Source: BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research, Bloomberg



Bank of America Merrill Lynch took a look at the presidential-election cycle and found that, on average, the second year is rather weak. Continues here

Category: Cycles, Markets, Politics

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

3 Responses to “Historical Presidential Cycle Pattern – 1928 through 2012”

  1. JimInMissoula says:

    Seems like median might be better, or plot of standard deviation envelope. 1929 was ‘year 1′ for instance and probably skews the average.

  2. BoKolis says:

    Now, why do you suppose that is?
    Sour grapes from the ideologues on the other side?
    Early-term “uncertainty?”

    Why does it kick up in the second half of the term?
    Less “uncertainty?”
    Markets are more comfortable?
    All that early-term lobbying/pestering/conditioning kicking in?
    Clearer idea of / gambling on whether this guy will get another term or who will be next into the dunk-tank?

    Those might seem silly but, you’d be hard-pressed to find any “tangible” force that lines up with the presidential cycle, much less any actionable one. I’m sure the cat who drew this up already knew that- or not- and left it to everyone else to make a Van Gogh out of chart porn.