2012 called. They were looking for their liberal punch line.Quote:
Originally Posted by spqrzilla
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/year...ry?id=61330530
It's unfortunate you'll always be eight years behind.
Printable View
2012 called. They were looking for their liberal punch line.Quote:
Originally Posted by spqrzilla
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/year...ry?id=61330530
It's unfortunate you'll always be eight years behind.
The whole Russian election interference bullshit is just the Left's attempt to silence opinions they don't want to acknowledge. You can return it to your alimentary canal from where it came.
When this country implodes in stupidity some of us may be looking to move to Russia so we can enjoy a little freedom.
In Russia, Elections come to you .Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
Careful, when your knee jerks that hard you might break something.Quote:
Originally Posted by spqrzilla
There is a small bit of truth to that assertion (left casts it as a GOP thing, when it's not). However, the GOP cliche perspective- e.g. yours - is just as bad. "That dadgum stuff is all made up". Like many things, the truth is in the middle - and your source of information is merely your opinion, which in your head, constitutes sufficiency for "fact".
Just wondering, have you moved your assets to cash/bonds yet? If not, will you please let us all know when it's time to?Quote:
It would be wise, imho, to go to cash/bonds in advance, because it will happen again. On top of the factor that the market is already sensitive to a possible D president, we're overdue, and there are already many initial indicators showing (such as overnight intra-bank lending at high rates) it's one fracture away from a total break, ala 2008 again.
Not yet. The public perception is leaning towards DJT right now after the dem's f'ed up with "impeachment" which provides, at minimum, a few more months of growth. If the D's nominated a very strong candidate (seems less likely) that polls well (possible), or something happens that dramatically shifts opinion/perception, right around then would be a good time. If Biden gets the nomination, there wont be dramatic implications either way, it might slow-crash. If Warren gets it and appears in any fashion, potentially electable (based on swing states) then many will be selling because they are worried about her implications, which in itself, can start to roll the boulder that quickly causes a crash, that is ironically blamed on DJT.Quote:
Originally Posted by TRnCO
If DJT gets reelected, then it's harder to predict. It probably won't make it the full four years, but it'll bide some time. The American economy is cyclic, in part, by design. It doesn't matter who POTUS is, eventually bubbles do pop. We might have decent gains for at least a couple years, though.
Right now I'm in volatile equities in my self-directed 401k, but I have plenty of time until retirement. Already up 9% for the year (3 weeks in), my main technique there is to predict peaks and troughs and sell and buy on limit trades without expiration. I did about 40% in 2018... should be able to exceed that this year if the above circumstances don't happen. If they do, I'll selloff and sit for awhile to see what happens. Not exactly groundbreaking science (buy low, sell high) - but you have to understand what you are buying and step away from it well enough to trust your sell and buy thresholds.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/29/u...vertising.html
This is what I was originally warning about... more $ dumped into ads even before Super-Tuesday than most prior elections had in sum. Bloomberg alone is spending more than Obama did in all of 2012 combined... just before super Tuesday. Regardless of if he wins the nomination, he's promised to dump hundreds of millions of more. Oh and each D & R billionaire has bought a 60 second Superbowl ad already, and... yet...
Just about everyone already knows who "their guy is", but expect to be bombarded with 400% the ad volume of the prior election all over a handful of people, probably all over less than a couple hundred thousand people are actually influenced in swing states. Our only saving grace is that we're no longer a swing state.
And note, my commentary is not about who wins, or DJT losing, or anything else... just only to get your ad filters prepped, everyone's going to get burned out even seeing the relentless ads for "their guy" and interruptions every 10 seconds to play the same things over-and-over-and-over-and-over-and-over-and-over. Even if you're wearing a MAGA hat.. (or those nuts with a Bloomin' Onion or something?), you're going to just want to watch your f$$$ing video at some point.
PS: If you want to make a difference, figure out how to change your voter registration to a swing state [Coffee]
well apparently the DNC thinks a rich white guy needs to get in the race. Apparently the DNC has changed the rules for qualifying to get in the next Dem. debate, so that Bloomberg will qualify. I suppose with all his money, the DNC wants him to be included for the sole purpose of adds bashing Trump. That's the only thing he brings to the DNC that I can see, is money. I simply don't see him of having a chance of being the Dem nominee, but with that said, I think the DNC is scared to death that mad Bernie will end up beating Biden, and then what? The DNC needs a back up plan to Biden, and I think Bloomy is it...