I would argue that both Mr. Obama and Mr. Trump have had very little to do with the stock market. Obama passed Healthcare, which didn't really do anything positive for the stock market. He also bailed out the banks, which really didn't matter in the grand scheme of things for the average American. Most money is FDIC insured and 401ks are diversified so much that a couple more bankruptcies wouldn't affect you that much in the long run. So instead of the government guaranteeing the debts of a failed bank using taxpayer money, they used taxpayer money to keep them afloat. The real losers in the deal would have been your friends "the evil rich people" who had over 250k and owned retail stock in those banks.
The strength of the stock market (and housing market) has been primarily due to "it's the only place to invest." This was accomplished by lowering the interest rates to basically nothing for 10 years. So you have two choices: invest in companies that are making profits or invest your money with banks for nothing and lose to inflation every year. While you could argue that Obama appointed Yellen, I'm pretty sure the same strategy would have been followed through by any fed chairman. This is why you're seeing a dip lately. There is a new fed chairman and the market is testing him because we're not sure what he's going to do with interest rates. It's basically just hedge funds looking to get some profits for their clients. Most long term investors aren't even paying attention to this garbage. What has changed? The companies are still making a lot of profits. If interest rates go up a quarter percent, it's still the best investment in town by a mile. Bonds will be down, of course, but still a better safety investment than CDs.
The point is.. anyone who is celebrating the stocks going down as a victory for Democrats, or is in any way trying to pin it on Donald Trump has a very limited understanding of economics. If your goal is to say "Well, he claims credit for the stocks being up," so I'm going to say it's his fault when they go down: he's a politician. His job is to convince enough "uninformeds" to vote for him by lying. That should be the definition of a politician's job. They all do it. Every single one. Trump convinced more "uninformeds" than Hillary did (well, electorally). Why fall for the bait and post equally inaccurate statements to the opposite?
But, yes, Puccacia is equally wrong. I just feel bad for Trump supporters on this board so I'm not as quick to point out their inaccuracies.