On Nov. 5, Jim Cramer of CNBC's Mad Money program, offered his election prognostication for what tomorrow will bring for the country. In a parallel to his atrocious stock picking record, and embarrassing diatribe of not selling Bear Stearns just days before it went bankrupt, the former hedge fund manager predicts that President Obama will win by not only a landslide, but with numbers not seen since Ronald Reagan in 1984.
Popular vote: Obama: 55%, Romney: 45%
Electoral College: Obama: 440, Romney: 98
Not only are these numbers absurd, there is not one poll, or analyst who is with 100 electors of this insane prediction. Cramer believes that several states, including long standing conservative ones like Arizona and Texas, will go for Obama, even when they didn't in 2008.
Analysis of Jim Cramer's stock pick performance:
In a quick chat with MarketBeat one of the paper’s authors, Paul Bolster, was kind enough to translate, explaining that Cramer beats the market in part because of the excess risk in his picks. “If we adjust for his market risk, we come up with an excess return that is essentially zero,” Bolster said, adding that “zero,” in this case, means his returns are roughly in line with the risk he’s taking on. “He’s pulling his own weight with respect to the risks that his picks represent,” Bolster said. In the paper, Bolster and fellow finance professor Trahan conclude that “we find inconsistent evidence of Cramer’s ability to add value through security selection.” - WSJ
Numbers wonk Patrick Burns served as the key stat cruncher for the Barron’s story, and here’s his paper explaining his approach. Conclusion: “In my opinion, Jim Cramer’s stock-picking superiority is at best unproved.”
Then of course, there is Cramer's more recent epic fail when he pushed the Facebook IPO on his show.
Looks like the man who is part of the psychopathic 1%, who believe taking massive risks at the detriment of investors and the country, is simply adding to his resume of being the fool and joker of Wall Street.