“What I find most ironic about these numbers is that one of Obama’s weaknesses is said to be his economic record,” said Paul T. Hickey, Bespoke’s co-founder. “While the stock market isn’t a complete reflection of the economy, it is an important indicator, and the stock market is one of the great things the president has working in his favor. But it’s a sensitive subject. With Wall Street so despised by the average American right now, it’s probably something he doesn’t want to be too quick to trumpet. But facts are facts.”

The market’s relationship to the economy and to the political system is complex and varying from era to era. But a simple truth is that the market’s rise and fall has an enormous effect on the wealth of ordinary Americans — and on whether they feel themselves to be wealthy.

Some market effects on wealth are straightforward enough. With the relative decline of traditional pensions, and the rise of defined-contribution plans like 401(k)’s, the well-being of middle-class households is intimately connected to the stock market’s fortunes. That was shockingly evident in 2008, when the Dow declined by more than 33 percent. That market fall, on top of a sharp drop in housing prices, contributed to a 19 percent decline in the total net worth of American households that year, according to figures compiled by the Federal Reserve.

Relatively low housing prices continue to depress aggregate wealth levels, the Fed’s Flow of Funds report shows. But when stock market values are factored in, the rising value of financial assets — including stocks — has restored the total wealth of American households. Using this measure, it is now higher than when Mr. Obama’s presidency began, Fed figures indicate.

Unfortunately for millions of Americans, that can’t be said for median household income, which was only $51,023 last year, down from $53,206 in 2009, according to Census Bureau figures adjusted for inflation. While it appears to have risen in 2012, median household income almost certainly has not returned to its former level. And rising income inequality means that the hardship has been felt disproportionately by poor people, who face a double-whammy: they don’t have financial assets that have grown in value.

Presidential election forecasting models using “objective data” like personal income, gross domestic product and unemployment have captured the gloomy realities of the economy, painting a relatively bleak picture of Mr. Obama’s electoral chances. But Robert S. Erikson, a professor of political science at Columbia University, said, “If you include subjective data — emphasizing expectations about the economy — you get a very different forecast.” In a paper, Professor Erikson and Christopher Wlezien of Temple University described a forecasting model using consumer sentiment measures and leading economic indicators. That model predicts an Obama victory “quite strongly,” Professor Erikson said in an interview.

The performance of the stock market, at least to some extent, is a subjective rendering of market participants’ expectations for the corporate economy. It’s a complicated subject, partly because market prices tend to rise when interest rates are low, as they are now, thanks largely to efforts of the Fed and other central banks.