asian and European gains on the overnight. As far as your job security goes, I would say that's far more dependent on the price of oil, and how much cash your particular company is sitting on. And, I'd say that managers rushing to fill positions (especially toward the end of the year) can also be due to the budget planning cycle as anything. You don't want to leave budget dollars (empty positions), on the table--and be perceived as not needing them. Makes it harder to make the case for your budget the next time around.

I would say, don't worry, Lockmat.

Oops I see Niche has answered you as well. And I agree--the markets--to a large extent-- have already priced in the election.

[crunchtastic]

I keep forgetting to post and see what the rest of you think--Massachusetts rejected an amendment to end the state income tax. I find that very interesting. Granted Mass is a blue state, but it still seemed pretty amazing.

To me the reasons to oppose it seem straightfoward--services would slashed and since the money would have to come from somewhere, property taxes would skyrocket. Probably would also be very bad news for credit ratings and bond issues. But obviously I don't have the whole story. Curious as to what the plan was to replace the revenue generated by the income tax. Kinkaid Alum, what's your take?

[N Judah]

Whew! Like diving into a pool of ice-cold water on a hot summer day.

[barracuda]

I think these words should be embossed somewhere, and read by all. You will not find a better concession speech in the History of our Country. And thing about these words that makes them exceptional, is the very fact that you know John McCain sincerely meant every word of it. President-Elect Obama's words in response to these, were just as powerful, and I feel just as sincere. We can only hope or future is in good hands, and that the best things for our country in the for-front of ever decision made from here on out.

I agree, I though both McCain and Obama gave exceptional speeches last night.

It was also reported that GWB has put together a transition task-force to insure the his replacement has all the tools he needs to perform his job from day one. It was brought up to the reports of the lack of this that was done behind the Clinton's. Something was said to have compared the condition of the executive wing being left in the condition of an evacuated frat house. Something like $15,000 worth of damage. President Bush has assured there will be no such issue with this change of power. Which I think this is a good thing.

Life goes on, we can all take a break now.

It will be interesting to see how the transition goes. When the GWB administration took office, it seems that they distanced themselves from anything relating to stigma they saw as Bill Clinton. I think it was just part of trashing Clinton's reputation. I wonder if Obama will pay any heed to what GWB transitions to him. With Bush's low approval rating, Obama will probably also look to distance himself from Bush as much as possible.

The White House damage story seemed more like a political stunt than anything else. Bob Barr and the GOP spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars for a year-long investigation primarily for the purpose of harming Clinton's reputation, and only $15,000 in damages was found, most of it standard wear and tear. But I doubt we'll see anything like this next January.

[KinkaidAlum]

I keep forgetting to post and see what the rest of you think--Massachusetts rejected an amendment to end the state income tax. I find that very interesting. Granted Mass is a blue state, but it still seemed pretty amazing.

To me the reasons to oppose it seem straightfoward--services would slashed and since the money would have to come from somewhere, property taxes would skyrocket. Probably would also be very bad news for credit ratings and bond issues. But obviously I don't have the whole story. Curious as to what the plan was to replace the revenue generated by the income tax. Kinkaid Alum, what's your take?

First off, I will say I am surprised by the results. I knew that Prop 1 would fail, but I had no idea it would fail by that much. As of this morning, it went down hard (70% NO to 30% YES). In fact, only one town voted for the measure (Essex, a small suburb on the North Shore). People voted no in the large cities (Boston, Worcester, and Springfield). They voted no down on the Cape (Provincetown, Barnstable, Hyannis). They voted no on the Islands (Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard). They voted no in the blue collar cities (Lowell, Fall River, New Bedford). They voted no in places with huge amounts of immigrants (Chelse and Lawrence). They voted no in the blue blood western suburbs (Concord, Wellesley, Weston). They voted no in the university towns (Williamstown, Amherst, Cambridge). They voted no in the "Jewsih" burbs (Newton and Brookline). They voted no out West (Pittsfield). The witches said NO in Salem. The pregnant teens said NO in Gloucester. I was very pleasantly surprised.

We also voted to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana and to ban dog racing.

