Tanking Market And Tanking Country?

“In the event Donald wins, I have no doubt in my mind the market tanks.”

—Mark Cuban, 9/6/16

A as polls tighten, stand guard over your 401 (k) and let’s take a look at part of what has happened in just a few days on the campaign trail:

  • Trump continues to deny, by his silence, that Barack Obama is our legitimate president who was born in Hawaii.
  • He continues to lie about his opposition to the Iraq war (and NBC’s Matt Lauer, now infamously, allowed him to get away with it during the fiasco called “Commander-in-Chief Forum” that was broadcast to more than 11 million people).
  • He has reiterated his creepy affection for a Russian thug, a former KGB agent that now runs the country, named Vladimir Putin. Other Republicans, including Mike Pence, have enthusiastically joined in this creepy affection. That stuff has been going on for years now, right-wing authoritarians admiring one of their own.
  • trump civilian military crisis.jpgHe has trashed our military and its leaders and, once again, said a Russian dictator—who is responsible for killing untold numbers of his political enemies and who is aggressively anti-American and who has zero respect for American values like democracy and civil liberties and who is indiscriminately killing civilians in Syria and who, by the way, supports the thug in Syria responsible for the death of some 400,000 people—is a stronger “leader” than our current president.
  • Trump, to no one’s surprise apparently, took information he got in an intelligence briefing and, because he says he is “pretty good with body language,” determined that the briefers hated Obama as much as he does. “I’ve never seen anything like it,” said former CIA Director Michael Hayden, a man with 40 years of experience in the field and a man who, by the way, is not a Democrat.
  • Trump’s top military adviser and strategic “thinker,” Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn—himself a Putin groupie with what Michael Crowley called “an odd affection for Russia and its authoritarian government”—constantly interrupted those intelligence briefers who were trying to light a candle inside of Trump’s dark mind. Of all people, Chris Christie, not known for his restraint, had to tell Flynn to shut the muck up.
  • Trump, who just recently stopped banning certain news outlets from covering him up close and personal, appeared on a government-owned Russian television network and trashed our “dishonest” media because, every now and then, some journalists actually call him out for one or two of his ten thousand lies. He also trashed Clinton and Obama and American foreign policy. Oh, he also let the Russians off the hook on sabotaging our election process, after he had previously begged them to do more espionage. Did I mention he did all this on a Russian propaganda network that Lt. Gen. Flynn appeared on frequently as an “analyst”?

I don’t know if Mark Cuban is right about the market tanking, should Trump win or even look like he can win in November. A Texas billionaire would know more about that than I would. But I’m much more worried about the country, as we have known it, tanking under a President Trump. Because I don’t think there is much doubt that it will.



  1. And as if all that weren’t enough, Trump has clearly signaled a willingness to politicize the military. He says “the Generals” under Obama have been “reduced to rubble”, whatever that means, and that he may have to get “his own” Generals, presumably more in the model of Flynn. You know, I thought the movie, Dr. Strangelove, was just satire, but now it actually seems possible. This nightmare just keeps getting worse.


    • I have been amazed over the last few days about something. Journalists, at least yesterday and today, on television especially, are acting like this latest stuff is all something new. Like they just woke up after that Commander-in-Chief Forum and said, “Damn. This guy is out of his bleeping mind.” But this dangerous shit has been going on for months and months and months, while they’ve been focused on a comparatively nothing “scandal” over emails and the Clinton Foundation. Or, worse, over her “style” and appearance. 

      It’s not a funny situation, as you make clear. It is inherently dangerous. The man obviously has ties to Russia, and we know people around him do too. Add to that he is unhinged and you have a recipe for death and destruction on a scale we only fear in our nightmares.


      • King Beauregard

         /  September 9, 2016

        I have decided Trump is proof positive that “it” can indeed happen here. While Trump may be no Hitler, he is nevertheless proof that an obvious lunatic can win if he appeals to enough of an electorate. In the US we don’t even have the excuse of turmoil from losing WWI and then having to pay reparations; this is just a big chunk of the electorate who like the cut of Trump’s jib, and — importantly — will modify their beliefs as needed to justify and support Trump.

        Oh well, at least we’re a two-party system so that the sane, responsible candidate isn’t relegated to some party that gets only a fifth of the vote. Two-party system for the win! (The Democratic Party is really much more like a coalition of smaller parties anyway — the Democrats are notoriously difficult to bring into formation because the party’s got so many factions — so I say the Democrats are the best of both worlds: enough party to win elections, not so much party that they’re in lockstep.)


        • I agree with you that fascism can come to America. I would not have said that a year ago. Trump has proven that the right combination of willingness to lie and deceive and exploit emotions, along with a blustery showmanship that appeals to authoritarian-leaning people, can be effective in pushing quasi-fascist leadership. If he were a smarter and more educated person, he would certainly be able to pull this off. Right now, the only way he can win is in a three- or four-way race.

