Do the American people know this?

[usregimechange]

Largest Single-Day Point Drops in the Dow Jones (with U.S. President):

1. March 16, 2020 – -2,997.10 points (Donald Trump)
2. March 12, 2020 – -2,352.60 points (Donald Trump)
3. April 4, 2025 – -2,231.07 points (Donald Trump)
4. March 9, 2020 – -2,013.76 points (Donald Trump)
5. June 11, 2020 – -1,861.82 points (Donald Trump)
6. April 3, 2025 – -1,679.39 points (Donald Trump)

And the political party of the Presidents who presided over the largest % drop in the Dow Jones:

1. October 19, 1987 – -22.61%
President: Ronald Reagan
Year: 1987
Party: Republican
2. March 16, 2020 – -12.93%
President: Donald Trump
Year: 2020
Party: Republican
3. October 28, 1929 – -12.82%
President: Herbert Hoover
Year: 1929
Party: Republican
4. October 29, 1929 – -11.73%
President: Herbert Hoover
Year: 1929
Party: Republican
5. March 12, 2020 – -9.99%
President: Donald Trump
Year: 2020
Party: Republican
6. November 6, 1929 – -9.92%
President: Herbert Hoover
Year: 1929
Party: Republican
7. December 18, 1899 – -8.72%
President: William McKinley
Year: 1899
Party: Republican
8. August 12, 1932 – -8.40%
President: Herbert Hoover
Year: 1932
Party: Republican
9. March 14, 1907 – -8.29%
President: Theodore Roosevelt
Year: 1907
Party: Republican
10. October 26, 1987 – -8.28%
President: Ronald Reagan
Year: 1987
Party: Republican

[BOSSHOG]

1. Thank You for that Excellent info My Friend

I guess that’s how republicans make America Great Again.

[usregimechange]

2. Welcome. I spent quite a bit of time making sure they were accurate

[BOSSHOG]

5. You must be one of those wacky liberals

Who value accuracy and the truth. Thank You Again.

[malaise]

3. Off to the greatest page for visibility

Spread it

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. 1: Point drops are useless. It's percent that counts. 2: Dow is 1896 price-weighted adding machine index. Use SP500

If you don't know why point drops are useless, PM me. Percentage drops here: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=20211511

The S&P 500, Nasdaq Composite and Russel 2000 indices are much more useful. The first two are capitalization weighted and the latter is a combination of capitalization weighting and possibly some jiggering about being on other indices that I haven't found clarity on.

To understand how weighting works, consider the Dow Jones Industrial Average®, which uses a very simple weighting method: price weighting. If Merck, a constituent of The Dow®, had a share price of USD 90, and the sum of the share prices of all DJIA component stocks was USD 4,300, then the weight of Merck in The Dow would be USD 90/USD 4,300 = 2.1%. If Visa, another DJIA component, had a share price of USD 180, it would have a weight of USD 180/USD 4,300 = 4.2%. Because the weight of Visa is twice that of Merck, a 10% change in the share price of Visa would have twice the impact on the performance of The Dow that a 10% change in the share price of Merck would.

[msongs]

6. one suspects point drops may be a bigger deal to most people than intellectual per centage drops.

2000 is bigger than 3 lol

[Bernardo de La Paz]

12. Sure, but Make America Stupid Again is not a good strategy. . . . . nt

[markodochartaigh]

31. "Make America Stupid Again"

Now I know two kinds of masa. Only one of them useful.

[usregimechange]

7. I included the percent drops

[Bernardo de La Paz]

8. No you did not. . . . . nt

[usregimechange]

15. WTH?

[usregimechange]

16. " And the political party of the Presidents who presided over the largest % drop in the Dow Jones"

[Bernardo de La Paz]

17. Lists of political parties are not lists of percentage drops. . . .nt

[usregimechange]

18. Did you see the % in the sentence???

WTH is going on With you.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

19. There is a percentage sign but no percentages.

WTH is going on With you.

Look in a mirror.

[usregimechange]

20. They're ranked by percent, need the middle names of the Presidents too?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

21. Middle names are not percentages. . . . . nt

[usregimechange]

25. There you go, updated in OP, let me know if there's anything else you need

[RandomNumbers]

50. You could have asked nicely for them to add the %s in the post.

Now I just got here, so I don't HAVE to do this .... but since the DATES are there, and presumably were there in the original version ...