I can't really speak for other voters, but I know I voted NO for several reasons. First, it would increase the deficit in the Commonwealth big time. That's irresponsible. Secondly, it would negatively affect things like schools, health care, roads, the MBTA, public parks, social services, and a host of other programs that make Massachusetts such a great place to live. That said, here's my favorite blog about the issue. Good stuff. This guy should join the HAIF.

http://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologis...s_income_ta.php

[Jeebus]

Your picture is actually from an anti-Obama website.

What do I think this inexperienced president will do? I'm hoping he'll stop making my country embarrass me.

This is such a vague statement. How has America embarrassed you?

I'm not sure if someone has mentioned this b/c I've only read this last page. But I wonder how wall street and the market will react today to Obama's election.

So far, the markets are favorable.

As of 1pm, the Dow was down 300 points. How is that favorable?

Honestly, this shouldn't be a time for fear (we've had enough of that the last 8 years).

We are the strongest, most powerful nation on earth (maybe in the history of the planet). Ask yourself... "What are you so afraid of?"

Your answer is found in the answer to this man's concerns:

Also, I work for an oil company as I'm sure many of you guys do. I'm not all doom and gloom but I must say that when I heard Obama won last night, I thought about job security for sure. Obama isn't the biggest fan of oil companies and big companies, both of which describe my employer. I know my managers are trying to fill in positions very soon before the ups say no more. I know a big reason for that was the financial crisis but I wonder if Obama is a reason now, too.

People didn't think about that when they voted. As the youtube videos have shown, many voted simply because of race, some voted because of a belief that Obama will somehow magically put gas in their cars, food on their tables, and pay their mortgage, some for strictly for party affiliation, and some voted because they hate "Bush Inc."

But those worried about keeping their jobs didn't vote for Obama, and I'll tell you why: If Obama does implement his tax plan, people will lose their jobs, and small businesses will close. Companies will retract, rather than expand - if not moving more of their operations out of the country. Prices for retail goods will increase to over compensate for revenue lost, then when profits are down, employers will lay off employees so that prices will decrease.

Hollywood, liberals with money, and the most poor are the only that enjoy Obama's presidency. Hollywood and liberals with money enjoy giving their money away, and poor people love getting free money. Everyone else who voted for him, once either laid-off, have reduced hours, or are just successful enough on paper, but see no difference in their wallets due to their tax bracket, will not likely vote for him again.

Also, all those who are eager for the war in Iraq to end needs to ask what those tens of thousands of civilian's working government contract jobs are going to do when they're laid off? Only so much of what is made/provided by government contracts can be rolled over into stateside production.

I am predicting that four years from now, we will still be in debt, and unemployment will be up substantially more than what it is now.. I hope I'm wrong, but for Obama to hope to change anything - he needs to change his tax plan.

[west20th]

Also, all those who are eager for the war in Iraq to end needs to ask what those tens of thousands of civilian's working government contract jobs are going to do when they're laid off? Only so much of what is made/provided by government contracts can be rolled over into stateside production.

That has got to be the most ridiculous justification for not ending the war.

[memebag]

This is such a vague statement. How has America embarrassed you?

Things America has done over the last 8 years that have embarrassed me, off the top of my head:

• We invaded Iraq.
  
• We fabricated evidence to justify that invasion.
  
• We set up a detention facility where we can hold people for years without due process.
  
• We abducted, imprisoned and tortured people in violation of US and international law.
  
• Cheney argues that his office isn't part of the executive branch and his records never have to be made public.
  
• Bush seems to lack basic language skills.
  
• The Bush administration tampers with scientific evidence to protect industry at the expense of the citizens and their environment.
  
• Bush believes that "intelligent design" should be taught as an alternative theory to evolution in school science classes.
  

The list could go on.

Also, all those who are eager for the war in Iraq to end needs to ask what those tens of thousands of civilian's working government contract jobs are going to do when they're laid off? Only so much of what is made/provided by government contracts can be rolled over into stateside production.

That doesn't even make sense mathematically. All of those jobs are being paid for with tax money. If they were all laid off tomorrow, we could continue to pay them their salary in jobless benefits with zero impact on the economy.

