I have long been a big believer in the idea that the daily fluctuations in the stock market can't be easily explained.

That doesn't stop people from making sage sounding comments about how the market fell 486 points today due to bad economic statistics -- like the ones we had today on contraction in service sector employment. But by that same logic, the market should have tumbled yesterday as well, thanks to bad retail sales, employment and auto sales numbers on which I posted -- and yet the Dow rose 306 points yesterday.

This got me to thinking about a possible explanation. There's nothing so fun as a good conspiracy theory. What if the Treasury was using its money to help prop up the market in the days preceding the election? My mind then leapt to a possible rationale: Perhaps it reasoned that since the collapse in the markets had helped Obama, a rise in stock prices would work to the advantage of McCain. Aha! It would certainly have looked better for the current administration if it could have been succeeded by another Republican in the Oval Office. If that was the intent, it didn't work too well.

Of course, just as there is no evidence that economic statistics -- or the election -- have anything to do with the market moving one way or the other, so it is difficult for me to find any evidence that the Treasury was funneling cash into the markets to prop it up. Oh well.

In all seriousness, I believe there is a fundamental lack of transparency if there is no credible basis on which to explain why the market moves every day. If the big buyers and sellers of stocks publicly disclosed their moves, then it might be feasible to explain them.

That does not seem to be on the horizon, though. So people will continue making their illogical explanations for those daily price swings.

Peter Cohan is President of Peter S. Cohan & Associates. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter.

Yuppie organic food market, Whole Foods (NYSE: WFMI) has been struggling with the slow economy. After all, the company that has jokingly been referred to as Whole Paycheck for its high prices has lost business as people have cut back on spending. Now, a private equity firm has stepped in to do a rare Private Investment in Public Equity (PIPE) deal -- buying 17% of its shares which boosted Whole Foods stock 19.8% after-hours.

Who would do such a thing? An affiliate of Leonard Green Partners, Green Equity Investors V, spent $425 million for its Whole Foods PIPE. Why did Leonard Green do this? Does it expect to take an active role in managing the company and somehow pull it out of its growth slump? Or is its 17% stake simply a passive investment -- and a bet that Whole Foods has bottomed out?

I think Leonard Green may have gotten a bargain. Whole Foods stock fell 6.2% during regular trading after it lowered its 2009 EPS estimates from $1.04 to between $0.95 and $1 -- it earned 82 cents a share in 2008. And based on that lower growth rate, Whole Foods trades at a PEG ratio of 0.6 -- on a P/E of 9.8 with earnings forecast to grow 16% in 2009.

Greenlight Reinsurance Ltd. (NASDAQ: GLRE) is an off-shore specialty property and casualty reinsurance company. This week, the company reported its Q3 results, which showed a net loss of $118.4 million or $3.29 per share.

Something else: Greenlight's investment portfolio is managed by a top hedge fund manager, David Einhorn. He was the person who publicly criticized -- and shorted -- Lehman before it went bust.

So, it's interesting to listen to the Greenlight conference call to get a sense of Einhorn's strategy.

Now, like many other hedge fund managers, he wasn't able to avoid the storm. In fact, Greenlight's investment portfolio plunged 15.9% for the quarter.

Actually, he increased his overall short positions during the past couple months. Yet, it wasn't enough as the markets underwent extreme volatility. It also didn't help that the federal government banned short selling of about one thousand financial services companies.

New York Times (NYSE: NYT) Columnist David Brooks draws attention to a U.S. economic discussion and reality that's been all-but-sidelined in the past three decades, particularly among younger investors and others who believe that history began in 1981. Namely, that there's been a distinct cyclicality to the nation's economic / public policy history.

Is a new progressive era ahead?

That may come as a surprise to market absolutists and others who see economic history and their view of economic progress as a straight line towards privatization. In fact, periods of economic conservatism and liberalism -- the latter also known as progressive reform -- have cycled for much of the nation's history.

For Brooks, those economic blinders help explain both the market absolutists' befuddlement at the financial crisis around them and their inability to adapt to the electoral demands brought on by the crisis. Market absolutists are in a straightjacket of a party that is ailing and part of a conservatism that is behind the times, he says.

On the cycle's timing, economist David H. Wang argues that the old era ends and the new era begins not when social pressures build from the bottom-up, but when institutions -- like investment banks, mortgage lenders and credit default swap issuers -- fail from the top-down.

Shares of Ambac Financial Group, Inc. (NYSE: ABK) are down nearly 40% today after the company reported results the street deemed abysmal, even by the low standards that have been set for this once-proud company. The company lost 2.4312 billion dollars -- but apparently it was too humiliating to put it that way. So the result is a ludicrous press release headline that reads Ambac Financial Group, Inc. Announces Third Quarter Net Loss of $2,431.2 Million.

Mark-to-market losses on credit derivatives amounted to $2,705.2 million with a smattering of gains and losses in others categories making up the remainder.

I understand that reason behind using the $2,431 million figure: in the company's balance sheet and income statement, figures are quoted in millions. But for the headline of the press release, it's a little weird to stick with that format: telling investors "We lost two-thousand four-hundred million dollars!" does not exactly inspire confidence.

Moody's announced on September 18th that is reviewing the company for a possible downgrade and the deterioration in the economy since then would not seem to bode well for the company's future. There could be many more thousands of millions in losses to come.

The Blackstone Group L.P.'s (NYSE: BX) stock is down from about $25 to under $10 during the last 52-weeks. No wonder. It does deals like buying Hilton Hotels According to The Wall Street Journal, "The $26 billion leveraged buyout of Hilton Hotels Corp., with its 2,900 hotels and 490,000 rooms throughout the world."

Travel is likely to be way, way down during the recession.

But, the news has broader implications than that. Most LBOs are done with heavy debt, usually borrowed from major banks. Often that debt carries high interest rates to account for risk. In a slowing economy, a lot of that debt will default. Companies which were taken private will end up in Chapter 11, especially those which depend heavily on consumer spending.

That brings the issue around to bank earnings in 2009. While write-offs for mortgage-backed paper may be improving somewhat, a wave of LBO defaults are likely to hit money center banks hard. More losses, more need for capital.

The Treasury may not be done handing out money yet. Another wave of trouble for banks is just around the corner.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

Here's is my quick form strategy for investing during an Obama presidency:

Health care stocks should perform well under an Obama administration. It has been made clear that within the next four years our healthcare system shall be taking on a radical new form. There is certain to be a massive infusion of new money into the sector. I would hasten to clarify that pharmaceutical stocks might not be the angle that you want to play here. I would lean more towards hospitals and long-term care providers. Check out this analysis from Kiplinger, to get yourself started.

Next, I'd be looking at infrastructure plays. I'd focus on materials, procurement, and construction, as they relate to roads, tunnels and bridges. This play will be more dangerous in the near term, as these types of expenditures will be more dependent on governmental budgetary processes, rather than executive edict. Jim Cramer recently offered some input about infrastructure. You might want to check out his suggestions. Then, you can find information about building an infrastructure position at TheStreet.com. Additionally, here's a great list of infrastructure companies which has been provided by Seeking Alpha.

To me, perhaps the most important investment angle to play through the next administration will be alternative energy stocks. I expect that there will be a great deal of money moving in there. Ethanol is said to be a sure thing. I myself am not so positive about that. Oh, we can be sure that there will be plenty of ethanol to go around. However, I don't see much financial return in it at the investor's level. I lean towards solar plays, and to a lesser degree, I like wind power. You can get a good feel for alternative energy direction by reviewing The Pickens Plan. There is no shortage of companies to invest in if you're looking for alternative energy plays. You can easily start your stock picking hunt by checking out the companies which are included in the Wilderhill Clean Energy Index.

As always, stock portfolio success begins with good research. Hopefully, I've given you some quality leads to get started with. When all is said and done, history clearly shows that the markets flourish under administrations controlled by the democrats. Let's hope to God that this time around won't be the exception.

For me, today is a day of great optimism. I'm immensely relieved that Obama was elected President and I expect great things from him. In fact, I think his win could increase optimism about the future of America enough to give the economy a much-needed boost.

Years from now, historians may look back and see Obama's election as kicking off a new virtuous cycle where people feel more upbeat, so they buy a few more items, and businesses do a bit better and hire more and...

Okay, I'm getting ahead of myself here. But while pondering what stock I would buy as a play on the new Obama America, my pick would be General Electric Co. (NYSE: GE). GE has long been a play on global economic growth. It is a huge conglomerate with businesses in consumer finance, media, energy and household appliances -- just to name a few. Its returns pretty much track the S&P 500 or other broad market indexes over time (although with more volatility than the index).

Given recent months of financial crisis and worldwide economic slowdown, GE's stock is cheap. It is trading today around $20 a share, a 50% drop from a year ago. It's price-earnings ratio is just 10 and its yield is a hefty 6%.

Those who were hoping for an Obama victory lap on the floor of the NYSE only got their toes bitten by bears. Weakening economic data and the market preparing for very weak retail sales numbers took away any shot of major gains today, and you can always blame major profit taking after a multi-day rally phase we saw.

Top Analyst Upgrades
Top Analyst Downgrades

Arcelor Mittal (NYSE: MT) was slapped after the global steel giant gave guidance for EBITDA in Q4 at $2.5 to $3.0 billion. This is being taken as an earnings warning with 2008 expectations being implied at roughly $24.2 billion as being more than 10% under consensus expectations. Shares were down 20% at $25.30 on above average volume shortly before the close.

Greenhill & Co., Inc. (NYSE: GHL) was down after it filed to sell up to 3.5 million shares of common stock in a secondary offering. Shares were down over 11% at $61.61 shortly before the close.

Another difficult data point for Boeing's 787 Dreamliner.

Boeing announced that it will delay the first test flight of its next-generation jetliner, the 787 Dreamliner, beyond Q4, citing the recently-ended machinists strike, Bloomberg News reported.

Further, the company set no new time frame for the plane, the test flight of which has already been delayed three times and is currently 15 months behind schedule, Bloomberg News reported. An eight-week strike with the machinists union, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, was settled November 2, with machinists approving a new contract shortly thereafter.

The Boeing Company's (NYSE: BA) shares slid $4.09 to $49.53 Wednesday afternoon amid a broader market sell-off.

It may seem a bit of a stretch, but Ford (NYSE: F) could benefit greatly from an Obama presidency. And it's not because Barack Obama is going to start riding in Lincoln presidential limousines like JFK and LBJ famously did.

Rather, Ford could benefit simply because politically, Obama can't afford to preside over the complete collapse of the American automotive industry. And that collapse is looking more and more like a very real possibility.

The Center for Automotive Research issued a report today analyzing the potential effects of serious cutbacks at the Big Three. If Ford, General Motors (NYSE: GM) and Chrysler were to cut production collectively by half, the result would be a loss of two and a half million jobs. If all three gave up the ghost entirely, over three million jobs would disappear in the first year alone. These are staggering figures. The impact on personal income and tax receipts would be enormous.

Unfortunately, these numbers have to be taken seriously given the state of the industry. As David Cole, the head of the Center for Automotive Research, said, "The likelihood of one or two of the Detroit Three manufacturers ending operations is very real."

There are two ways one can look at the current state of the U.S. auto industry: 1) things are pretty bad or 2) the auto sector has no where to go but up.

With cash dwindling, General Motors' and Ford's shares appear to be making a run at inclusion in the penny stock category.

Deutsche Bank (NYSE: DB) Monday did not offer research to reverse that prediction: in a research note it downgraded GM to Sell from Hold, with a target of $0 (that's correct: zero dollars), commenting that even if the company avoids a bankruptcy, it will face a bankruptcy-like future, marketwatch.com reported Monday.

A U.S. Government rescue of GM, Ford and Chrysler is likely in the early weeks of the Obama Administration, if it isn't passed by the current Congress before then, "probably on the order of $25-30 billion in loans and investments," so says economist David H. Wang, with even more assistance beyond that, if the formerly 'Big Three' automakers agree to certain performance terms. General Motors Corporation (NYSE: GM) shares plunged 96 cents to $3.40, while Ford Motor Company (NYSE: F) shares fell 8 cents to $1.94 in Monday afternoon trading.

Obama to seek next-gen vehicle

Further, Wang said President-elect Obama will likely try to solve a portion of the U.S.'s energy problem and the auto sector's woes in one program.

Time Warner (NYSE: TWX)
Q3 2008 Earnings Conference Call
November 5, 2008 10:30 AM ET

Management Summary

Operator

Welcome to the Time Warner third quarter 2008 earnings conference call. (Operator Instructions) Now I will turn the call over to Mr. Doug Shapiro, Vice President of Investor Relations. Sir, you may begin.

Douglas Shapiro – Vice President, Investor Relations

Thank you, Shirley. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to Time Warner's 2008 third quarter earnings conference call. This morning we issued two press releases: one detailing our results for the third quarter and the other updating our 2008 business outlook.

Before we begin, there are two things I need to cover. First, we refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures. Schedules setting out reconciliations of these historical non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are included in our earning release or trending schedules. These reconciliations are available on our website at timewarner.com/investors. A reconciliation of our expected future financial performance is also included in the business outlook release that is available on our website.

It was only two weeks ago I posted about one of the stocks I own and follow closely Chasing Value: Intuitive Surgical Earnings -- what now?, a company that I consider an "Obama pick". My frequent readers know that the company is one of my older investments and one that has paid off handsomely. Although Intuitive Surgical Inc. (NASDAQ: ISRG) may still be a profitable investment at it's current level, at this point, it is well covered.

Searching for something less known, and certainly more controversial, I have the ideal Obama stock pick to add to your watchlist, StemCell Inc. (NASDA: STEM) which closed yesterday at $1.90. per share. It is not profitable, spends heavily on Research and Development and is highly speculative. So was ISRG when I got in very early.

The company profile states that STEM "discovers cell-based therapies to treat diseases of the central nervous system (CNS), such as cerebral palsy and Alzheimer's disease, as well as spinal cord injury. It is researching stem cell and progenitor cell (cells that have developed from stem cells) therapies to repair neural tissue damaged by disease and injury, and has discovered markers for CNS stem cells and a way to reproduce them for transplant."

Ah, my old buddy Revlon, Inc (NYSE: REV)! Actually, that exclamatory statement is full of sarcasm. Revlon, a beauty-products business whose colleagues include Avon Products, Inc. (NYSE: AVP) and The Estee Lauder Companies Inc. (NYSE: EL), is not a buddy of mine. It is a stock that I really have no intention of buying. The company isn't exactly the most attractive one out there at the moment in terms of fundamentals, but it did have a decent cash-flow statement in the third quarter. Let's check out some numbers.

To begin with, revenues didn't see much growth, as they rose about 1%. Reported net income was $0.57 per diluted share versus a net loss of $0.20 per diluted share in the year-ago period. Unfortunately, that doesn't tell the whole tale. You have to strip out a one-time gain from discontinued operations to get the full story. And you're not going to like it once you do. So, the loss from continuing operations becomes $0.30 per diluted share, which was $0.06 wider than the loss in Q3 2007. Yet, the cash-flow statement does offer a bright spot. Positive operational cash flow of almost $44 million was booked over the last nine months. Last year, Revlon used almost $50 million to fund operations over the nine-month period. Some changes in working capital helped out.

Well, even with the better cash-flow scenario, no, I'm not buying the stock. Revlon is still, in my opinion, a long way off from becoming a great investment idea. I'll need to see more robust growth in the top line and a better profit picture. Sure, for the nine-month period, Revlon did generate a profit of $0.04 per diluted share, but I'm still not convinced. As of this writing, the stock was down 23%. I know it's a bad day in the markets and all, but I wouldn't want to align myself with a company that sees that kind of reaction to earnings. Such a pullback doesn't scream value to me when it comes to Revlon.

Disclosure: I don't own any company mentioned; positions can change at any time.