1. The bond market suggests that president Trump will win the 2020 presidential election."Trump's economy will reaccelerate in 2020," says David Ranson, director of research at financial analytics firm HCWE & Co. "2019 will mislead some people into believing that Trump is on the edge."
In other words, the sluggish economy this year could sucker some into thinking Trump will lose.
But like it or not such a thing probably won't happen.
That's precisely the period when voters will be making their decisions about who they want in the White House. If the economy at that time is booming, then they'll likely want that to continue.
2. The Depressed Sanders Vote. Stop fretting about Bernie’s supporters not voting for Clinton – we’re voting for Clinton! The polls already show that more Sanders voters will vote for Hillary this year than the number of Hillary primary voters in ’08 who then voted for Obama. This is not the problem. The fire alarm that should be going off is that while the average Bernie backer will drag him/herself to the polls that day to somewhat reluctantly vote for Hillary, it will be what’s called a “depressed vote” – meaning the voter doesn’t bring five people to vote with her. He doesn’t volunteer 10 hours in the month leading up to the election. She never talks in an excited voice when asked why she’s voting for Hillary. A depressed voter. Because, when you’re young, you have zero tolerance for phonies and BS. Returning to the Clinton/Bush era for them is like suddenly having to pay for music, or using MySpace or carrying around one of those big-ass portable phones. They’re not going to vote for Trump; some will vote third party, but many will just stay home. Hillary Clinton is going to have to do something to give them a reason to support her — and picking a moderate, bland-o, middle of the road old white guy as her running mate is not the kind of edgy move that tells millenials that their vote is important to Hillary. Having two women on the ticket – that was an exciting idea. But then Hillary got scared and has decided to play it safe. This is just one example of how she is killing the youth vote.
That's precisely the period when voters will be making their decisions about who they want in the White House. If the economy at that time is booming, then they'll likely want that to continue.
2. The Depressed Sanders Vote. Stop fretting about Bernie’s supporters not voting for Clinton – we’re voting for Clinton! The polls already show that more Sanders voters will vote for Hillary this year than the number of Hillary primary voters in ’08 who then voted for Obama. This is not the problem. The fire alarm that should be going off is that while the average Bernie backer will drag him/herself to the polls that day to somewhat reluctantly vote for Hillary, it will be what’s called a “depressed vote” – meaning the voter doesn’t bring five people to vote with her. He doesn’t volunteer 10 hours in the month leading up to the election. She never talks in an excited voice when asked why she’s voting for Hillary. A depressed voter. Because, when you’re young, you have zero tolerance for phonies and BS. Returning to the Clinton/Bush era for them is like suddenly having to pay for music, or using MySpace or carrying around one of those big-ass portable phones. They’re not going to vote for Trump; some will vote third party, but many will just stay home. Hillary Clinton is going to have to do something to give them a reason to support her — and picking a moderate, bland-o, middle of the road old white guy as her running mate is not the kind of edgy move that tells millenials that their vote is important to Hillary. Having two women on the ticket – that was an exciting idea. But then Hillary got scared and has decided to play it safe. This is just one example of how she is killing the youth vote.
3. GDP, GDP, GDP!!!
GDP growth rates show a little better news for Trump
With our final two variables, GDP growth and the unemployment, Sides offers one more critical piece of context: The important thing is not the absolute number, but the trend that we’ve seen since the president took office. As Sides noted, Ronald Reagan’s reelection at 7 percent unemployment might seem surprising until you recall the unemployment rate was at 10 percent when he took office.
In general, GDP has been growing a little faster under Trump than it was at the end of Obama’s presidency. Leaving alone whether the president deserves any credit for that improvement, it would bode well for his reelection chances if it continues.
The question is whether it will. The Federal Reserve recently downgraded its GDP growth projections for 2019, from 2.3 percent to 2.1 percent, and for 2020, down to 1.9 percent. It’s not a guarantee, but those projections are a warning sign for the president.
4. JOBS, JOBS, JOBS!!!
4. JOBS, JOBS, JOBS!!!
The unemployment rate is still going down under Trump
Unemployment under Trump has largely maintained the same trend we saw in the last two years of Obama — by which I mean it’s kept going down.
5. why the wealthy back Trump
When Steve Bannon, who served Trump as chief White House strategist and is now fomenting populist revolution across Europe, called for “deconstruction of the administrative state”, he specifically targeted the systems of taxation, financial oversight, and public accountability that constrain the ultra-wealthy. The American hedge fund manager Robert Mercer, whose $60m offshore “war chest” bankrolled both Brexit and the Trump campaign, only began donating to political causes after the US Internal Revenue Service fined his firm $6.8bn for tax evasion. Arron Banks, the UK businessman with substantial offshore holdings, may have had a similar motivation: he became the largest financial backer of Brexit’s Leave.EU campaign following the imposition of costly international regulatory requirements on his insurance companies.
When Steve Bannon, who served Trump as chief White House strategist and is now fomenting populist revolution across Europe, called for “deconstruction of the administrative state”, he specifically targeted the systems of taxation, financial oversight, and public accountability that constrain the ultra-wealthy. The American hedge fund manager Robert Mercer, whose $60m offshore “war chest” bankrolled both Brexit and the Trump campaign, only began donating to political causes after the US Internal Revenue Service fined his firm $6.8bn for tax evasion. Arron Banks, the UK businessman with substantial offshore holdings, may have had a similar motivation: he became the largest financial backer of Brexit’s Leave.EU campaign following the imposition of costly international regulatory requirements on his insurance companies.
Even richer is the irony that ultra-nationalist campaigns have been funded by wealth hoarded offshore, courtesy of the same global elites demonized by Bannon and other self-proclaimed nationalists. Populist ultra-nationalism is a project bought and paid for by global elites and their tax haven wealth.
K, LEAVE A COMMENT BELOW.
No comments:
Post a Comment