[RedScare]

Your answer is found in the answer to this man's concerns:

People didn't think about that when they voted. As the youtube videos have shown, many voted simply because of race, some voted because of a belief that Obama will somehow magically put gas in their cars, food on their tables, and pay their mortgage, some for strictly for party affiliation, and some voted because they hate "Bush Inc."

But those worried about keeping their jobs didn't vote for Obama, and I'll tell you why: If Obama does implement his tax plan, people will lose their jobs, and small businesses will close. Companies will retract, rather than expand - if not moving more of their operations out of the country. Prices for retail goods will increase to over compensate for revenue lost, then when profits are down, employers will lay off employees so that prices will decrease.

Hollywood, liberals with money, and the most poor are the only that enjoy Obama's presidency. Hollywood and liberals with money enjoy giving their money away, and poor people love getting free money. Everyone else who voted for him, once either laid-off, have reduced hours, or are just successful enough on paper, but see no difference in their wallets due to their tax bracket, will not likely vote for him again.

Also, all those who are eager for the war in Iraq to end needs to ask what those tens of thousands of civilian's working government contract jobs are going to do when they're laid off? Only so much of what is made/provided by government contracts can be rolled over into stateside production.

I am predicting that four years from now, we will still be in debt, and unemployment will be up substantially more than what it is now.. I hope I'm wrong, but for Obama to hope to change anything - he needs to change his tax plan.

I am embarrassed for you that you think the DOW is the economy. FWIW, historically, the DOW does very well under Democratic presidents, better on average than under Republicans. I might also point out that the DOW was at 10543 on Bush's 2001 inauguration. Do you really want to compare a one day 300 point drop to an 8 year 1,200 point one? And, considering the size of this recession and the housing and financial crisis that caused it, most economists predict that unemployment WILL grow substantially in the future. You do not stop recessions with an election. Unemployment tends to be a lagging indicator, meaning it will continue to rise even after the recession officially ends. I will be surprised if unemployment is NOT higher in 4 years than it is today.

We will still be in debt in 4 years? Really? What was your first clue? Was it Bush's 2009 budget that will add $1 TRILLION to the national debt? Was it the fact that we are just entering the recession, as opposed to coming out of it? Was it just a lucky guess? I vote for number 3, given the rest of your post. And changing his tax plan? Have you not figured out that Bush's tax plan DOUBLED our debt in 8 years? McCain offered more of the same. You need to either pay your taxes to reduce the debt, or mortgage your future and demand low taxes. You can't have both. That is a GOP myth that coincidentally was voted out last night.

As for the tens of thousands of civilians in Iraq, I'll ask you. At $120 Billion per year, do you not think there are a few reconstruction projects that could be funded here in the US, precisely the type of government investment in infrastructure that economists say is needed to spur the foundering economy?

I didn't expect any opinions to change with the vote last night, and I did expect the snarkiness to begin immediately, but I must warn you, as tough as Obama's job will be, it is that tough because of what Bush and the GOP have done, not because of anything he hasn't done.

[Fringe]

I really don't worry about Obama's tax plan. Most of that was just to get votes. He's not going to raise taxes for the rich or for the corporations. Where do you think the bulk of his campaign money came from? There's the old saying, "don't bite the hand that feeds you" and Obama's way too smart to do that. This country has been and always will be run by big business and it's not going to change with a Democrat in control. I'd also be surprised if we "middle class" see any of the tax cuts he promised. We have a huge national debt and someone has to pay for it. Hope I'm wrong but most politicians are bought and paid for these days.

I just hope he can reign in some of the spending. Getting out of Iraq will help. Hey, maybe he can switch some of those jobs over to border control.

[sevfiv]

Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, or not;

From NBC's Andrea Mitchell

A senior Obama advisor confirms to NBC News that Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel has accepted the job of Chief of Staff for the Obama White House.

*** UPDATE *** In an email to NBC News, Emanuel spokeswoman Sarah Feinberg denies the reporting that Emanuel has accepted the chief of staff job.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/200...05/1654796.aspx

[TheNiche]

I am predicting that four years from now, we will still be in debt, and unemployment will be up substantially more than what it is now.. I hope I'm wrong, but for Obama to hope to change anything - he needs to change his tax plan.

Obama is going to need to level with us about a realistic solution.

Perhaps the most fundamental problem that we're dealing with is that the ratio of consumption against savings as components of GDP have gotten all out of whack. Investment and Savings is the only viable solution; not only is it vitally important for the long-term so as to support retirement consumption by aging Boomers, but it is necessary now even as a short-run solution. Encouraging a higher savings rate would help to keep financial institutions capitalized and provides them the funds to lend that are necessary for entrepreneurs acting in a competitive environment to further develop our capital stock, enhance productivity, and ultimately to continue growing our economy.

The $168 billion of economic stimulus such as was enacted in February was irresponsible and destructive in multiple ways. Firstly, the stimulus was intentionally set up as a disproportionate transfer of wealth from high-earning taxpayers to low-earning taxpayers. That pisses off free market fundies, and rightly so because it is after all tantamount to theft. But since lower-earning households have a low propensity to save, most of that 'stimulus' only caused a brief burst of consumption spending, much of which only exacerbated the imbalance of trade. Worse, we issued a ton of government debt to finance this consumption, which crowded out the market for debt which might have been put to other, more productive uses.

From what has been talked about by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid, they sound very enthusiastic about continuing the failed economic policy of the GWB administration. Keynesianism may be tempting as it is politically popular and has application from time to time, but this isn't that time. Obama promoted himself the candidate of change, but the truth is that real change may be a bitter pill to swallow.

[TheNiche]

I am embarrassed for you that you think the DOW is the economy. FWIW, historically, the DOW does very well under Democratic presidents, better on average than under Republicans. I might also point out that the DOW was at 10543 on Bush's 2001 inauguration. Do you really want to compare a one day 300 point drop to an 8 year 1,200 point one? And, considering the size of this recession and the housing and financial crisis that caused it, most economists predict that unemployment WILL grow substantially in the future. You do not stop recessions with an election. Unemployment tends to be a lagging indicator, meaning it will continue to rise even after the recession officially ends. I will be surprised if unemployment is NOT higher in 4 years than it is today.

The DJIA is an indicator of risk-adjusted earnings expectations among the country's largest corporations. The implications of Obama's rhetoric (which whether it is credible or not remains TBD) are potentially hurtful to business and the economy, and especially to large corporations. His rhetoric developed expectations on Wall Street, and that he would successfully be elected was pretty clearly evident well before last night. That is to say...the adverse effects that his policies are expected to have are already built into stock pricing, and that has occurred months prior to the end of the current administration's term.

So you could make the argument that the DJIA hasn't done well under the GWB administration or under Republicans, and I could make the argument that the DJIA has fallen further and further as it became increasingly clear that Obama would win. Both are really crappy lines of reasoning, ignoring the differences between correlation and causation, but that wouldn't prevent us from spouting plenty of partisan nonsense--if we so choose. ...either that, or you and I could both admit that the DJIA is the function of an enormously complex and volatile set of variables inclusive of the political environment but with specific political matters potentially having an impact prior to, during and following EACH of the following processes: 1) proposal, 2) implementation, and 3) consequences, effectively rendering an attempt at objective analysis unreliable and invalid.

Stalemate. Happy?

[RedScare]

Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, or not;

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/200...05/1654796.aspx

There goes the 'No Friend of Israel' argument.

[RedScare]

Stalemate. Happy?

Happy that you agree that the Dow is not the economy. Not happy if you think that I threw out that worthless stat about the Dow's performance under different parties as meaningful in any way. I pointed out that the Dow does better under Dem presidents to show that even Jeebus' meaningless point that the Dow dropped today was flawed.

BTW, if Jeebus would like to know why the Dow REALLY dropped today, he might look at the October jobs report that was released today.

[Fringe]

Obama got elected yesterday and the economy is STILL in the crapper. What kind of president is he?

[Trae]

Not bad for a Community Organizer:

"I don't know exactly what a community organizer does..."

-Sarah Palin, as the RNC audience laughs and snickers

I bet her ass knows now.

[sarahiki]

Not bad for a Community Organizer:

"I don't know exactly what a community organizer does..."

-Sarah Palin, as the RNC audience laughs and snickers

I bet her ass knows now.

Nice.

Anyone want to predict what her next move is?

[west20th]

Nice.

