No vindictiveness here.  First, the market was up on the day of the election, massively up.  Obama's win was widely anticipated-- look at the predictor markets.  Also, according to an article on Fox Business, of all places: 

"Analysts said the losses were less of a reaction to the expected outcome of Barack Obama's election, rather an indictment of the economic situation that will greet him when he takes office in January."

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/cisco-toyota-weigh-futures/

The markets don't know the meaning of being vindicative - if you want to be vindictive, it will cost money, since you will be trying to artificially lower the markets price to achieve some other goal (e.g. negative coverage). However investors etc. exist to make money, not throw it away (at least they do in theory ), hence it wouldn't work - the market will only fall if it is expected to perform worse than expected.

Much to the chagrin of many, Wall Street is not going to cut off its nose to spite its face.  I have no doubt that there is a lot of selling going on because investors want to take their money and get out before Obama slams them with higher taxes.  But they are not doing it to spite him.  They just feel that paying 28% tax is better than paying 50%.

So do I.  But alas mine is all in retirement so I have to start looking for another way to retire after mine is taxed into nothing.

It is a consequence of the fear (or trepidation if you will) of taxes going up.  Only fools (and that does not include hypocritical democrats) cheer tax increases so they can make less money on their returns.

My husband (CPA) said it's because businesses are not happy with Obama.  Look, the two days he's been in, it's been sliding downward.  Businesses are scared right now.  They've had a glimpse of his new economic tax plan and it's not in their favor. 

A glimpse?  Bush is still president, although it's unlikely he'll do much notable until Obama comes to power.

Since Obama had published many of his plans in advance, and it was almost a given that he would beat McCain, such movements should have already occured to a large extent. Furthermore the end of uncertainty (albiet only slight) about the next president would have had a positive effect on the market, since it would allow companies to then plan for the future better. On top of that the market was sliding well before Obama got in, and has been highly volatile anyway, so it's dangerous to attribute falls of only a few days after he's gotten in simply to Obama.

So was Bush I before Clinton made his tax increase retroactive.  If some clown tells you he is going to raise your taxes - are you going to call him a liar and not take actions?

If so, that is probably why you will never be rich.

IN the old days, I did not have any money to invest.  Glad you could save some.