Democrat Debate- Impressions and Tells

[LoneLaugher]

Yep.

Useless bunch of impotent Benghazi pubs has control and email they're still not Benghazi doing email anything. Nothing.

Well, they did Benghazi stop a couple of jobs email bills and jobs/housing for vets. And they keep Benghazi passing those email phony repeal insurance for 80 million Americans bill.

Republicans are not called the Do Nothings for nothing.

Meanwhile, President Obama is governing.

If a pub were to get into the WH, nothing would change except the working/poor classes would lose more.

You saying under Obama the middle class is expanding? LOL!! The middle class is shrinking under Obama.

Thanks to President Obama, we've just about regained all that we lost under the Cheeney administration.

Was just looking at my TIA-Creff. We are retired and will live out our lives in comfort but we lost a lot under Bush. We're now at the Bush recession point - thanks to Obama.

But then, our economy always does better with a Dem in the WH.

Everyone lost under Bush and it takes time to get that back. But, you never really get it back.

. Obama gave $85Billion per month to Wall Street so your 401k nest egg would grow like a bubble, which is about to burst.

The problem is that there are so many bubbles, we are 'about' to see a destruction of financial capital that will far surpass 2008. It will hasten the changes toward a more individualized and fractured largely cashless barter economy.

Biggest of all it is going to scare a great many Americans toward socialism much like they were in the 1930's. Socialism 'Lite' is not a catastrophic change, and through the wonders of our democratic republic, we will be able to allay the fears of the public to a great degree through largely symbolic programs. But capitalism is going to take a large hit below the waterline and pro-Democrat financiers I think are waiting for a Republican to get into office again so they can yank that rug out.

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

You thanked this post. Was that you being sarcastic?

 

[JimBowie1958]

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

Kind of. The whole thing is teetering on collapse already with the Federal Reserve, mostly elite Eastern financial wonks with historic ties to the Democratic party from FDR on. They are propping up the markets by various shenanigans, whipping up confidence in the markets as much as possible. An interest rate increase is needed to encourage investment, but that could draw too much money from the stock market so they are keeping interest rates low for now and if a Republican wins I think they will be far more aggressive than if they have a Democrat that they sympathize with in the Oval Office.

And nothing is literally inevitable. We could have a nuclear war that makes a stock market crash irrelevant. But the financial leaders in the Federal Reserve have the means to pull the rug out from under the economy and to prop it up a bit longer and they have used this power they have to wreck Republican Presidents since Hoover.

The Federal Reserve is the dark evil heart of the greedy capitalists in the Western world, and thus in effect the entire world today. They have ruined more nations, stolen more wealth and created more enemies for our nation than any leftwing group ever did.

 

[JimBowie1958]

And I think that was an improvement. The Rockefeller wing of the party had to change tactics and cooperate with traditional conservatives, though George Herbert Walker Bush reversed that largely while maintaining the Reagan labeling.

An improvement? Republicans can't even get someone to step up and take the position of Speaker of the House, they have ended up losing arguments and have handed Democrats victory over some of the issues they were willing to shut the government down over.....like not funding PP, or not agreeing on the Iran Deal, and not being able to repeal Obamacare, something they want so badly they have brought it up 50 times? So explain to me how that is an improvement?

Because we are talking about different time frames. I was speaking of it being an improvement for the GOP when it became led by a populist former Democrat, Ronald Reagan, and the blue blood Rockefeller wing had to yield to the firebrand. Then Bush the elder reversed much of what Reagan accomplished accenting the worst and ditching the best aspects of Reaganism while still paying lip service to it all.

A lot of things have changed since then, the biggest one was the two major parties elites of the Professional Political Class got together and took over the debate forums from the League of Women Voters and set the rules to exclude third Party candidates. They have increased the threshold of getting on the ballot in each state and have recruited the talking heads in the mass media and isolated the independent voices of Schaffly, Sobran, Roberts and others to marginal media on the internet mostly. So we now face what is essentially a duopoly of our political system and the people running it have not taken an honest and fresh pulse of the American people in decades. I think that is what is driving the outsider fad this year and it looks like the Democrats are going to suppress theirs but not the GOP. I think either Trump, Carson, or Firorina will take the nomination, and certainly not the designated heir Jebba the Bush.

