>Politics were playing a big role in rattling investors ahead of Monday’s U.S. presidential debate between Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and her Republican rival Donald Trump.
>There are conflicting poll numbers and some showing that Mr. Trump is gaining on Hillary Clinton and that is weighing on markets.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-stocks-brace-for-sharp-losses-in-nervous-wait-for-presidential-debate-2016-09-26
>>74867
So what are some of the major reasonings for this? I can understand on a large scale, like assuming Clinton will embrace a global market, but why such a large daily response? Seems like the market would go up as people invest into where they think the new president would boost, ie military industry, or Texan contracting companies (lel).
>So what are some of the major reasonings for this?
Everyone knows Hillary is for sale. Fortune 500 companies do better than startups in a corruptible rigged crony capitalist system. Offshoring slave labor remains legal.
Trump starts winning, markets tank due to uncertainty towards bribes and him being against free trade agreements that allow for 5cent a day laborers and no import penalties.
>>74908
...or it could be good old fashioned uncertainty and the market being led by the nose by fickle men who'd panic sell if Hillary farted during the debate.
>>74916
Scratch that: they'd panic sell/buy depending on volume, length, and wetness of said fart.
why would the market not suffer? American credit has been shot to hell through this election
>>74887
They realize the country is doomed.