• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Obama Winning Investors by 49%-38% Against Romney in Poll

AdamT

AdamT

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2011
Messages
17,773
Reaction score
5,746
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
How to explain the disconnect between U.S. and non-U.S. investors? IMO, investors in general understand that Obama would be better for the US economy, but US investors are more concerned with the possibility of their own taxes going up than they are with the health of the over all economy.

Global investors increasingly prefer President Barack Obama to Republican challenger Mitt Romney and most say they believe the incumbent will remain in the White House for another four years.

Asked who would be the better leader for the global economy, 49 percent favor Obama against 38 percent for Romney, according to a quarterly Bloomberg Global Poll. In January, the two candidates tied on the question.

By the same margin, they say Obama has a better vision for the U.S. economy, according to the survey of 1,253 Bloomberg customers, who are investors, analysts or traders.

Obama “managed the U.S. economy pretty well, solving a lot of imbalances created by the previous administration,” says poll respondent Mario Di Marcantonio, 35, a senior portfolio manager at Eurizon Capital in Milan.

“I believe the second Obama term will be better than having a U-turn with Romney,” he says. “More stability will mean more visibility and more investment in the future.”

The American presidential election is dividing foreign investors and those based in the U.S., where Romney is favored across the board. U.S. investors choose the Republican candidate as best for the global economy by more than 2-to-1. Respondents outside the U.S. prefer Democrat Obama by almost 3-to-1 in the poll, conducted May 8.


Obama Winning Investors by 49%-38% Against Romney in Poll - Bloomberg
Click to expand...
 
Oh yeah - I'm so totally going ot vote for my candidate based on the global economy.

The American presidential election is dividing foreign investors and those based in the U.S., where Romney is favored across the board. U.S. investors choose the Republican candidate as best for the global economy by more than 2-to-1. Respondents outside the U.S. prefer Democrat Obama by almost 3-to-1 in the poll, conducted May 8.
Click to expand...

If they're OUTSIDE the US their main focus is to expound profitably on US business and government actions - it does NOT mean that they have our nation's best interest at heart; they have their own interest in heart. If we fall apart - it doesn't matter to them so long as their select investments pay out. Of COURSE they want visibility; they want to be able to take advantage of US business loops and holes as much as possible.

But we all know many issues aren't decided with the President - but with Congressional action:

Members of Congress from both political parties are held in low esteem. Just 31 percent of global respondents give the Democrats a favorable rating, compared with 55 percent who view them negatively. Republicans do even worse: 26 percent view them favorably, compared with 60 percent who have a negative view.
Click to expand...
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Oh yeah - I'm so totally going ot vote for my candidate based on the global economy.



If they're OUTSIDE the US their main focus is to expound profitably on US business and government actions - it does NOT mean that they have our nation's best interest at heart; they have their own interest in heart. If we fall apart - it doesn't matter to them so long as their select investments pay out. Of COURSE they want visibility; they want to be able to take advantage of US business loops and holes as much as possible.

But we all know many issues aren't decided with the President - but with Congressional action:
Click to expand...

Investors, wherever they are located, will not benefit if the world's largest economy, and world's largest consumer, suffers economically. That's fundamental. As an American investor I sure as hell want to see, e.g. Europe and China succeed economically, because if they don't it depresses not only their markets but OUR markets.

I reckon you don't do much investing?
 
AdamT said:
Investors, wherever they are located, will not benefit if the world's largest economy, and world's largest consumer, suffers economically. That's fundamental. As an American investor I sure as hell want to see, e.g. Europe and China succeed economically, because if they don't it depresses not only their markets but OUR markets.

I reckon you don't do much investing?
Click to expand...

Smarmy business men are not philanthropists; their priority is the success of their empire; not anyone else's. As is evident by our own business moguls farming out jobs overseas because they pay out less to the employees there.

Is that the most beneficial thing for US economy? No - it's the best thing for their business' bottom line - nothing more.

See - same thing.
 
Last edited:
Aunt Spiker said:
Smarmy business men are not philanthropists; their priority is the success of their empire; not anyone else's. As is evident by our own business moguls farming out jobs overseas because they pay out less to the employees there.

