Posted on 09/11/2024 3:58:41 AM PDT by C19fan
Financial markets early Wednesday were moving in a way consistent with a reduced likelihood of a second Donald Trump presidency.
Though a key inflation report was looming, cross-asset movements suggested who traders believed had won. U.S. stock futures were modestly lower. The dollar fell vs. major rivals, particularly the Japanese yen
Bitcoin slumped by 2%.
Trump Media and Technology which tends to move in line with the likelihood of Trump winning the presidency, skidded 15% in premarket trade.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Aren’t the financial markets nothing but a scam ?
Not surprising, trillions more in *free* gummit handouts and subsidies to the countless corporate shells and NGOs.
BS... Total BS
How about the betting odds. What happened there?
They went form Trump ahead by five points to tied.
So then, the markets know that Kamala is bad for the economy And that Trump is good for the economy.
And the markets know that the candidate who is good for the economy, didn’t didn’t perform well in the debate.
Looks to me like the market, Also known as the people, wanted and still want Trump to be president.
This shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone, Kamala was always going to be the winner unless she demonstrated the mental ability Biden showed in his one debate
Hillary held her own in her debates with Trump and lost, the key to winning is getting anyone remotely supporting Trump to the polls, take advantage of early voting and ballot harvesting where legal and to the degree possible slow down the cheating by the Democrats
In terms of performance art, commiela did do a better job.
That just means that Trump is still an authentic, non-politician, and commiela is an academy award con-job.
These stories were written Monday night
Cmon man
The Powers That Be support The Powers That Be.
X polls crowned Trump the winner of this debate. pic.twitter.com/xxWkcsIrhw— Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree) September 11, 2024
I was pleased with Trump’s performance overall. The only part that really bothered me was the part about pets being eaten in Springfield. I don’t care if it is true or not that’s not something you should say in a debate. It gains you nothing and it will be replayed over and over to make you seem like a crackpot.
This is an indicator of nothing.
lol - So the market futures are much lower and CBS spins that as “Markets are acting as if Kamala was the winner of last nights debate”
Of course, that had NOTHING to do with it.
A poor stock performance is is best check against a Kamminist victory.
Trump has to keep beating the drum about unrealized capital gains, higher taxes in general and more IRS agents.
The question is how many swing voters care about the markets? If they work, have a mortgage, and are saving for retirement, they should care. But so many of these people just don’t have a real stake in the economy or they just don’t care.
David Manure was an embarrassment as a “moderator“.
Hillary also won big debating Trump on 2016 but lost the presidency.
Circa 2016——Echelon Insights polling showed that
<><> Clinton won the 2016 debate 48–22,
<><>the 2016 debate made 41% of respondents more likely to vote for Clinton
<><>and 29% were more likely to vote for Trump.
<><>Reuters/Ipsos 2016 poll found 56% thought Clinton did better, while 26% thought Trump did.
Not the market of futures-— certainly not. That is where money is made— and the decisions such as they are, of forecast and gambling.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.