# Repubs have biggest gain since before WWII... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 3, 2010, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333 "2010-11-03T15:34:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![erez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47c2d/32.png) [@erez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erez)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/41 "2010-11-04T02:39:59Z")
BlinkingDuck, I strongly recommend that you do not make investment decisions by yourself if this thread reflects your understanding of the stock market. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/42 "2010-11-04T03:09:22Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > The markets predicted a move so large…the largest swing since 1938. The markets don’t care if it’s the largest what since what. It’s not out of the realm of what was anticipated. Right now I see the New York Times says the Republicans picked up 60 seats in the House with 11 still to be decided. I see that Monday [Nate Silver forecast a gain of 54 or 55 seats in the House.](http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/01/house-forecast-g-o-p-plus-54-55-seats-significantly-larger-or-smaller-gains-possible/) [In a separate blog entry,](http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/01/agreeing-to-disagree-size-of-republican-wave-hard-to-predict/#more-3087) he wrote this: > [@](#): > > The most widely-used formula says that a Republican advantage of 7 points among likely voters on the generic ballot — which is about what the average is — would translate to a Republican gain of 53 seats. But if you plug the Gallup likely voter results into the model instead (the model was originally designed around Gallup data, in fact), it projects a G.O.P. gain of 77 seats. If you use the Newsweek poll, on the other hand, it shows Republicans gaining just 23 seats. > […] > Our model also thinks the spread of potential outcomes is exceptionally wide: its 95 percent confidence interval runs from a 23-seat Republican gain to an 81-seat one. That’s one blogger, but I think it helps to show this was not a total surprise and was within the spread of opinions people held before the election. It’s something the market already would have taken into account. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/43 "2010-11-04T03:35:40Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > The market is … basically flat right now. And we’ve known for a long time that the Republicans were very likely to win the House but that they weren’t likely to get the Senate, so investors have been trading on that information for weeks or months. Yes, markets do “foretell the future” (in fact studies have shown that election betting sites have a better track record than pollsters do). But I did read that a Republican Senate was given a very high likelihood - 48% or so. (Whether markets are _correct_ that Repubs are good for economy is a matter for another thread.) ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/44 "2010-11-04T04:25:51Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > What a stupid OP. > [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > Mace, your faith in markets is…well…maybe a bit stupid. It is permitted to attack statements (or beliefs), rather than posters, in this forum, but I suggest everyone back off before the insults tread over that fine line. [/Modding] ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/45 "2010-11-04T04:49:38Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > The markets predicted a move so large…the largest swing since 1938. Um, yes? Not just the markets, but pretty much everyone. Have you not been paying attention to the political climate the last few months? The election results were not a surprise. If anything, I think the Democrats did slightly better in the Senate than expected, and worse in the House than expected. Pretty much a wash. Listen, I’m a liberal and I don’t have some sort of blind faith in the wisdom of the markets, but this is pretty basic economics at play here. I certainly think you would’ve seen much more movement if the Republicans took over the Senate or if the Dems made an unusually strong showing. ---
**Author:** ![Lochdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/edb3f5/32.png) [@Lochdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lochdale)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/46 "2010-11-04T06:34:37Z")
Largest mid-term turn out in history I believe. Massive repudiation to Obama and the Congressional Democrats…mostly. I think it was a vote against the status quo and a vote against one party having all the power. The Democrats squandered a massive opportunity but don’t think that obstructionism will work. If the Republicans don’t make real efforts to work with the President then they’ll get destroyed in 2012. Still, 60 seats is a massive swing. ---
**Author:** ![erez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47c2d/32.png) [@erez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erez)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/47 "2010-11-04T06:40:54Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > But I did read that a Republican Senate was given a very high likelihood - 48% or so. (Whether markets are _correct_ that Repubs are good for economy is a matter for another thread.) No, it was never that high. See [http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/common/c\_cd.jsp?conDetailID=639643&z=1260803051168](http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/common/c_cd.jsp?conDetailID=639643&z=1260803051168) with the caveat that I think that most contracts on InTrade are thinly traded. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/48 "2010-11-04T10:42:49Z")
> [@](#): > > Repubs have biggest gain since before WWII… > …and the stock market is down. > > OBVIOUSLY the markets hate the idea of Republicans having such a gain. And, to round out the discussion, the Dow is now at its highest point in two years. I guess the markets did not like having the Dems in control of the White House and both houses of Congress. If you believe that the markets track the elections that closely, which you probably shouldn’t. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/49 "2010-11-04T13:15:17Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > The markets predicted a move so large…the largest swing since 1938. > > Damn! Them markets be SMART! > > What would have happened then if the Repubs would have just had a ‘normal’ gain…you know what was predicted by many? The market would be WAY down then! > > Mace, your faith in markets is…well…maybe a bit stupid. If you notice, I made no prediction about which way the market would react to the size of a Republican win. You just assumed I was thinking it would react negatively to a win that was less than predicted. All I said was that things played out as expected, so any reaction by the market was likely already factored in. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/50 "2010-11-04T13:17:56Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > You mean when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? 😃 :dubious: That was the **Jews!** Remember?! They were shouting, “Torah! Torah! Torah!” ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/51 "2010-11-04T13:56:41Z")