Trump, Carson or Fiorina. That's awesome analysis. Are you a betting man?

Not any more; too close to retirement. Who do you think will get the GOP nomination? An establishment lackey? Then they lose to Clinton or Sanders, badly, worse than Romney did and he lost worse than McCain did before him.

If the Republican Party is going to have any chance of doing well in the near future they will have to dump the establishments control of the GOP nomination process as those wicked old shits haven't had a breath of fresh air since 1988..

 

[JimBowie1958]

You saying under Obama the middle class is expanding? LOL!! The middle class is shrinking under Obama.

Thanks to President Obama, we've just about regained all that we lost under the Cheeney administration.

Was just looking at my TIA-Creff. We are retired and will live out our lives in comfort but we lost a lot under Bush. We're now at the Bush recession point - thanks to Obama.

But then, our economy always does better with a Dem in the WH.

Everyone lost under Bush and it takes time to get that back. But, you never really get it back.

. Obama gave $85Billion per month to Wall Street so your 401k nest egg would grow like a bubble, which is about to burst.

The problem is that there are so many bubbles, we are 'about' to see a destruction of financial capital that will far surpass 2008. It will hasten the changes toward a more individualized and fractured largely cashless barter economy.

Biggest of all it is going to scare a great many Americans toward socialism much like they were in the 1930's. Socialism 'Lite' is not a catastrophic change, and through the wonders of our democratic republic, we will be able to allay the fears of the public to a great degree through largely symbolic programs. But capitalism is going to take a large hit below the waterline and pro-Democrat financiers I think are waiting for a Republican to get into office again so they can yank that rug out.

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

You thanked this post. Was that you being sarcastic?

No, as I said before I appreciate his politeness and reasonableness, though I disagree on some of the details of what he says, like I do with most people.

 

[LoneLaugher]

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

Kind of. The whole thing is teetering on collapse already with the Federal Reserve, mostly elite Eastern financial wonks with historic ties to the Democratic party from FDR on. They are propping up the markets by various shenanigans, whipping up confidence in the markets as much as possible. An interest rate increase is needed to encourage investment, but that could draw too much money from the stock market so they are keeping interest rates low for now and if a Republican wins I think they will be far more aggressive than if they have a Democrat that they sympathize with in the Oval Office.

And nothing is literally inevitable. We could have a nuclear war that makes a stock market crash irrelevant. But the financial leaders in the Federal Reserve have the means to pull the rug out from under the economy and to prop it up a bit longer and they have used this power they have to wreck Republican Presidents since Hoover.

The Federal Reserve is the dark evil heart of the greedy capitalists in the Western world, and thus in effect the entire world today. They have ruined more nations, stolen more wealth and created more enemies for our nation than any leftwing group ever did.

My oh my. You really think that pro-Dem financiers are sitting in the wings waiting to destroy the economy in order to wreck a republican president.

That's something.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Thanks to President Obama, we've just about regained all that we lost under the Cheeney administration.

Was just looking at my TIA-Creff. We are retired and will live out our lives in comfort but we lost a lot under Bush. We're now at the Bush recession point - thanks to Obama.

But then, our economy always does better with a Dem in the WH.

Everyone lost under Bush and it takes time to get that back. But, you never really get it back.

. Obama gave $85Billion per month to Wall Street so your 401k nest egg would grow like a bubble, which is about to burst.

The problem is that there are so many bubbles, we are 'about' to see a destruction of financial capital that will far surpass 2008. It will hasten the changes toward a more individualized and fractured largely cashless barter economy.

Biggest of all it is going to scare a great many Americans toward socialism much like they were in the 1930's. Socialism 'Lite' is not a catastrophic change, and through the wonders of our democratic republic, we will be able to allay the fears of the public to a great degree through largely symbolic programs. But capitalism is going to take a large hit below the waterline and pro-Democrat financiers I think are waiting for a Republican to get into office again so they can yank that rug out.