          I like your analysis of the Democratic Party. I have tried to tell that to people for years. In our politics, we have our factions inside the parties (the GOP has its internal factions, too; they are in danger now of fracturing, though, as Trump has revealed just how a lot of working class people don’t buy into, say, the globalism/trade issues and entitlement cut rhetoric that Republican elites have embraced for decades now) rather than electing a multitude of factions to fill each legislative seat and then expecting them to form a working coalition that can actually govern.


  2. ansonburlingame

     /  September 9, 2016

    As both of you well know I am opposed to both Dem and GOP candidates. But I continue to watch and read about political events to find a way to say “Yes, I agree with that position” or at least “Yes, I believe that explains well enough your actions during the ……. (email incidents, bankruptcies, etc.) and I can still vote for you at this point”.

    Not at all unexpectedly, your critique of the Commander-in-Chief show is all about what Trump did wrong. You even trashed Matt Lauer for not holding Trump accountable. Not a word was said however about Hillary and if you had written such I am pretty sure it would have been praise for her during that event. OK, fine. I have enough experience herein to accept this blog for what it is, a strong progressive position on every subjected mentioned and unrelenting attacks on matters related to conservative views.

    On the other hand, for what it is worth, I thought (while watching) that Lauer did a super job asking every hard question possible in the given time. He tried to limit Hillary’s filibusters and wanted to delve deeper into Trump’s nonsense but lacked the time to do either. But as far as questions asked, he did great in my view and I am not a supporter of NBC most of the time.

    As I fell asleep thinking about the show I decided that Trump did a better job than Hillary. I won’t try to defend that decision herein. But more important, there was little or nothing said by either H or T that gave me any reason to think that I could comfortably support either one of them, still..

    One last comment. A month ago it was clear to me that Trump would only gain about 40% of the popular vote come Nov. But obviously the race in now tightening though I still feel that Hillary is comfortably ahead at least with rational voters!! I wonder WHY the race, according to polls has in fact tightened and would be interested in Duane’s views as to why that is the case. Has the 40% enemy list gotten bigger (all the red necked white men, etc.), have some Dems moved from H to undecided now, or even D’s going to T at this point.

    It would seem to me that H has moved DOWN in polls while T has remained in the 40-45% range of supporters. I don’t know and just asking for a progressive view on the reasons why, for now, the race almost seems to have become a race, sort of?



    • It seems to me the race is pretty much back to where it was before both conventions. I am having a hard time, like most sane people, understanding why so many Americans prefer a racist demagogue who doesn’t know anything of substance about the government or the way the world has worked in the past and works now. I will tell you why I think he has the support he has, as best as I can see it:

      1. The built-in Republican/conservative electorate of about 35-40%, who would vote for anyone with an R by their name (just like Dems). The Republican establishment has, for the most part, either kept relatively quiet or has openly embraced him, thus “normalizing” him in the eyes of these voters.
      2. A rather large percentage (I don’t know what it is but it isn’t small) of white people, mostly uneducated, who are either outright racist or at least anxious about the “takeover” of “their” country by people of color.
      3. Xenophobes and homophobes and misogynists, almost all of whom are, if they vote, supporting Trump.
      4. Evangelicals, many of whom, oddly, see Trump as a strong leader who can restore Christianity to its rightful place as America’s faith. This despite the fact that he doesn’t give a shit about evangelicalism or faith in general, judging by those who have know him well. But I will tell you this about evangelicals, having been one: most are as gullible as can be. That’s why so many evangelical preachers, obvious frauds, do so well on TV raising millions and living in big homes with private jets. Donald Trump is a con man just like they are.
      5. Finally, I don’t care what anyone says, I have witnessed a hostile television press go after Hillary Clinton with a fierceness and tenacity that they just don’t apply to Trump. Print media, with the exception of some of the New York Times coverage and the Associated Press, has done a better job of exposing him (they have, though, at times been completely unfair with stories about the emails and the Clinton Foundation. But unless those well-researched exposés on Trump
        get converted into TV coverage, most of it isn’t noticed by the larger public. And TV people are only interested in the latest thing Trump has said and let much of the other stuff wilt. Part of this is attributable to the Niagara Falls level of scandals and controversies and lies and fraud that is his life and presidential campaign. There is so much to get distracted by, it is hard for TV people to focus on one thing. But they should at least pick out a few of the big ones, like the fraud he has obviously committed with his phony university and his failure to pay his bills and his use of debt to essentially steal money from those dumb enough to lend it to him and his Russian connections and his refusal to release his tax returns so we can all see just what a fraud it is when it comes to his business dealings and wealth. Oh, and that doesn’t begin to cover it: his policy prescriptions, when he isn’t changing them by the hour, are horrendously incoherent or unrealistic and would run up debt like you and I have never seen.


