Posted Aug 12, 2014 by Martin Armstrong
Obama’s approval rating is an abysmal 36-59 percent while giving Hillary Clinton has a much more robust 52-43 percent. This is showing how even markets move and why divorce is so bad. No matter if it is love, politics, or investment, as human beings we act always in anticipation. This is why fundamental analysis fails because people will act based upon confidence that may be completely opposite of the actual fundamental news. It is also why there are economic panics. The majority simply always have to be wrong. Every market crash they try to find the mythical short player who overpowered the market assuming people would never sell a winning trade. The panic comes when people try to sell and suddenly they discover there is no bid. Europe is eliminating short-selling and will only discover that the market will fall faster for only a short will buy during a panic decline. Outlaw short selling and you get no bid at all.
Virtually every presidential election has the promise of change. People are just starting to grasp how Marxist Obama really is. His appointment of Lagarde as the head of the IMF was a red flag beyond description. This crazy woman is intent upon confiscating 10%+ of everyone’s account to bail out the banks. There has been so much finger-pointing at the rich by Obama that he has made it seem bad to be successful and to be millionaires and billionaires are almost criminal.
Now Clinton, running for president, is bashing Obama on foreign policy as she attempts to contrast her more hawkish tendencies with the Obama administration’s approach. During an interview on CNN on Sunday, Clinton criticize the Obama administration’s interactions with other nations. “How do we try to enlist the rest of the world in this struggle between cooperation and order and conflict and disorder, which is really at the root of so much that’s going on today? And I don’t think we’ve done a very good job of that,” she said. She also noted the popularity of George W. Bush in Africa because of his efforts to battle AIDS there. He made me “proud to be an American again,” Clinton said.
Hillary is clearly trying to woo Wall Street distinguishing herself from Obama who wants even more regulation. Meanwhile, the Republicans are caught up in their own civil war between the Tea Party and the Country-Club crowd. Each candidate, the seven dwarfs Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry, is finding it very difficult to separate themselves from the crowd. The mainstream candidates are Chris Christie, Jeb Bush and Paul Ryan, yet simultaneously they are dumbfounded trying to figure out a way to attack Hillary Clinton, which is becoming known as simply the GOP’s 2016 Hillary paradox.
Here is our old forecast chart from 1996 on Presidential elections. The blue is third-party activity. While we have never seen a third-party victory in the United States, this time the election comes following the peak in the ECM rather than at the bottom as was the case during the Great Depression. Everything we have forecast for years was targeted at the 2016 election just one year following the Sovereign Debt Crisis Big Bang we had targeted for 2015.75. Each event feeds into the next so the economics is likely to produce the biggest third-party showing to date. Will they win? We will work on the details of the model
Here was the detail forecast for the 2000 election. The computer projected the Democrats should have won. Of course, that was the election stolen by the Bush crowd and the Supreme Court. When the votes were counted, they confirmed that our computer was correct. The Democrats should have won – but for the corruption. I doubt there would have been an Iraq War if Cheney was not running the show.