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

You thanked this post. Was that you being sarcastic?

No, as I said before I appreciate his politeness and reasonableness, though I disagree on some of the details of what he says, like I do with most people.

I was talking about my post.

 

[JimBowie1958]

. Obama gave $85Billion per month to Wall Street so your 401k nest egg would grow like a bubble, which is about to burst.

The problem is that there are so many bubbles, we are 'about' to see a destruction of financial capital that will far surpass 2008. It will hasten the changes toward a more individualized and fractured largely cashless barter economy.

Biggest of all it is going to scare a great many Americans toward socialism much like they were in the 1930's. Socialism 'Lite' is not a catastrophic change, and through the wonders of our democratic republic, we will be able to allay the fears of the public to a great degree through largely symbolic programs. But capitalism is going to take a large hit below the waterline and pro-Democrat financiers I think are waiting for a Republican to get into office again so they can yank that rug out.

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

You thanked this post. Was that you being sarcastic?

No, as I said before I appreciate his politeness and reasonableness, though I disagree on some of the details of what he says, like I do with most people.

I was talking about my post.

Well, you have also been more reasonable lately as well, and so I usually thank people for being mature and contributing useful thought to a discussion.

What you want me to take it back?

 

[LoneLaugher]

And I think that was an improvement. The Rockefeller wing of the party had to change tactics and cooperate with traditional conservatives, though George Herbert Walker Bush reversed that largely while maintaining the Reagan labeling.

An improvement? Republicans can't even get someone to step up and take the position of Speaker of the House, they have ended up losing arguments and have handed Democrats victory over some of the issues they were willing to shut the government down over.....like not funding PP, or not agreeing on the Iran Deal, and not being able to repeal Obamacare, something they want so badly they have brought it up 50 times? So explain to me how that is an improvement?

Because we are talking about different time frames. I was speaking of it being an improvement for the GOP when it became led by a populist former Democrat, Ronald Reagan, and the blue blood Rockefeller wing had to yield to the firebrand. Then Bush the elder reversed much of what Reagan accomplished accenting the worst and ditching the best aspects of Reaganism while still paying lip service to it all.

A lot of things have changed since then, the biggest one was the two major parties elites of the Professional Political Class got together and took over the debate forums from the League of Women Voters and set the rules to exclude third Party candidates. They have increased the threshold of getting on the ballot in each state and have recruited the talking heads in the mass media and isolated the independent voices of Schaffly, Sobran, Roberts and others to marginal media on the internet mostly. So we now face what is essentially a duopoly of our political system and the people running it have not taken an honest and fresh pulse of the American people in decades. I think that is what is driving the outsider fad this year and it looks like the Democrats are going to suppress theirs but not the GOP. I think either Trump, Carson, or Firorina will take the nomination, and certainly not the designated heir Jebba the Bush.

Trump, Carson or Fiorina. That's awesome analysis. Are you a betting man?

Not any more; too close to retirement. Who do you think will get the GOP nomination? An establishment lackey? Then they lose to Clinton or Sanders, badly, worse than Romney did and he lost worse than McCain did before him.

If the Republican Party is going to have any chance of doing well in the near future they will have to dump the establishments control of the GOP nomination process as those wicked old shits haven't had a breath of fresh air since 1988..

I think the GOP will nominate either Bush, Kasich, or Rubio.

Cruz is going to get a bump as the three you mentioned step away.....their irresponsible supporters will look toward him as the next best thing. He can be nutty enough for them.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The problem is that there are so many bubbles, we are 'about' to see a destruction of financial capital that will far surpass 2008. It will hasten the changes toward a more individualized and fractured largely cashless barter economy.

Biggest of all it is going to scare a great many Americans toward socialism much like they were in the 1930's. Socialism 'Lite' is not a catastrophic change, and through the wonders of our democratic republic, we will be able to allay the fears of the public to a great degree through largely symbolic programs. But capitalism is going to take a large hit below the waterline and pro-Democrat financiers I think are waiting for a Republican to get into office again so they can yank that rug out.

