The question I've been getting most frequently recently is, "Which candidate will be best for the economy?"
Well, first of all, if I knew that I'd probably be some Beltway "king maker" power broker, so that should answer the question right there - I have no idea. Besides, no candidate has put together a detailed enough economic plan to make an educated assessment and, even if they did, there is no guarantee that they would follow through with it once in office. So no matter what the TV pundits say, they have no clue either.
The inevitable follow-up question is, "Then, which party is better for the markets?" My answer to that is: "It doesn't matter." Again, contrary to what the talking heads on TV insist, there is virtually no difference in stock market performance during one party’s administration over another’s.
Conventional wisdom might suggest that Republicans, who are supposedly more business-friendly than the Democrats, would be more beneficial for your stock holdings. In fact, looking back to 1900, Democrats have been slightly better for stocks, with the Dow up an average of nearly 9% annually when the Democrats are in control, compared with nearly 6% per year during Republican administrations. But normal variations in annual stock market returns dwarf that difference. ~ Kiplinger
I know many of you have some pretty strong opinions about your candidate and/or party, but I, unfortunately, can’t help with any fodder. I am going to stick with my boring “Stay the course” approach. There are some pretty interesting myths around elections and the stock market. Go to the article I quoted above, How the Presidential Election Will Effect the Stock Market, to read more.
Source: Brett Danko, Kiplinger
Author
John