Apr

10

One should read the chapter on strange anomalies in presidential names and victories in Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science by Martin Gardner to see how multiple classification, i.e. over determination, and many more hypotheseses than elections can come up with the strangest, craziest predictors of election results based on things like their names, or moves in the market during certain period.

I always love when Bloomberg, which is the most biased in my opinion news service in favor of democrats, always trots out the canard that markets do better during democratic presidencies than republicans. Martin Gardner where are you. Of course if you start here or there, and don't take account of the moves likes in 2008 of -50% before the inauguration in fear of the coming president you can come up with things as silly as what Gardner reports.


Comments

Name

Email

Website

Speak your mind

3 Comments so far

  1. Snowballing on April 13, 2012 11:40 am

    Victor you are so right about Obama not accepting responsibility for the market dropping 50% before he took office. He only wants to showcase the market recovering after he took office.

    For three years I keep telling people if we had elected McCain we would have started two more wars and reduced taxes and the world would still be prospering with no economic downturn.

    Keep telling it like it is Victor.

  2. Roger Tompkins on April 18, 2012 3:54 am

    Snowballing — excellent.

  3. Chipster on April 30, 2012 1:52 am

    So, if the market fell 50% before Obama was inaugurated because it feared what was to come, why did it start going up, and continue to go up massively within two months after his inauguration? Did the market suddenly realize that Obama wasn’t so bad after all? This election analysis seems specious on its face.

Archives

Resources & Links

Search