Just about everyone except Hillary Clinton has agreed that Barack Obama will be the nominee of the Democratic Party for President. And so with presumptive nominee Obama joining the presumptive Republican nominee, John McCain, let the games begin.

The Wall Street Journal quickly weighed in with a poll reporting that McCain comes out ahead by a wide margin when people are asked, “Which candidate do you believe will be best for business?” There is a problem with that question being so broad as to have little meaning. Still, Republicans certainly have an edge in terms of voter perceptions on pro-business issues.

There is also a perception that markets do better under Republican presidents...a perception not supported by the facts. Take a look at some data for the last fifty years worth of Presidential terms. (I created this table myself, using raw numbers from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and Dow Jones.)

Bill Clinton gets the best grade for his first term with a 95% increase in the DJIA. But Ronald Reagan’s second term comes in second with a 79% gain.

The Dow was flat during the current president’s first term (the jury is still out on the second term). But it rose 52% while his father was in office, even though most would agree Bill Clinton beat George H.W. Bush first and foremost on economic issues.

It is hard from these numbers to make a case that one party is better than the other in terms of market performance.

OK, how about if we look at the change in GDP over each four year period? John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson take top honors in this category. But Richard Nixon and Reagan do well too.

Bottom line, I don’t see any evidence that either party is, de facto, “better” for business.

So where does this leave us? It depends on the candidates. If recent history serves, the Republicans will argue that the Democrats are out to destroy business through regulation and stifle growth through taxation... hile the Democrats will charge that the Republicans care only about the rich, let Wall Street run free at the expense of middle class American, create deficits which pass the cost of government on to generations yet to be born, and deny working people a chance to share in the fruits of their labor.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

There are obvious differences between the candidates and their party platforms. But the answers to the issues which face us are not obvious. What services should government provide? How do we allocate the tax burden so it is “fair” and meets our needs but doesn’t retard growth? How do we regulate to prevent excesses without interfering with the free market system which has served us so well over the years?

Both Senators McCain and Obama have pledged a “different” kind of campaign -- a campaign in which issues, not personalities, will be debated. We have heard these words before and they have turned out to be empty. But these two candidates have already demonstrated in their primary campaigns that they see this as a serious commitment. I’m keeping my fingers crossed.