Is that the most beneficial thing for US economy? No - it's the best thing for their business' bottom line - nothing more.

See - same thing.
Click to expand...

Yes, we're saying the same thing. They are out for their own interests, which, as an international investors, requires that the number one economy in the world succeed. When US markets tank, ALL markets tank. Get it?
 
AdamT said:
Yes, we're saying the same thing. They are out for their own interests, which, as an international investors, requires that the number one economy in the world succeed. When US markets tank, ALL markets tank. Get it?
Click to expand...

The world economy doesn't center around the US and the US alone, though. It never did. We're not as big of a player in the world economy as you think. They benefit significantly from our government's struggles and the fact that businesses in the US and our government seek out foreign investors to borrow money - whether we're all doing better as individuals is a different matter.

Whether we have food to eat - or safe roads to travel on - mean nothing.

If our economy continues to crumple do you think their business interests will cease? No - they will simply follow new business paths as they are *already* doing worldwide. European Nations, growing African and South American Nations = many other areas are gaining strength and financial stability.

It's a false reality to imagine that they are concerned for our nation's actual wellbeing when their own countries suffer extensively and yet they seek out business partnerships worldwide: if they can't focus purely on their own nation *why* woudl we assume they're concerned with ours?
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
How to explain the disconnect between U.S. and non-U.S. investors? IMO, investors in general understand that Obama would be better for the US economy, but US investors are more concerned with the possibility of their own taxes going up than they are with the health of the over all economy.
Click to expand...


makes sense as long as shorting is still alowed.. Id bet against the US economy under Obama.. we know what direction he is going for sure.. just look at Morris's Six treaties of Obama...
 
Thrilla said:
foreign investors don't get to vote in US elections.... but US investors do.
Click to expand...

Thats not relevent to the article... "Global Investors"..yada...
 
Aunt Spiker said:
The world economy doesn't center around the US and the US alone, though. It never did. We're not as big of a player in the world economy as you think. They benefit significantly from our government's struggles and the fact that businesses in the US and our government seek out foreign investors to borrow money - whether we're all doing better as individuals is a different matter.

Whether we have food to eat - or safe roads to travel on - mean nothing.

If our economy continues to crumple do you think their business interests will cease? No - they will simply follow new business paths as they are *already* doing worldwide. European Nations, growing African and South American Nations = many other areas are gaining strength and financial stability.

It's a false reality to imagine that they are concerned for our nation's actual wellbeing when their own countries suffer extensively and yet they seek out business partnerships worldwide: if they can't focus purely on their own nation *why* woudl we assume they're concerned with ours?
Click to expand...

I don't think you have any appreciation for the impact our economy has on the rest of the world. Just look at how the gyrations of a tiny, all but insignificant economy like Greece's has screwed with OUR markets?

You don't really do much investing, do you?
 
AdamT said:
I don't think you have any appreciation for the impact our economy has on the rest of the world. Just look at how the gyrations of a tiny, all but insignificant economy like Greece's has screwed with OUR markets?

You don't really do much investing, do you?
Click to expand...

actually nobody does that much investing.. the coutnry is broke and my WS friends are saying ite never been worse.. ever.. no volume, no trades.. Dodd Frank is to blame..( im on the phone with the top desk at Barclays) and they said to tell you the spectre of taxing ones 401k is hurting the market...
 
Last edited:
I don't give a rat's ass what "global investors" think about our Presidential election...just like I don't give a rat's ass what ANY non-US citizen thinks. This is OUR election and we won't elect a President based on what's best for them...rather, what's best for US.

Fork the global investors!!
 
The point being that global investors think that Obama would be best for the economy -- and they aren't biased by other factors as US investors are.
 
AdamT said:
The point being that global investors think that Obama would be best for the economy -- and they aren't biased by other factors as US investors are.
Click to expand...

They are biased by their own factors - based on the success of their own nation, market or region as well as leniency with international business functions such as tarrifs and regulations and the ability to loan out to not necessarily businesses but governments in order to profit from the interest.

If we knew who these individual supporting investors were we could likely analyze their business history and see where they might be going with their future plans.
 