I see it as a massive repudiation of Obama and the Congress as well (11% favorability rating!:eek:). The guy (Obama) seems to sare little about public opinion (witness his $200,000,000/day trip to India)-how’s that for deficit fighting! The most important thing-the all-important house committe chairmaships now go to Republicans-so Obama willbe stymied in his attempts to push his socialist agenda. Look for two things next year: -Obama becoming powerless -another whipsaw election in 2010-if unemployment stays above 7% ---
**Author:** ![BlinkingDuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@BlinkingDuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlinkingDuck)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/52 "2010-11-04T14:42:19Z")
Finally! From a Technical Analysis viewpoint, today could be an important day. It is breaking into a new yearly high and making inroads into a prior minor resistance level. Assuming it can hold/punch through then the Dow should rise to around 12000ish and spend some time there working its way through a more substantial resistance level. Mace, man…I’ve been investing for 19 years…heavily for the last 15. I know markets. As proof I usually do better than the indicies every year. I also know “Everyone knows that…” is usually wrong including your belief. A repub sweep heavier then expect with a falling market (or even holding steady) would be BAD. A red flag…especially when it is below a resistance level. I don’t hold faith with the infallibility of the markets. Markets can be stupid. Textbook case is the NASDAQ back during the dotcom crash 10 years ago. You really believe that ‘everything was priced in’ when the NAsdaq was insanely high? No, markets, like people can be very WRONG. Now, maybe you meant ‘don’t fight the market’ which is very wise advice…but one must always be on the lookout for things like…well, like the market not going up when a stronger than expected repub victory in 2010. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/53 "2010-11-04T14:44:53Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > I see it as a massive repudiation of Obama and the Congress as well (11% favorability rating!:eek:). > The guy (Obama) seems to sare little about public opinion (witness his $200,000,000/day trip to India)-how’s that for deficit fighting! Wow! $200 million per day is a LOT of money for a trip to India. If we could stop all trips to India, we could balance the budget in no time. > [@](#): > > The most important thing-the all-important house committe chairmaships now go to Republicans-so Obama willbe stymied in his attempts to push his socialist agenda. > Look for two things next year: > -Obama becoming powerless > -another whipsaw election in 2010-if unemployment stays above 7% Oh, jeez, we’re having another election in 2010? I haven’t even recovered from this one yet. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/54 "2010-11-04T14:44:56Z")
**BlinkingDuck** , do you have a cite that this was stronger than anticipated? So far I think the evidence says it was within the realm of expectations. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/55 "2010-11-04T15:27:27Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > That’s one blogger, but I think it helps to show this was not a total surprise and was within the spread of opinions people held before the election. It’s something the market already would have taken into account. Nate Silver isn’t just one blogger, he is the best election-predicting analyst in the world. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/56 "2010-11-04T15:32:00Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Nate Silver isn’t just one blogger, he is the best election-predicting analyst in the world. I did undersell him there. He is very, very good at what he does. ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/57 "2010-11-04T15:57:58Z")
Up, down, up, down. I’m in it for the long haul. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/58 "2010-11-04T16:37:28Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > Mace, man…I’ve been investing for 19 years…heavily for the last 15. I know markets. As proof I usually do better than the indicies every year. I also know “Everyone knows that…” is usually wrong including your belief. I’ve been investing for 30 years and have done very, very well, thank-you very much. If you have anything to say that specifically disputes my comment, bring it. Fact is, the results reflect pretty much what everyone was expecting. I’ll also note that there is a lot going on the world besides the US election. Trying to assign a market move (or non-move) to one factor is not a good analysis technique. ---
**Author:** ![theR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@theR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theR)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/59 "2010-11-04T18:10:33Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Nate Silver isn’t just one blogger, he is the best election-predicting analyst in the world. Slight hijack, but I think Sam Wang would [not agree](http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/11/post-election-evaluation-part-2/). ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2010, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333/60 "2010-11-04T19:07:29Z")
> [@theR](#): > > Slight hijack, but I think Sam Wang would [not agree](http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/11/post-election-evaluation-part-2/). Looks like Nate was closer this time around, though. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/repubs-have-biggest-gain-since-before-wwii/559333.md?page=4)