Kamala Harris has a brand-new and perhaps improbable surrogate to shill for her now — an endorsement that might be more of an indictment than a boon to her nascent campaign.
You might be familiar with this individual, infamous for the inaccurate predictions he routinely makes on television, for which anyone who takes his advice seriously suffers.
Via Market Watch (emphasis added):
Presumptive presidential nominee Kamala Harris picked up a huge endorsement on Monday, from CNBC’s Jim Cramer.
Though whether that turns out to be a good thing or a bad thing is another matter.
A president Harris would “absolutely, absolutely, no doubt about it” be good for the stock market and American business, Cramer said, adding that her ties to Silicon Valley mean she’d be very supportive of the big technology companies that dominate Wall Street.
“Let’s not forget her brother in law is Tony West, who is a former general counsel of Pepsico, then was with the Justice Department, and is now the general counsel of Uber,” Cramer said. “And you tell me if there’s someone who’s more sophisticated [about business and the stock market] and knows more about business and the west coast than her brother in law, who would be an amazing adviser. They’re close.”
Harris, Cramer said, would be much more pro-business and pro-Silicon Valley than Biden. “I’m regarding this as Mega versus MAGA. Mega tech does better with someone who’s sophisticated, who understands California, who’s not against tech.”
If Cramer is right, a Harris presidency would be better for large cap stocks and Trump for small caps. For Harris that would be bullish for the S&P 500 index…
Cramer argued that Harris and the Democrats were now more pro-business than the Republicans under Donald Trump and JD Vance would be, as they have embraced a kind of small town “populism” and “nativism” (“not nationalism – nativism”) not seen since the “Populist” era of the 1890s.
Jim Cramer, for the record, is literally the worst market analyst in recorded history. That he still has a show on CNBC speaks to the mediocrity of cable news actors.
His schtick is to get hopped up on something — let’s be generous and say it’s unbridled enthusiasm for money-changing or perhaps a legal substance like caffeine — and make wildly inaccurate predictions that cost anyone who takes his advice seriously.
Via The Philadelphia Inquirer (emphasis added):
When it comes to putting his neck on the line — and sometimes coming close to getting it chopped off — few, if any, rival Jim Cramer, the loudmouthed host of "Mad Money" on CNBC. On one hand, he must be doing something right since his show has been on the air for 10 years. But his wrong picks are legendary — Hewlett-Packard was one.
In 2012, he urged viewers to dump the stock based on his dim view that its corporate culture was broken. Within six months, HP shot up 115 percent.…
He also told viewers to ditch Best Buy. "Exit these stocks immediately," he urged. Cramer cited "terrible same store sales losses as well as a dramatic decline in cash flow" at the retailer. His pessimism was unfounded. Like HP, Best Buy rose 124 percent in the following six months.
Most egregiously, he was touting failed Silicon Valley Bank just weeks before it collapsed and had to be bailed out by the government.
Via New York Post (emphasis added):
A clip of CNBC “Mad Money” host Jim Cramer praising Signature Bank as a good investment has resurfaced following news that the lender was shut down by regulators on Sunday following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank.
Cramer, who has been pummeled on social media over stock market prognostications gone wrong, told viewers on April 12 of last year that Signature Bank qualified as a “GARP stock” — one that embodies the principle of “growth at a reasonable price.”
Cramer listed Signature alongside State Street, Bank of New York Mellon, and Charles Schwab as “investable” stocks that would benefit from the Federal Reserve hiking interest rates.
Cramer’s plugging of Signature Bank resurfaced just days after other clips that showed him praising Silicon Valley Bank mere weeks before the tech-centric lender imploded, sparking a crisis across the US financial sector.
All that to say: Cramer and the Karamel-uh entity deserve each other; I wish them failure in their marriage from hell.
