ELECTION



timeline: S&P 500 chief executives have combined to give more money to Trump’s campaign than Biden’s, even as the Democratic challenger has more S&P CEOs as donors.


S&P 500 chief executives have combined to give more money to Trump’s campaign than Biden’s, even as the Democratic challenger has more S&P CEOs as donors.

As the Nov. 3 election sparks record campaign contributions, the CEOs of S&P 500 companies are helping to fund the war chests of President Donald Trump and challenger Joe Biden, while also contributing to other Republican and Democratic politicians.

In their political giving as individuals, these chief executives have combined to give more to Trump than Biden. Some 15 CEOs whose companies are components of the S&P 500 (SPX) have donated a total of $2.489 million to Trump’s principal campaign committee, its joint fundraising groups with the Republican National Committee or pro-Trump super PACs.

Meanwhile, 30 chief execs have contributed $536,100 to Biden’s main campaign committee, its joint groups with the Democratic National Committee or pro-Biden super PACs. These figures come from a MarketWatch analysis of processed Federal Election Commission data on individual contributions made between January 2019 and August 2020. Anyone who held the CEO job in 2019 or 2020 at a company that was part of the S&P 500 is included.

As shown in the table below, the S&P CEOs giving the most to Trump were Intercontinental Exchange’s (ICE) Jeffrey Sprecher, whose wife, Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler of Georgia, faces a tough Senate race, and Las Vegas Sands’s (LVS) Sheldon Adelson, a longtime major GOP donor. Also ranking high in dollar amounts donated were Vornado Realty Trust’s (VNO) Steven Roth and Oracle’s (ORCL) Safra Catz.

S&P 500 CEOs giving their own money to Trump’s campaign

CEO Company Amount Recipient Sector
1. Jeffrey Sprecher Intercontinental Exchange $1,000,000.00 America First Action Financials
Jeffrey Sprecher Intercontinental Exchange $290,300.00 Trump Victory Financials
Jeffrey Sprecher Intercontinental Exchange $5,600.00 Donald J. Trump for President Financials
2.

(Bloomberg) — Newcrest Mining Ltd., Australia’s largest gold producer, will be better positioned to push ahead with growth in the Americas after winning approval for a new listing in Toronto, according to its top executive.

The producer won conditional clearance to list on the Toronto Stock Exchange from next week, and is returning to the bourse amid renewed investor appetite for gold equities and to reflect the company’s emphasis on growth in the region, Chief Executive Officer Sandeep Biswas said Tuesday in a phone interview.



a man wearing a suit and tie: Newcrest Is Scanning the Market for Gold Assets, CEO Sandeep Biswas Says


© Bloomberg
Newcrest Is Scanning the Market for Gold Assets, CEO Sandeep Biswas Says

Sandeep Biswas

Photographer: Carla Gottgens/Bloomberg

Melbourne-based Newcrest has spent about $1.3 billion since last year to acquire the Red Chris mine in Canada and to increase its exposure to the Lundin Gold Inc.’s Fruta del Norte operation in Ecuador. It’s also focused on exploration in the U.S., Mexico and Chile.

“This cements that and obviously puts some more emphasis on it,” Biswas said. “It increases our optionality when we want to do things.”

Video: CNBC Markets Now: October 01, 2020 (CNBC)

CNBC Markets Now: October 01, 2020

UP NEXT

UP NEXT

Newcrest, which raised about A$1.2 billion ($860 million) in share sales this year, has had renewed interest from North American investors in recent months as gold prices surged to a record. The company previously removed a Toronto listing in September 2013 after trading in Canada for about 18 months.

Loading...

Load Error

“There’s a heightened interest in gold, particularly from generalist funds, and you’re starting to see some of that money coming into the market,” Biswas said. “I see no reason for that not to continue.”

Newcrest has advanced about 3% in Sydney trading this year, compared to a 45% gain for industry leader Newmont Corp.’s U.S.-listed shares and a

Mr. Trump also applied pressure to get the leaders of Israel, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates to the White House for an agreement that many experts believe did little to realize the regional “comprehensive peace agreement” promised by the administration’s official National Security Strategy. Instead, the engagement offered little more than a photo opportunity to help Mr. Trump’s re-election and may have undermined future efforts to achieve lasting and meaningful results in the region.

Mr. Trump’s predecessors have also, on occasion, made decisions and deals that served their political interests. But those deals typically aligned with America’s stated policies and its interests. The problem is that too often Mr. Trump’s deals do not.

And that’s just the deals we know about: Few people have any real idea of what is being promised in other calls and meetings. We may never know. This inconsistent, incomplete and inscrutable patchwork of foreign policy is not just inefficient, it risks disastrous mistakes by the United States and miscalculation by allies and adversaries alike. It also provides a potential opportunity for the sort of ethical misconduct that worries many about the debts and dealings exposed in new reports about Mr. Trump’s taxes.

No one, not even Mr. Trump, can say with confidence what American foreign policy is on any given issue these days. Such uncertainty is a source of stress and friction, leaving American military personnel, diplomats and intelligence officers not only out of the loop but also out of step with each other and with allies. After almost four years of this uncertainty, foreign government representatives simply shortcut the system and look for a White House back channel to figure out if the United States will zig when it’s supposed to zag.

Even worse, the uncertainty means that Americans themselves cannot know, or