I could have just f*cking LOOKED IT UP if I really wanted to know the exact percentages. And, so could you. If that was what you cared about. If you just thought it would be more helpful to have that listed, for any reader, then maybe just ask nicely?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

51. So in your book the reader should do all the work. Every reader should spend a minute looking it up

There have been over 5,000 views of this thread. Assume there are 1,200 unique viewers. So you think it is a good use of time that 1,200 viewers spend 1,200 minutes looking it up. That is 20 hours.

I think it would be a much better use of time if the OP spent say 10 (ten) minutes getting the data and formatting it nicely.

20 hours (or whatever a more accurate estimate is) is a waste compared to 10 minutes. Wouldn't it be a kindness if the OP did a little work to smooth the reader's task?

A poster could have two different motivations to posting. 1) They want to share an insight or fact and help people understand it. 2) They are writing so that they can look at their own writing and who the hell cares about anyone else.

I, being me, assume that almost all posters here have motivation #1 and thus would be motivated to do the ten minutes of work to share the fact or insight.

Demanding that the reader do the work would be motivation #2. You, are free to endorse and support and advocate motivation #2.

[usregimechange]

53. Reminds me of when I worked at a Dem HQ and..

A guy came in and said, wth is wrong with you guys you should be staffing this place 24-7! And I said we’d love to, would you like to volunteer to help make that happen? And he said oh I don’t have time for that.

I’m not getting paid to do this.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

54. Exactly. Regardless, anything worth doing is worth doing as best as one is able. . . . nt

[RandomNumbers]

55. The work of being nice if you notice something missing from a post and request it be added.

There is nothing wrong with noticing something missing and suggesting it be added. My post is about tone.

We are all supposed to be allies here.

[usregimechange]

52. Thank you

[malaise]

35. Not to experts

But to those MAGDAs - it is freaking perfect.

Thanks for MAGDAs SNL - make America Great Depression again😀

[malaise]

36. Not to experts

But to those MAGDAs - it is freaking perfect.

Thanks for MAGDAs SNL - make America Great Depression again😀

[Bernardo de La Paz]

38. People posting on DU are not posting to magas. . . . . . . nt

[malaise]

39. That chart is perfect to spread

Just saying.
Put it outside their favorite places

[jalan48]

9. This would make a great information ad in a newspaper. Maybe Ms Walton could spring for it.

[WarGamer]

10. Why not list the single day point gains records?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

11. Because point gains are as useless as point drops. . . . nt

[WarGamer]

13. I think the true story is volatility

The largest point GAINS and largest POINT LOSSES both belong to Trump.

He's a bull in a china shop and the market likes stability...

I don't mind, as a daily options trader but it's hell for those with long term ports.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

14. Yes, volatility is an important part of the story, as is uncertainty. . . . . nt

[niyad]

22. KNR and bookmarking.

[aggiesal]

23. The 8 largest Dow Jones drops in US history:

1. Trump, 3/16/20 -2,997.10
2. Trump, 3/12/20 -2,352.60
3. Trump 4/4/25 -2,231.07
4. Trump, 3/9/20 -2,013.76
5. Trump, 6/11/20 -1,861.82
6. Trump, 4/3/25 -1,679.39
7. Trump, 3/11/20 -1,464.94
8. Trump, 03/18/20 -1,338.46

[jgmiller]

24. This is way too academic looking to help with most voters unfortunately

There is way too much text and reading involved. When the first guy tried to kill Trump I was surprise to read that Trump frequently showed charts (or at least one) at his rallys. I thought that was way too academic for the MAGA crowd but then I looked at it and got it. You didn't need to understand numbers or math to get it, it was just one line going up and down and he would point out that when he was in charge was when it went up. Of course he cherry picked the data but that didn't matter because none of them cared about or understood the data behind it they just saw this:

"Trump in office : Up Good"
"Biden in office: Down Bad"

Someone with enough visibility could do something like that with this data. Just have two columns on a graph, one blue and one red and show how much better the market, economy, etc does under Democrats vs Republicans.

We get way too lost in the details, the thing Trump understands better than most is that people don't want details (which is sad), they want pretty pictures.

[usregimechange]

26. Yeah but the other guy here wanted everything in there

[gopiscrap]

27. this should be posted every where

[Swede]

28. Republicans are shrewd businessmen.

Or so I've heard.

[ReRe]

29. K&R

This would be a good one to copy and stick in your wallet/purse to have handy when a magat confronts you about how bad Biden's economy was. Just give this to them and tell them shut the fuck up and go look it up.

[Warpy]

30. Republicans are rigidly top-down thinkers

whose economic dogma forces them to shovel as much wealth as they can into the maws of the wealthy owning class while starving the demand side by throwing people out of work, passing regressive taxes, and generally ensuring that people will have far less to live on.

Then the country goes into recession, the Republicans stand around with their thumbs up their bums, completely paralyzed by their dogma.

The US then throws them out of office for a term or two, just barely long enough to undo some of the damage, then they fall for GOP bullshit again for the next roud of unmitigated stupidity.
Perhaps if That Fat Grifter clings to his ruinous tariffs long enough, the electorate will finally catch a clue about what's really going on, but I'm not having an optimistic night tonight.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

40. He will stick to it; not gonna change any time soon. He posted Friday and Saturday

President Trump doubled down on his controversial tariff policy early Friday as markets continued to plummet on fears of a US economic recession.

In a post on his social media platform Truth Social, the president said, "TO THE MANY INVESTORS COMING INTO THE UNITED STATES AND INVESTING MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF MONEY, MY POLICIES WILL NEVER CHANGE. THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO GET RICH, RICHER THAN EVER BEFORE!!!"

President Trump on Saturday took a victory lap over the sweeping new tariffs he levied on nearly all foreign trading partners, claiming the end result will serve as an “economic revolution.”

“We have been the dumb and helpless ‘whipping post,’ but not any longer,” he wrote on Truth Social. “We are bringing back jobs and businesses like never before. Already, more than FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS OF INVESTMENT, and rising fast!”

“THIS IS AN ECONOMIC REVOLUTION, AND WE WILL WIN,” he added. “HANG TOUGH, it won’t be easy, but the end result will be historic. We will, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!”

[Warpy]

46. Other factors are at work

First, as we all know, he has never been wrong about anything, he knows more about finance than anyone else on the planet and only he can fix the world. Yes, I just threw up a little there.

Second, his own net worth is now estimated to be 90% crypto, his vanity coin selling extremely well to bad actors who want favors. Likely the techno brows who are backing this idiocy and economic suicide are the same. They will not be harmed by a significant crash, if one happens. Right now, it looks like a slow slide, two steps back then one forward as bargain hunters come out.

Both these factors will have him cling to those tariffs as long as possible. Hang onto what ya got, it's going to be rough for a while.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

47. I don't know about "90%" but yes his ego and his investment conflicts of interest are definitely factors

Of course, one can say there is NO conflict of interest: he only has one interest, himself.

[Warpy]

48. That 90% is a figure I've heard from both left and right sources

because his vanity crypto, launched after the coalition of the rich and the stupid voted him back in, has run up his paper net worth that quickly.

Of course, they day he leaves office, it will all go poof, but he's likely to have skated out of it by then.

[Jack Valentino]

32. All of the GOP stock market analysts whom I read, recognize that DEMOCRATIC Presidents

have historically been better for the stock market,
and for the general economy...

but then again, they aren't maggots or Trump/GOP cultists---
they still try to tell the truth about such financial matters---
because if they didn't, they would lose all credibility.

[markodochartaigh]

33. Do they know this:

Ten of the eleven U.S. recessions between 1953 and 2020 began under Republican presidents.[3] Of these, the most statistically significant differences are in real GDP growth, unemployment rate change, stock market annual return, and job creation rate.

Or, in the case of authoritarians, do they believe it. Since authoritarians tend to reject facts which contradict their belief system.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._economic_performance_by_presidential_party

[Probatim]

34. He's gunning to replace Raygun as the greatest president ever...

[William769]

37. Most of them don't care.

[IronLionZion]

41. Trump is in great company with Hoover and Reagan

all Republican heroes.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

42. Protest sign today

[Ol Janx Spirit]

43. Clearly, no--they don't. And that is why we can't have nice things... N/T

[dlk]

44. There's a pattern

Who stands to benefit?

[wordstroken]

45. If they didn't before, they do now. Great eye-opening info. Thanks, usregimechange.

[TommieMommy]

49. Very interesting 🤔 thank you