The extreme divergence in market returns between strong presidential years and weak midterm years from 1962-1982 was driven by populist political cycles. This pattern is re-emerging, as seen in 2022's sharp drop and 2024's strength, because the same underlying political forces are now at play.
Related Insights
A contrarian view suggests a new political administration might deliberately implement growth-negative policies at the start of a term. This strategy, likened to a new CEO "kitchen sinking" results, clears the deck and establishes a low baseline, making subsequent growth appear more robust.
Recent elections demonstrate that a strong stock market doesn't translate to votes. This political reality frees politicians to enact populist policies that may harm market indices but appeal to the electorate, creating a structural headwind for cap-weighted indexes dominated by a few large tech companies.
The 2026 midterm elections are unlikely to cause significant policy shifts due to probable gridlock. Their real value for investors is in providing 'soft signals' about evolving voter preferences that could foreshadow major policy directions after the 2028 general election, creating opportunities if the market misinterprets them.
The sectors that outperform in the initial year of a new presidential administration can provide a roadmap for market trends over the subsequent years. This political-macro overlay suggests focusing on current leaders, like metals, for sustained performance.
To understand any market or economic event, view it through the lens of five major forces: 1) the debt/money cycle, 2) internal political order/disorder, 3) the international world order, 4) acts of nature/climate, and 5) technology. Their convergence often creates a "perfect storm."
The historic gap between Republican and Democratic pride in America reflects a "K-shaped" economy. A soaring stock market benefits a concentrated few, exacerbating wealth inequality and breaking the social contract. This disconnect between headline market performance and the economic reality for most citizens fuels political division.
Extreme inequality and inflation, driven by debt and money printing, create widespread frustration. This frustration "summons" populist figures like Trump, who are seen as chaos agents to disrupt a rigged system, rather than being the root cause of the political anger themselves.
The traditional relationship where economic performance dictated political outcomes has flipped. Now, political priorities like tariff policies, reshoring, and populist movements are the primary drivers of economic trends, creating a more unpredictable environment for investors.
The current administration is tolerating economic pain and a market slowdown now, a year before midterm elections. This creates the political capital and justification to aggressively stimulate the economy and boost markets right before voters head to the polls.
The world is shifting from a post-WWII "bundled" phase of globalization to an "unbundled" phase of populism. This decoupling, driven by anger at elite exploitation, is a predictable historical cycle, much like the recurring bundling and unbundling of media services.