Anyone want to predict what her next move is?

Dancing with the stars? Or maybe a Fox show like "The View" with Ann Coulter and Michelle Maulkin. "The View from Hell". Seriously though, I think there are enough hard core Repubs that will encourage her to run in 2012.

[Jeebus]

Not bad for a Community Organizer:

Hardly, he won because of three combined reasons: 1. television and print media 2. he's African American, and 3. he ran on the Democratic ticket. Number 1 and number 3 picked him four years ago and began grooming him. No one was going to beat him this election.

If you're going to give credit - give it where due.

That has got to be the most ridiculous justification for not ending the war.

Its not a reason to "not end the war". It was a legitimate question. I want to know how you feel about those thousands that have contract jobs that could be laid off if the war is brought to an abrupt end.

That doesn't even make sense mathematically. All of those jobs are being paid for with tax money. If they were all laid off tomorrow, we could continue to pay them their salary in jobless benefits with zero impact on the economy.

So you're rather pay people a portion of their contract job salary as welfare? I guess they'll get the rest of their lost income on the back end from Obama's tax breaks/credits.

I didn't expect any opinions to change with the vote last night, and I did expect the snarkiness to begin immediately, but I must warn you, as tough as Obama's job will be, it is that tough because of what Bush and the GOP have done, not because of anything he hasn't done.

You never fail to "blame it all on the GOP". You can feel however you like for me, and other conservatives though, we'll just compare notes four years from now and see the chips actually fell.

[memebag]

So you're rather pay people a portion of their contract job salary as welfare?

Nope. I was just pointing out that fear of the economic impact of putting them out of work is not a reason to perpetuate the war.

[TheNiche]

Its not a reason to "not end the war". It was a legitimate question. I want to know how you feel about those thousands that have contract jobs that could be laid off if the war is brought to an abrupt end.

____ 'em.

So you're rather pay people a portion of their contract job salary as welfare? I guess they'll get the rest of their lost income on the back end from Obama's tax breaks/credits.

I'd definitely rather that than pay them to live in and stimulate the economy of a foreign country if their work was not otherwise furthering the interests of United States taxpayers.

[RedScare]

Hardly, he won because of three combined reasons: 1. television and print media 2. he's African American, and 3. he ran on the Democratic ticket. Number 1 and number 3 picked him four years ago and began grooming him. No one was going to beat him this election.

Not me. I voted for the White half. Trae probably voted for the Black half, though.

Just one article on Obama's vaunted "ground game"...

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na...0,6488135.story

[sifuwong]

Does anyone have details on his income tax increase? I've only read that his tax increase for those over $250k will be at 39.5%. What about those that earn over 1 million? 5 million? What will their tax rates be...40 something %?

[RedScare]

Does anyone have details on his income tax increase? I've only read that his tax increase for those over $250k will be at 39.5%. What about those that earn over 1 million? 5 million? What will their tax rates be...40 something %?

His proposal is not really a proposal to increase taxes, but a proposal to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire. To jerry rig the budget numbers, Bush's tax cuts were not made permanent. They are set to expire in 2010 or 2011. The tax rates would then return to the Clinto tax rates enacted in 1993.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnibus_Budge...ion_Act_of_1993

The net result of allowing the cuts to expire, of course, is that the top tax rate increases to 39.6%. That's it. There are also proposals to extend the Bush tax cuts on incomes below $250,000, and some other credits.

[Jeebus]

Not me. I voted for the White half. Trae probably voted for the Black half, though.

You're being facetious. I would imagine you voted more for reason number 3 than Trae did however - solely based on both your posts.

[RedScare]

You're being facetious. I would imagine you voted more for reason number 3 than Trae did however - solely based on both your posts.

Actually, if you knew anything about how little use I have for idiots, you would know that my vote had nothing whatsoever to do with his race and everything to do with his intelligence.

[Jeebus]

Actually, if you knew anything about how little use I have for idiots, you would know that my vote had nothing whatsoever to do with his race and everything to do with his intelligence.

I never accused you of voting for him based on race. Re-read.

[west20th]

____ 'em.

Luv those short and to the point replies.

[sevfiv]

Emanuel accepted:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081106/ap_on_el_pr/obama