Political optics. Current POTUS's claim to success rests, in part, on a high performing financial sector. If the market tanks or stagnates, he no longer has that as a talking point.
I agree with the political optics part, and that the POTUS current claim to success is finances, but I 100% disagree that if the market stagnates or tanks completely that he no longer has that talking point.
If the market tanks, all the talking heads will just blame the upcoming election, and claim that markets and market makers are scared of a Democrat being elected. It doesn't change the talking points for the President at all, I imagine. He still claims the moral victory, if only he hadn't been undercut by those thieves on the other side.
That sort of thing is standard now. Claim success until you can't, then deny any involvement and blame someone else. That's politics, baby.
The Fed is not under the President's authority and is probably not filled with Trump fans. The system for better or worse is designed to resist political motivations. (For better because "political," for worse because "political" is the low-valence word for "democratic.")
If the market tanks, all the talking heads will just blame the upcoming election, and claim that markets and market makers are scared of a Democrat being elected. It doesn't change the talking points for the President at all, I imagine. He still claims the moral victory, if only he hadn't been undercut by those thieves on the other side.
That sort of thing is standard now. Claim success until you can't, then deny any involvement and blame someone else. That's politics, baby.