      Liked by 1 person

  3. ansonburlingame

     /  September 12, 2016


    Accurately reported or not, I have no idea. BUT Cokie Roberts, a democrat, but one that I read and listen to carefully, is now quoted as saying that Democrats are “whispering” about the need to “replace Hillary due to health reasons”.

    I am somewhat sure that “you and yours” herein are mildly concerned about Hillary’s drop in polls. As I said above I do not believe Trump has risen in polls. The polling problem for Dems is, again Hillary’s drop from 50% plus to the 45-50% place she now resides thus “tightening” the race.

    I will continue to hold, for now, to my prediction that Trump will not get more than 40% of the popular vote come Nov. But I will be truly amazed if he gets 45% of such vote. The challenge for Hillary to to remain in the 45-50% range to make this coming election a sure bet. For sure if she garners 50% or greater in the popular vote, the only question that will remain is how big the landslide might be. Third party candidates may decide that outcome. If Green and Libertarian parties garner 10% or greater, combined, then we might just have a horse race in Nov, God forbid.

    When I was 68 I came down with pneumonia. I was SICK, as sick as I have ever been and no way could I have stood long anywhere for several days. Trying to just work your way through such a disease at that age is crazy to even try. But so what if Hillary gets pneumonia, the truth is reported and she takes to three or four days to recover. Sure conspiracies will try to make a big deal ot such but…..

    But now she and her staff reinforce the sneaky, lying, making excuses Hillary the press continues to make a big deal out of. I believe that sentiment is exactly why Hillary, before pneumonia, went down rather significantly in the polls. So health reasons, “sneaky” reasons or a combination of the two, true or false, Hillary is faced with a real challenge now in what should have been a race only to see the seize of the landslide.

    The other reason for the lack of overwhelming support for Hillary is the simple fact that many, many Americans have no at all liked all that has happened in the Obama years. For sure today, a vote for Hillary is essentially a vote for “4 more years”. The only significant difference between H and O right now, policy wise, is she just might crater the Trans-Pacific deal.

    You certainly are correct that she has volumes of “positions” to be read. But boil all those positions down and it sure reads like “4 more years”. If that is true Trump “could”, repeat “could” pull out a win with 40% of his vote coming out of the “fever swamp” of red necks PLUS some “thinking folks” that just don’t want “4 more years”. But many Dems would also have to vote for a third party to make that a possibility as well.

    Given all that, if I were in your political camp I would be a little worried right now but no way would I want to see Hillary pulled out of the race for someone else to run. Dems might just as well give away the White House to do so. And NO, for the sake of America I don’t want to see that happen and let Trump waltz into the WH by default.



    • Anonymous

       /  September 13, 2016

      So what you’re saying is Hillary is tougher than the commander of a nuclear submarine because she can function while sick with pneumonia? Sounds tough enough for me!


      • Her surrogates need to go on television and constantly push the toughness issue. And I mean constantly push it. Trying to keep campaigning at her age, with pneumonia, is a demonstration of the stamina Trump, stupidly, claims she lacks. Her schedule is much tougher than his, what with his flights back to New York every night so he can sleep and Tweet in his own bed. She has impressed me with her mental toughness, which now has been put in service to overcome some physical problems.


    • 1. The only Democrats “whispering” about replacing Hillary Clinton are lukewarm Democrats like Cokie Roberts. Hillary ain’t going anywhere. It’s not in her personality and there would be a revolt in the party if some dolts tried to force her out. It is stupid talk generated by dumb-ass Democrats who get scared every time the wind blows against them.

      2. Ever since I saw how Trump was going to be covered by the mainstream press, I have been worried about the election. I have taken nothing for granted. My biggest source of hope is that Barack Obama will soon start earnestly campaigning for her. Looks like that starts today. He will, no doubt, be touting the latest economic numbers, like the fact that median wages have gone up about 5%.

      3. If Trump wins, it will be because of third-party candidates.

      4. What the Clinton campaign did wrong was, on Friday, not telling the press that she had pneumonia. They could have squelched the stupid conspiracy bullshit (which had leaked into mainstream press) and given her cover to take a few days off. But you know why that didn’t happen? Because she is one determined person. She wanted to keep going and it cost her. I, for one, admire that. I would think you would too.

      5. Finally, I think it is grossly unfair of you to condense all of her complicated policy positions (which Trump or any other candidate hasn’t even come close to producing) as “4 more years.” Some people want to have it both ways. Some say she is much more of a “hawk” than Obama is and then also say “4 more years” of the same feckless foreign policy. Some people want to say she wants to spend much more money than Obama did, but then “4 more years” of the same economic policy. Can’t have it both ways. Journalist complain about her lack of transparency, but never bother to read or report on all of the things she has put out about what she actually wants to accomplish as president (after all, that’s the point of being president, isn’t it?). That is part of the reason the race is close. No focus whatsoever, and I mean whatsoever, on policy issues, especially on television.



%d bloggers like this: