I came across some information that really points to how the federal government can and does affect voting despite Obama’s lying to the public and in support of Trump’s claim that it can be done. NOT just vote rigging but in actual changes in an area that most people like me never ever concern ourselves with since we have no money to bet. Yes BET.
The financial world has been allowed for far too long to run rampant over the economies of the world. From stock markets to banks supposedly too big to fail, we have been taken on a leaky boat ride down a short river. So has the FED bank. Here is how the FEDS can manipulate critical elections like presidential races.
First and foremost I could give generally a rabbit poop pellet about what the markets are doing, how the Fed manipulates money and interest, or how banks are overbalanced. EXCEPT that every item we use, buy, plan for future or hope to have for our children is now tied with a hangman’s knot to those very troublesome betting bookies. Top Banks have purchased three times or more derivatives even since they were so-called “bailed out” and are dangerously derivative heavy. Feds have been bouncing or pretending to bounce interest rates up and down for dozens of years.
The Federal government despite what it wants us to believe has a lot of input into the Fed and failed systems like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It even has recently passed some kind of rebate for homeowners spending more and more in creating an artificial financial world. While on one hand like in March 2016, Obama seems to have assured “someone” that steps had been put in place that no big bank could ever fail, people with far more financial smarts than me has said he LIED – seriously? Ya think? The guy opens his mouth and nothing but lies flows out. Even I who am a total village idiot on banking could have told people that.
Back during a Columbus, Ohio rally Trump told everyone that the federal government (not just voting) could rig the election. Obama immediately responded with “the federal government” has no way to rig elections. What is rigging even mean?” Mainstream media only minimally covered his response and then immediately dropped the whole hot potato. But some who consider themselves experts said — Yes Trump was right.
So if I am following their explanation (understand I was viewing was an infomercial video) this can really happen. Let me try to explain what I got out of the information — you who are more informed are welcome to correct or expound upon it at will.
During the last year before an election, the FEDS take a look at the markets and decide to either raise or lower the interest rate. Let’s say there is a particular party holding the oval office that might need a bit of boost. The FEDS decide at the start of the year, fine we need to show that the President has done a fine job of boosting economy so we can artificially lower or raise the rate slightly and the markets will trend stronger. If the FEDS sees that the party does not have a great chance of staying in office, then they can manipulate the rate in the opposite direction to trend weaker. In this I would have to assume the FED backs the party that backs the FED if you get my drift.
This particular group said they could with a statistical probability of 86.4% determine how the election would be won or lost. Their premise was based on the Standard & Poor market. Reaching back into time over the last 22 elections they found that when the S&P rose 12 out of 14 times during the three months prior to November, the incumbent party won the election. When the S&P fell in in the three months prior, the incumbent party lost in 7 out of 8 elections. In other words, voters especially those who kept up with S&P were keyed to economy and its influence on our lives. If it was seen with optimism then the incumbent party had little to worry about. By the same token, if the economy was disastrous then the incumbent party suffered the brunt of their wrath. Makes sense to me.
SO TRUMP WAS RIGHT. The federal government can and does manipulate elections. Shocker – NOT. This is simply what we instinctively believed finally rationally explained.
So looking at the last year of S&P, the graphs last year at this time show a trend upward. Then in January the FED did its little manipulation only this time it backfired. S&P reacted strongly by plunging downward. It shocked the FED enough that they backed off of the scheduled rate hike and soon S&P began humming along going higher than in the last two years. UNTIL the market starting wobbling a little and the FED board began discussing changes (Presumably to help the Democrats look good for election time or world changes forced their hand to make decisions.)
MarketWatch ran a story on September 9, 2016 by Greg Robb, “Fed’s Rosengren backs interest-rate hike amid concerns on asset prices”.
““My personal view, based on data that we have received to date, is that a reasonable case can be made for continuing to pursue a gradual normalization of monetary policy,” Rosengren said in a breakfast speech to the South Shore Chamber of Commerce in Quincy, Massachusetts.”
A majority of economists surveyed by the Wall Street Journal expect the Fed to hold off raising rates until December which Trump also mentioned in that speech. Had the “bubble” hit now, then the next president could go in with a better idea and game plan to correct but if that increase smacks Wall Street in December of all months then……well you get the possibilities and coming disasters of the next president to unravel. Hopefully Trump has some extremely good ECONOMIC leaders that can be working on the “what ifs” NOW, considering how to clip the talons of the Federal Bank, and be ready for any banking and Wall Street maneuvers.
According to the Federal Bank Reserve of Boston, the top five takeaways from that meeting were
1- Gradual tightening of monetary policy is likely to be appropriate,
2- U.S. economy is resilient, despite headwinds from abroad,
3- Some conflicting signals, but underlying domestic strength is key,
4- Forecasts and market indicators are trending positive, and,
5- Risks are increasingly two-sided – downside risk as well as risk of overheating.
Overheating? Heck our economy is so screwed up at the present time thanks to this current administration even a degree more of heat will be too much. Taking into account our situation and those of other countries around the world, the next year is going to be a financial doozey to say the least.