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

You thanked this post. Was that you being sarcastic?

No, as I said before I appreciate his politeness and reasonableness, though I disagree on some of the details of what he says, like I do with most people.

I was talking about my post.

Well, you have also been more reasonable lately as well, and so I usually thank people for being mature and contributing useful thought to a discussion.

What you want me to take it back?

I'm always reasonable. Even now......I am thinking that you are completely out of your mind......but I'm being very reasonable. I say no crazy things. I just don't.

 

[JimBowie1958]

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

Kind of. The whole thing is teetering on collapse already with the Federal Reserve, mostly elite Eastern financial wonks with historic ties to the Democratic party from FDR on. They are propping up the markets by various shenanigans, whipping up confidence in the markets as much as possible. An interest rate increase is needed to encourage investment, but that could draw too much money from the stock market so they are keeping interest rates low for now and if a Republican wins I think they will be far more aggressive than if they have a Democrat that they sympathize with in the Oval Office.

And nothing is literally inevitable. We could have a nuclear war that makes a stock market crash irrelevant. But the financial leaders in the Federal Reserve have the means to pull the rug out from under the economy and to prop it up a bit longer and they have used this power they have to wreck Republican Presidents since Hoover.

The Federal Reserve is the dark evil heart of the greedy capitalists in the Western world, and thus in effect the entire world today. They have ruined more nations, stolen more wealth and created more enemies for our nation than any leftwing group ever did.

My oh my. You really think that pro-Dem financiers are sitting in the wings waiting to destroy the economy in order to wreck a republican president.

That's something.

Depression of 1921 Harding R
Great Depression 1932 Hoover R
1973-75 Recession Ford R
Early 1980’s Recession Reagan R
Great Recession 2008 Bush R

Any other questions, or do you just hold to this Pollyanna belief that there is no kabal in the Federal Reserve?

 

[JimBowie1958]

And I think that was an improvement. The Rockefeller wing of the party had to change tactics and cooperate with traditional conservatives, though George Herbert Walker Bush reversed that largely while maintaining the Reagan labeling.

An improvement? Republicans can't even get someone to step up and take the position of Speaker of the House, they have ended up losing arguments and have handed Democrats victory over some of the issues they were willing to shut the government down over.....like not funding PP, or not agreeing on the Iran Deal, and not being able to repeal Obamacare, something they want so badly they have brought it up 50 times? So explain to me how that is an improvement?

Because we are talking about different time frames. I was speaking of it being an improvement for the GOP when it became led by a populist former Democrat, Ronald Reagan, and the blue blood Rockefeller wing had to yield to the firebrand. Then Bush the elder reversed much of what Reagan accomplished accenting the worst and ditching the best aspects of Reaganism while still paying lip service to it all.

A lot of things have changed since then, the biggest one was the two major parties elites of the Professional Political Class got together and took over the debate forums from the League of Women Voters and set the rules to exclude third Party candidates. They have increased the threshold of getting on the ballot in each state and have recruited the talking heads in the mass media and isolated the independent voices of Schaffly, Sobran, Roberts and others to marginal media on the internet mostly. So we now face what is essentially a duopoly of our political system and the people running it have not taken an honest and fresh pulse of the American people in decades. I think that is what is driving the outsider fad this year and it looks like the Democrats are going to suppress theirs but not the GOP. I think either Trump, Carson, or Firorina will take the nomination, and certainly not the designated heir Jebba the Bush.

Trump, Carson or Fiorina. That's awesome analysis. Are you a betting man?

Not any more; too close to retirement. Who do you think will get the GOP nomination? An establishment lackey? Then they lose to Clinton or Sanders, badly, worse than Romney did and he lost worse than McCain did before him.

If the Republican Party is going to have any chance of doing well in the near future they will have to dump the establishments control of the GOP nomination process as those wicked old shits haven't had a breath of fresh air since 1988..

I think the GOP will nominate either Bush, Kasich, or Rubio.

Cruz is going to get a bump as the three you mentioned step away.....their irresponsible supporters will look toward him as the next best thing. He can be nutty enough for them.

