Which party is better for the U.S. stock market? The answer to this question may surprise some people. Studies consistently show that the stock market actually performs better under Democratic presidencies than Republican.

I know what you’re thinking. Conventional wisdom says that Republican presidents are preferred by big money donors on Wall Street. But evidence consistently suggests otherwise and investment professionals in the business of making money should re-think this view. According to a recent analysis by Ned Davis Research, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) returned 7.2% during Democratic administrations compared to just 3.6% under Republican presidents. In fact, several other studies have also reached this conclusion. For example, a 2003 study by two finance professors at UCLA titled “The Presidential Puzzle: Political Cycles and the Stock Market” also found that the the stock market performs better and tends to be less volatile when Democrats are in power (1896 through 2001).

These results partially explain why Wall Street firms have increased their political giving to the DNC in recent years and both Obama and Clinton have strong ties to the financial community.

According to Reuters, Chrysler is talking with India’s Tata Motors and Italy’s Fiat, as it seeks to raise cash and open doors to faster-growing markets outside the U.S. Chrysler has been in discussions with Tata about arrangements to sell its Jeep Wrangler SUV in India and possibly other Asian markets. In addition, Chrysler has been talking to Fiat about leasing Chrysler production capacity in North America and cooperating in retail distribution in the U.S. market. This scenario could allow Fiat to return to the world’s largest auto market, while allowing Chrysler to cut costs at a time when sales are down and it faces mounting pressure to shore up cash.

Gerry Meyers, a professor at the University of Michigan business school and chief executive of American Motors when it owned Jeep in the early 1980s, said it was clear that Chrysler needed international partners. "In my mind, they’re clearly under a financial strain. It may even be a liquidity strain. There are a lot of questions floating around about how much longer Chrysler can go on with problems like this," he said.

Chrysler lost $1.6 billion in 2007. On Tuesday Fitch Ratings downgraded Chrysler, warning that the automaker could run below the "minimum required levels" of cash to finance operations by the second half of 2009 if industry-wide sales remain flat or worsen.

Fiat and Tata already have a partnership. Fiat agreed this month to handle the financing in Europe for Tata’s Jaguar and Land Rover brands, while Tata said it was open to Fiat selling its Nano.

On the same day that the story above appeared in Reuters, BBC News reported that Tata has seen net profits fall 30% due to high material costs and losses from changes in foreign exchange rates.

Today, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) and the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace (SPEEA) – in conjunction with the AFL-CIO’s Office of Investment – hosted an investor forum to provide an update regarding their upcoming negotiations with The Boeing Company. Together, the IAM and SPEEA represent over 50,000 employees at Boeing. In total, over fifty Wall Street analysts, investment managers and pension funds were represented on the call.

David White, Assistant Director of Strategic Resources at the Machinists, cautioned the company from taking a hard-line stance in this year’s bargaining. “This round of negotiations is shaping up to be particularly critical for the future direction of Boeing,” he warned. “Given the myriad of issues currently facing the Dreamliner program, the company cannot afford a work stoppage right now.” Mr. White pointed out that three of the last four contract cycles resulted in a major strike at Boeing. “Our members have delivered for management. Now its time for Mr. McNerney and his executive team to acknowledge this contribution,” he said.

In preparation for the negotiations, the two unions have been raising concerns among institutional investors regarding the company’s failing global supplier business model and the coming demographic shift in its workforce. “If not proactively addressed by management in short-order, these two issues could pose serious risk for investors and will prevent the company from maximizing shareholder value in the long-term,” said Stan Sorscher, research director at SPEEA.

To hear a replay of the hour-long forum, call 1-800-475-6701, passcode: 955367.