Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 22, 2014, 01:17:17 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  U.S. Presidential Election Results
| | |-+  2000 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | | |-+  Nasdaq Effects in 2000
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Nasdaq Effects in 2000  (Read 809 times)
phk
phknrocket1k
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12975


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

View Profile
« on: October 03, 2011, 03:42:46 am »
Ignore

The Nasdaq peaked on March 10th, 2000 (for good) at 5048.16 and closed at 3,415.79 on Election Day representing a ~32% decline in a period of 8 months. Did this have any effect?
Logged

GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7213
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2011, 07:40:43 am »
Ignore

It might have cost Gore the election. It could have been a factor that just decided not to show up in the exit polling. But, was still in the voter's minds.
Logged

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=195483.new#new
the birth of modern america & onward election James Blaine is easily reelected & returned to the white house defeating former Indiana Governor Thomas Hendricks & Independent candidate Clinton Fisk.
AverroŽs Nix
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10023
United States


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2011, 11:54:32 am »
Ignore

It might have cost Gore the election. It could have been a factor that just decided not to show up in the exit polling. But, was still in the voter's minds.

At such a miniscule margin, a thousand minor factors are responsible for Gore's loss, ranging from the weather to traffic to what was on TV on election day to the price of milk.

On the Atlas Forums, it's likely that this is an inane statement. So I'll respond to the original poster's question: Yes, it had an effect on the margin, and it's likely that it hurt Gore more than Bush. And if it did, it almost certainly affected the outcome of the election.
Logged

GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7213
United States


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: October 03, 2011, 12:06:51 pm »
Ignore

It might have cost Gore the election. It could have been a factor that just decided not to show up in the exit polling. But, was still in the voter's minds.


On the Atlas Forums, it's likely that this is an inane statement. So I'll respond to the original poster's question: Yes, it had an effect on the margin, and it's likely that it hurt Gore more than Bush. And if it did, it almost certainly affected the outcome of the election.
Which is basically what I said, except written differently.
Logged

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=195483.new#new
the birth of modern america & onward election James Blaine is easily reelected & returned to the white house defeating former Indiana Governor Thomas Hendricks & Independent candidate Clinton Fisk.
AverroŽs Nix
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10023
United States


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: October 03, 2011, 12:12:17 pm »
Ignore

It might have cost Gore the election. It could have been a factor that just decided not to show up in the exit polling. But, was still in the voter's minds.


On the Atlas Forums, it's likely that this is an inane statement. So I'll respond to the original poster's question: Yes, it had an effect on the margin, and it's likely that it hurt Gore more than Bush. And if it did, it almost certainly affected the outcome of the election.

Which is basically what I said, except written differently.


Almost. I put greater emphasis on the fact that altering virtually any of the conditions on election day in 2000 could have changed the outcome. To be clear, I was referring to my first sentence as inane, not anything that you'd said.
Logged

Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines