The Independent Market Observer

10/18/12 – Why Are Women . . . So Much More Interesting to Men Than Men Are to Women? —Virginia Woolf

Posted by Brad McMillan, CFA, CAIA, MAI

Find me on:

This entry was posted on Oct 18, 2012 10:29:41 AM

and tagged Politics and the Economy, Yesterday's News

Leave a comment

Well, because they vote, in this case. The big story today, which made the front pages of the major papers, was the discovery by both campaigns that women vote. The Financial Times (FT) led with “Fiery Obama seizes on debate to put Romney in a bind over female voters,” the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) led with a more sedate “Candidates Zero In on Women Voters,” and the New York Times (NYT) had a relatively stuffy “Rival Campaigns Intently Pursue Votes of Women.” The underlying story is the same, that women voters—a “minority” that actually constitutes 53 percent (a majority) of the electorate—are now up for grabs, as Romney has narrowed down what had been a large Obama lead to almost even in some polls. One more example of how politics is proving much more fluid than was commonly expected.

Now that the Romney rebound is in full swing, as predicted, I think we can expect to see more pro-Obama coverage in the next round of the horse race. This has already started, with Obama being reported as more energized on the trail, but it will intensify. It is worth noting that despite the Romney rebound, Obama is still ahead by almost two to one in the Nate Silver forecast and in the Intrade market, although both of those numbers are down from their highs.

One pending issue—for whoever wins in November, but particularly for Romney—is what is being said about China during the campaign. The Chinese are listening, and they are not happy. “China fumes over ‘bashing’” (WSJ, p. A6) and “China’s Currency Policy, an Irritant to US, Provides Debate Fodder” (NYT, p. B3) have the candidates making statements and, in some cases, promises that will come back to haunt them post-election. The WSJ story in particular highlights the Chinese government’s reaction. China matters, for the obvious reasons, but also because the government there is increasingly looking for distractions from slowing growth (FT, p. 7; WSJ, p. A9; NYT, p. B8) and finding them in nationalism and disputes with other countries. The Japan and China tensions continue to cook, with “Japanese Politician’s Visit to War Shrine Raises Questions” (NYT, p. A12) and “China attacks Abe over shrine visit” (FT, p. 2). Adding the U.S. to the list unnecessarily is probably not constructive.

Other than that, same as ever. Good news for the U.S., as home construction climbed to a four-year high, per the front page of the WSJ and page B8 of the NYT, and mortgage activity continued to drive higher bank profits, per page C5 of the WSJ. Europe continues to flail around for solutions, per multiple stories in the WSJ and NYT.

One final point worth noting—the NYT has “Multivitamin Use Linked to Lowered Cancer Risk” (p. A19). I don’t know about you, but I am going to start taking my vitamins again.

Subscribe via Email

Crash-Test Investing

Hot Topics

New Call-to-action



see all



The information on this website is intended for informational/educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment advice, a solicitation, or a recommendation to buy or sell any security or investment product. Please contact your financial professional for more information specific to your situation.

Certain sections of this commentary contain forward-looking statements that are based on our reasonable expectations, estimates, projections, and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks and uncertainties, which are difficult to predict. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Diversification does not assure a profit or protect against loss in declining markets.

The S&P 500 Index is a broad-based measurement of changes in stock market conditions based on the average performance of 500 widely held common stocks. All indices are unmanaged and investors cannot invest directly in an index.

The MSCI EAFE (Europe, Australia, Far East) Index is a free float‐adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure the equity market performance of developed markets, excluding the U.S. and Canada. The MSCI EAFE Index consists of 21 developed market country indices.

One basis point (bp) is equal to 1/100th of 1 percent, or 0.01 percent.

Third-party links are provided to you as a courtesy. We make no representation as to the completeness or accuracy of information provided on these websites. Information on such sites, including third-party links contained within, should not be construed as an endorsement or adoption by Commonwealth of any kind. You should consult with a financial advisor regarding your specific situation.


Please review our Terms of Use

Commonwealth Financial Network®