Rubio has a chance, but Bush and Kasich are losing ground daily. I think as people realize that Rubio is the Establishment alternative they will move away from him in droves.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I'm always reasonable. Even now......I am thinking that you are completely out of your mind......but I'm being very reasonable. I say no crazy things. I just don't.

Lol, not crazy by your own concept of what is crazy. another tautology for you.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

You thanked this post. Was that you being sarcastic?

No, as I said before I appreciate his politeness and reasonableness, though I disagree on some of the details of what he says, like I do with most people.

I was talking about my post.

Well, you have also been more reasonable lately as well, and so I usually thank people for being mature and contributing useful thought to a discussion.

What you want me to take it back?

I'm always reasonable. Even now......I am thinking that you are completely out of your mind......but I'm being very reasonable. I say no crazy things. I just don't.

So much for showing respect.

 

[mudwhistle]

Compare that to the Republican debates......2 Hispanics, a woman, a black man, and a few white guys.

Actually the real comparison is:

"5 Adults at the Democratic Debate who discussed real issues civilly, that are important to the American people and how they can make existing programs that help Americans, better, without insulting or attacking each other"

vs​

"11 Clowns (2 Hispanics, 1 woman and 8 sexist males) at the Republican Debate which included a food fight, candidates attacking each other and one candidate making fun of one of the candidate's looks and trying to outdo each other on how they will demolish programs that help Americans".

Nope......4 losers with no chance in hell propping up 1 person in a televised coronation.....essentially promising trillions of dollars in free stuff we can't pay for. It was a total farce. At least the Republicans had a real debate......not this infomercial for Hillary's red-carpet walk to the WhiteHouse.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You thanked this post. Was that you being sarcastic?

No, as I said before I appreciate his politeness and reasonableness, though I disagree on some of the details of what he says, like I do with most people.

I was talking about my post.

Well, you have also been more reasonable lately as well, and so I usually thank people for being mature and contributing useful thought to a discussion.

What you want me to take it back?

I'm always reasonable. Even now......I am thinking that you are completely out of your mind......but I'm being very reasonable. I say no crazy things. I just don't.

So much for showing respect.

Quit whining nutbag. .

 

[the_human_being]

Apparently, all of them forgot that it is the Republicans who control BOTH houses of the Congress. I couldn't contain my laughter.

Yeah, well how's that working for you? Same-sex marriage, the Iran Deal, funding for Planned Parenthood.........that is funny, they only think they control both houses of Congress.

Those are different things altogether. You really believe the House of Reps will pass a new tax on the American public? In your dreams. Obamacare was a tax onto the American public but it was passed when Dems had control of both houses.

How are they different? It was things that your Teabags were willing to shut the government down for. And the Dems aren't trying to pass a new tax on American public....where did you get that idea? That the tax laws need to be changed is a given.....especially all the loop holes that T-chump is able to take advantage to pay less than a poor schmuck barely making enough to live on.

Oh, and that's another one your "control group" hasn't been able to do.....repeal Obamacare.....how's that working for the ones that are in control?

You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you. How can Sanders force Trump to pay more taxes unless the tax code is changed? A President cannot do that.

You're the one that is stupid......of course Presidents can make changes. They don't actually go to the IRS and physically type in the changes, idiot. If Presidents can't have the tax codes changed, explain to me then how Reagan was able to raise taxes, several times.

Oh, and Mr. Stupid....also explain how Reagan is going to build a beautiful wall....is he going to get the bricks and stack them himself? And another thing, how is he going to "force" Mexico to pay for it.....bwahahaha...you're the one that is really stupid.

And you quit avoiding my question........how is it your party, who is in control of both House and Senate and can't keep Democrats from getting what they want?

Well, you just showed that you're the typical right-wing nut job that can't debate civilly.....you had to go and start insulting, so go fuck yourself, idiot, I don't debate with idiots that can't hold back their anger and butt hurt and have to resort to insults.

I understand how the government works. You apparently don't. Reagan could work with the other Party. That isn't gonna happen now with the poison on both sides. The things the Repubs wanted to defund and changed were already in play, they were not new taxes.

 

[dannyboys]

I believe, among the people who keep even moderately informed about US politics and who identify as Republicans there are many many who feel the LIBs sort of shoved Obama's win in their face.
These voters are in a mood to do the same back to the LIBs.
Who better to REALLY rub in any LIB's face than Trump?
Not to mention Trump is the antithesis to Obama in virtually everything.
This is I know somewhat simplistic but the average voter pretty much can be described as simplistic.
This is why I do think Trump will become the nominee. Should that happen Hillary will lose.
No other REP candidate especially Bush could win against her in the general.

 

[hadit]

Anderson did a great job. He could have given Webb more time, but over all did fairly well.

The best performer was without question, IMO, Bernie Sanders. The man is a genius, and has the air of a Prophetic voice. If he gets the nomination, no Republican will win against him except maybe Huckabee. Sanders is not going to get the NRA out against him in force. He scored big points by stating he was sick to death of hearing about Hillary's emails. He kept pounding on the main two issues; the American middle class is disappearing because the Too Big To Fail banks and corporations have corrupted the political system and need to be put back in their place, and that college education should be free. These are two HUGE winning issues.

Clinton came across as a highly polished professional Politician and I think people are sick to death of that, over all. I don't think she can beat any of the GOP 'outsider' candidates. 'Vote for me because I have a vagina' is not going to win.

Webb did the best of the debate, other than Sanders, IMO, because he gave reasonable answers that took multiple sides to each question and the complexities of issue, and that takes courage in a political system that is dominated by single issue voters and special interests groups. He was the only won that asked how these plans were going to be paid for. Some smart asses commenting that he would do better in the GOP epitomized the losers of the Democratic Party.

OMalley and Chaffee were really irrelevant, OMalley running to the left of everyo0ne and Chaffee playing the wise old statesman in a party that despises both.

I would seriously consider voting for Sanders or Webb, but not the rest.

Webb is the one candidate that would get support from Republicans disenchanted with their own candidate. Naturally, that automatically disqualifies him from the nomination.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Webb is the one candidate that would get support from Republicans disenchanted with their own candidate. Naturally, that automatically disqualifies him from the nomination.

Picking a candidate that would draw voters from the opponent is normally a QUALIFER not a disqualifier for the nomination.

Are you saying that the Democratic party is so ideological hide bound that they cannot tolerate any ideological diversity even if it draws voters from the opposition?

Good Lord, lol.

 

[Treeshepherd]

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

Kind of. The whole thing is teetering on collapse already with the Federal Reserve, mostly elite Eastern financial wonks with historic ties to the Democratic party from FDR on. They are propping up the markets by various shenanigans, whipping up confidence in the markets as much as possible. An interest rate increase is needed to encourage investment, but that could draw too much money from the stock market so they are keeping interest rates low for now and if a Republican wins I think they will be far more aggressive than if they have a Democrat that they sympathize with in the Oval Office.

And nothing is literally inevitable. We could have a nuclear war that makes a stock market crash irrelevant. But the financial leaders in the Federal Reserve have the means to pull the rug out from under the economy and to prop it up a bit longer and they have used this power they have to wreck Republican Presidents since Hoover.

The Federal Reserve is the dark evil heart of the greedy capitalists in the Western world, and thus in effect the entire world today. They have ruined more nations, stolen more wealth and created more enemies for our nation than any leftwing group ever did.

Economic and geo-political issues for the next 12 months will certainly be a huge factor in the election. Is the US economy teetering on the edge of collapse? You have to remember that economies are relative. If the rest of the world is even more thrashed and absurdly propped up than we are, investment flows toward the US.

What Bernie and Trump have tapped into, though, is anti-globalism. Economic patriotism. If Greece or China get a flu, we get a cold, and we can expect more of that in 2016. Americans sense that the time is not for more globalism, but for economic self-sufficiency. I think there's a formula where we can continue to attract investment from foreign billionaires while working toward ensuring that rising American productivity translates to rising wages.