AdamT said:
How to explain the disconnect between U.S. and non-U.S. investors? IMO, investors in general understand that Obama would be better for the US economy, but US investors are more concerned with the possibility of their own taxes going up than they are with the health of the over all economy.
Click to expand...

It's called political correctness.

Run a politically incorrect business, and you'll have regulators up your ass in no time.
 
Business men = business interests.

If it was their business' interest to see to the overall health of our country they'd pursue exactly that. But it's not. That is OUR interest - not theirs.

But the guy who sells bullets will profit from war and in some way encourage it or support it because it's good for business. That's why government constantly has to regulate business - and why business sticks it's nose in government with lobbyists to try to direct legislation.
 
AdamT said:
The point being that global investors think that Obama would be best for the economy -- and they aren't biased by other factors as US investors are.
Click to expand...

incorrect.. that not what they think .
 
Neither of you believe your interpretations are too simple or straightforward, and, uh, too centered around your personal beliefs?

Anyway, the reason why Obama is ahead is because there is a perception that Romney is going to be highly indulgent toward America's "Wall-Street" community, and their wish to continue with the same policies that resulted in the 2008 global recession; its a little bit more reckless a way of doing business than other people prefer, since not everyone can count on their governments to back up their crashes the same way an American businessman can.

actually nobody does that much investing.. the coutnry is broke and my WS friends are saying ite never been worse.. ever.. no volume, no trades.. Dodd Frank is to blame..( im on the phone with the top desk at Barclays) and they said to tell you the spectre of taxing ones 401k is hurting the market...
Click to expand...

"nods skeptically"

In seriousness, if someone says the threat of taxes discourages business, they are lying. The more you get taxed, the more business you have to do to acquire the amount of money that you want. So you'll be capitalizing on any opportunity you can. The only thing that stops business is lack of opportunity.
 
Last edited:
Morality Games said:
Neither of you believe your interpretations are too simple or straightforward, and, uh, too centered around your personal beliefs?
Click to expand...

No, I personally think that global investors support whoever they think will be best for the American economy. For as the American market goes, so goes the world market.
 
AdamT said:
No, I personally think that global investors support whoever they think will be best for the American economy. For as the American market goes, so goes the world market.
Click to expand...

No- their interest isn't the whole of the economy: it's the whole of their sector. As long as their sector profits they're fine even if everyone's dying of hunger.

We have a world filled with multi-billionaire earning corporations; but yet we're all in the ****ter. In your interpretation of things this shouldn't be happening because they invest in national interests - not their own personal business interest.
 
AdamT said:
How to explain the disconnect between U.S. and non-U.S. investors? IMO, investors in general understand that Obama would be better for the US economy, but US investors are more concerned with the possibility of their own taxes going up than they are with the health of the over all economy.
Click to expand...

right.... so rich foreigners want us to reelect Obama.


Well gosh :roll: that changes everything.


although it will be interesting to see if the Obama campaign conveniently "forgets" to track where their donors live again this election.
 
AdamT said:
Investors, wherever they are located, will not benefit if the world's largest economy, and world's largest consumer, suffers economically. That's fundamental. As an American investor I sure as hell want to see, e.g. Europe and China succeed economically, because if they don't it depresses not only their markets but OUR markets.

I reckon you don't do much investing?
Click to expand...

I reckon that you don't pay much attention to U.S. polls and how they are changing. You see results matter and the Obama results trump the rock star status he has with people like you who buy the rhetoric and vote for him based upon likeability and rhetoric.

Gallup also has Romney winning but this is the first poll that has Romney over 50%

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports™
 
sangha said:
But it isn't one business sector that's favoring Obama; It's most of them
Click to expand...

Actually - it's just a marginal % one over the other of a select few businessmen across the world = how many is that, really? Maybe 100 or 1000? Are these true business moguls or not? We have no clue what their criteria was for this and therefor can take it marginally at best.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Actually - it's just a marginal % one over the other of a select few businessmen across the world = how many is that, really? Maybe 100 or 1000? Are these true business moguls or not? We have no clue what their criteria was for this and therefor can take it marginally at best.
Click to expand...

It's widespread approval of Obama over Romney. If his support was weak or limited, he wouldn't be ahead of Romney.


And it's an 11 point spread, which is almost 1/3 of Romney's support
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom