This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Could The Market Be Predicting a Romney Win?
The markets have been overbought, propped up on Fed intervention, on next to no volume for some time now, so we were more than due for a correction.
However, when looking at the selling pressure over the last few days, I cannot help but wonder if the markets are possibly forecasting that Mitt Romney will win the US Presidential Election… and Ben Bernanke will either be fired or step down as Fed Chairman.
Romney has stated several that he would fire Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke if he wins office. While this doesn’t represent the real shakeup that the Fed needs, it’s definitely a step in the right direction.
Also, Romney is the only one to have even mentioned Bernanke in his campaign. Obama not only reappointed Bernanke but has steered clear of even mentioning his name on the campaign trail (for obvious reasons: Bernanke is politically toxic and Obama doesn’t want to remind people that Obama re-appointed him).
So, if Romney did win, the markets would lose their primary prop: the Bernanke put. Given that most of the market action has been based on anticipation of more Fed intervention, the fact that Bernanke could leave as Fed Chairman combined with the fact that the Fed went “all in” with QE 3 leaves the market with little hope for additional liquidity.
This was the very problem with the Fed intervening so heavily to begin with: by attempting to prop the markets up, the Fed didn’t let the bad debts clear out of the system. As a result, the big reset has been pushed down the road.
If Romney wins the Presidency, it’s quite possible he would let that reset finally hit. After all, he could easily fire the economists at the BLS who have massaged the data, fire Ben Bernanke, and then blame the subsequent market correction and bad, but realistic economic data on Obama (much as Obama has blamed the bad economy he inherited on Bush).
Will this be the case? I honestly don’t know. There are so many negatives facing the markets today that distinguishing what is causing what is more difficult than usual.
However, one thing I do know is that the globe continues to have too much debt and that the only way to deal with this debt is through default (hyperinflation is just a other form of default as the underlying currency takes a massive hit in either instance).
In this environment, Gold and precious metals remain one of the few real safe havens. Whereas stocks, bonds and other assets all have custodial risk (meaning who actually owns what, if anything), Gold, stored by the owner, is one of the few real assets that is “money in hand.”
With that in mind, we’ve recently put together a FREE Special Report titled Bullion 101: Everything You Need to Know About Investing in Gold and Silver Bullion…
It outlines how to buy bullion, what coins to buy, what to ask any potential bullion dealer, and more.
Best of all, this report is 100% FREE. And you can pick up a copy here:
http://gainspainscapital.com/bullion101/
Best Regards,
Graham Summers
PS. We also feature a second FREE report focusing on Europe. . It’s called What Europe’s Collapse Means For You and it explains exactly how the coming Crisis will unfold as well as which investment (both direct and backdoor) you can make to profit from it.
This report is also 100% FREE. You can pick up a copy today at:
http://gainspainscapital.com/eu-report/
- advertisements -
Nonsense. If Romney wins, he'll replace Bernanke with another suit who will run the Fed in exactly the same way. This will satisfy the muppets, being that they are simple fucks who don't understand the problem anyway. Likewise with Obamacare, to be replaced with the "Free Market Healthcare Reform Act" or some such which will be identical to Obamacare, line for line, but, again, the muppets, being simple fucks, won't know any better, and will hail Romney for delivering them from socialized medicine...and for saving their medicare...lol.
The smartest thing for Romney to do if he wins (full disclosure: I believe he will win, and I will be voting for him) is to get the bad out of the way as swiftly as possible. We're already back in recession and 2013 will be a lousy year no matter what - doing the right thing will make it a bit lousier but will also reveal who is dead and who is living - and allow the living to start to rebuild. Swift action in the right direction will allow economic recovery to come faster and be more effective - and if you're planning on running for re-election in 2016 then you want as long a lead-time in recovery before that date as you can get.
To be sure, only a revolutionary change in the way our government and economy works will fix the problem in a long term manner - and Romney is simply not that revolutionary. He's smart enough to avoid the gigantic pitfalls that Obama (and Bernanke) fell in to, but he likely does not precieve which deep, fundamental changes are necessary to restore America to a nation where one man, working hard and living frugally, can support his family and leave a legacy for his children. To get to that revolutionary form of change will take some time - a lot of education and a lot of political activism, but we can get there. Hopefully by 2020 - more in Congress (where it really matters) than elsewhere - we'll have enough people in government power who understand how deep the changes need to go.
It may be, of course, that we can't fix it until it completely collapses - Romney might lose or, winning, do the completely wrong things. We know for certain that if Obama wins he will as a matter of policy do the wrong things (not out of malice but because he sincerley believes the idiocy which was stuffed in to his head in college). I'm voting Romney because Obama must go - and I'm hoping that Romney is smart enough (and courageous enough) to do at least some of the right things. Ultimately, though, it is really up to us - the people - to fix this mess and that is a long, hard fight against entrenched interests.
Let's see if Ryan grows and if Libertarians keep up their energy. I am voting for Mittens to buy time. Also, my dog is safe from being lunch. O-Phone will be scouring Hawayer for canine delicacies.
Good riddance to F M Davis, Jr.
Gotta give Barry credit...
How many ex Presidents have naked pics of their Mom on the webz?
A First! Anyone know where you can get the ones that don't have the black bars over the good parts?
I woulda banged his momma, too; looks like everyone else did.
Mark, respectfully You have forgotten how many times an elected official will do the EXACT opposite of what the platform he/she was represented. Even Obama did the same thing with his economic team.
You're right on one poinst though: It will be a long hard fight against entrenched interests.
Think: Hunger games.
That is why Romney was my 4th or 5th choice - because I worry that once in office he'll start to try and make nice/nice with the very people and institutions which have wrecked the nation. On the other hand, the Ruling Class (which, yes, Romney is part of) hammering Romney for the past 6 months should give him pause for thought. The Ruling Class is loyal to its own, but in a fight between the liberal and conservative sides of the Ruling Class, the liberal part is always preferred because a large majority of the Ruling Class are liberals.
Aside from that, Romney has also seen the lesson of the last three years for a GOP politician - beware of angering the increasingly revolutionary party base. The most recent lesson was learned by Lugar during the primary season - it is a lesson not being lost on perceptive politicians (heck, even Orrin Hatch suddenly remembered there is this constitution thingy we're all supposed to obey - he had to in order to prevent his fate matching Lugar's). The one, sure deadly thing for Romney in 2016 would be to have a TEA Party-backed challenger in the primaries...to be sure, the machine would pretty much ensure Romney's re-nomination, but only at the cost of a bruising, divisive fight which would almost certainly lead to defeat in November. This knowledge will tend to keep Romney on the straight and narrow - it would be after November, 2016 that we'd have to worry (on the other hand, 2nd term President's rarely get any major initiatives off the ground...which is part of my argument for making our Presidency a one term, 6 year project).
To me, we do what we can during the Romney Administration to get what reforms are possible - and then keep working to elect House and Senate members who will actually commit to deep reforms. We get enough of them - and especially enough of them who are perfectly willing to lose the next election - and then we can get really moving.
It's mindsets like this that are our undoing. Congrats, Mark Noonan, you have been successfully assimilated by the Borg.
That is just where you're wrong - it is I who am assimilating the Borg. Its why I don't bother with a Third Party: no conceivable third party will have enough time to gain power before disaster ensues. Building up a genuine, national party with the ability to win a plurality in Congress and the White House is at least a 20 to 30 year project...and it would have to be done by people who will initially eschew the House, Senate and White House in favor of winning the county commission and city council. The only way a Third Party could work would be if about 1/4 of each of the two major parties jumped ship at the same time to form a new party (it could happen, too - there is definitely a possibility under certain circumstances of a "Christian Democrat" party arising in the United States).
The GOP is not at all perfect - but it can be taken over. That is the goal.
Romney is full of shit. And can any of us fire our boss? Doubt it.
If Romney's plutocrat and republican buddies were smart, they would layoff a shit ton of people and hedge against it (to make money), and tank the market to get this guy in office.
But the keyword is "smart". These people....are fucking dumb nepotistic assbags.
Perhaps a "step in the right direction" is pathetically insufficient.
Romney too will eventually have to ask Fed to bankroll his increased military spending, so there's not difference in the long run. Short-term like a quarter or sth, yeah, market has reasons to correct should Romney wins.
No, the Market is just gagging on itself.
You could argue that the banking system has already defaulted (again) with the demise of mark-to-market. Nixon took us off the world (Bretton Woods) gold standard (temporarily) by executive order and any president who refuses to put us back on the gold standard (also by executive order) is complicit.
Graham your post are starting to remind me of "Deep thoughts by Jack Handy"
Federal Reserve needs a competitor. This will give time for US gvt/citizens to learn the truth of US Constitution Artcile 1 Section 10 and finally realize fiat currency is illegal. As the competitor stabalises commerce and economies, the Fed could be elminated or used as a default mechanism.
Dear Graham: If it's Ryan, he's lying, if it's Mitt he's full of shit!
Regardless of who wins, we are going to have to take our medicine; and I may add it will be a very bitter pill to swallow. The sooner we re-set, the more manageable the ensuing pain that will follow.
Bernanke needs to be tried for treason; upon conviction, must be a life long target for anyone/everyone to throw rotten fruit at... not fired!
I suspect even if Romney were to do 'the right thing' and let nature take its course (allow losers to loose) that the outcry would be overwhelming. Even the most ardent supporter of free markets would holler in pain and the final outcome would be more printing to ease that pain all the way to hyperinflation. I predict this will happen even though all participants know what the end result would be. It is a simple matter of the way we humans respond to pain.
Obama's new movie starring Arnold Schwarzenegger: "TOTAL FASTFALL" :Where Liars, Commies, Murderers, and Thieves go to disappear from the public's eye.
Graham,
You are such a fucking idiot, it's pathetic.
If Romney wins and Bernanke is not re-appointed to the Fed, just who the hell , if not the Fed, will finance the U.S. governments deficit ?
Who else will be buying U.S. Treasurys other than the Fed?
So Bernanke getting re-appointed is really meaningless. The next asshole running the Fed will pick up the ball exactly where Bernanke dropped it.
Glad I never subscribed to your bullshit service.
vmromk - I only got 1/3rd through the article and was about to leave a comment about how stupid the author is; I'm glad you beat me to it.
Let me also add, Graham, that the President can not fire the Fed Chairman. Asshole. Bernanke's second term ends on January 31, 2014, unless he quits, which means Romney would overlap him by more than a year.
+1. how does Graham feed himself, not to mention his leprechaun gold baking helpers?
By scaring the clueless investors shitless.
When Bernanke leaves, for whatever reason, his replacement is sure to be in the same Greenspan-easy-money-mold. And whoever is the next POTUS, the same borrow and spend policy will remain. The only change might be a slight adjustment of tax policy, hardly enough to make a dent in the revenue/expenditure ratio. It's a yawner for wall street.
Hell yes and the market loves obama cause he loved them back thus the tank probably with some help from the Presidential Protection Team which is what the PPT should really be called.
Memo To Investors: Bernanke And Obama Are Your Business Partnershttp://www.forbes.com/sites/jerrybowyer/2012/10/10/memo-to-investors-bernanke-and-obama-are-your-business-partners/
Wall St. May Not Cheer, but Obama’s Been Good for Stocks
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/your-money/wall-st-may-not-cheer-but-obamas-been-good-for-stocks.html?_r=0
This Utah law on precious metal coins may give you an idea about where Romney's head is at.
Do you really think Mittens is a gold bug???
Tell me just how much money Bain Capital would have made if hard currency existed?
That my friend is your answer...