Clinton Surge Appears Not to Have Upset Wall Street : Investing: Historically, markets have done well under Democratic presidents, an expert points out.

If Wall Street is concerned about the outcome of the November presidential election, it has not shown up in such major stock market barometers as the Dow Jones industrial average, or the NASDAQ over-the-counter composite.

With several polls showing Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton in first place, the market’s performance may be good news for the Democrats. After the withdrawal of Ross Perot, the market rose slightly, reflecting relief by investors that the race would probably not be forced into the House.

The Mexican stock market also shot up--because Perot indicated opposition to a free trade agreement.

The United States market did retreat a bit Friday over concerns about the weak economy, however.

Since the election is still three months away, the market could yet register its displeasure. “But so far there has been nothing that would indicate skittishness by the investment community,” says Dennis Jarrett, an official of Kidder, Peabody & Co., an investment house.

Some market watchers, however, reverse the coin. They say that instead of showing a sense of ease about Clinton, the stock market is actually signaling a Bush victory.

“What the market is saying is that investors shouldn’t worry, that Mr. Clinton is not going to win,” says Gene Jay Seagle, vice president of Gruntal & Co. “Wall Street also knows that the Federal Reserve Board will keep pushing interest rates down” until November to restart the U.S. economy, Seagle says.

Still, most market technicians say that if Wall Street really felt threatened and assumed that a Clinton White House would somehow resort to massive federal spending, higher taxes and excessive cutbacks in defense--the type of economic “liberalism” abhorred by the business community--the Dow or some other market indicator would be flashing red lights. So far, that has not occurred.

“The market is not terribly upset about the recent Clinton surge,” says Jeremy Siegel, a professor of finance at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. The financial community “probably prefers President Bush; but it could live with Clinton.”

While most Americans likely assume that rising stock markets and Republican administrations go hand in hand--since most financiers are Republicans--”stock markets have done very well under Democratic presidents,” Siegel notes. He points to the Roosevelt Administration in the early 1930s, when stocks rose, and to the early ‘60s, under John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson.