The Trumpanomic Effect: Part One

Now that the election is over and we know who the president is going to be, it is time now to analyze what I think will be one of the largest impacted areas of a Trump administration.

The economy.

As an investor I am now spending considerable time evaluating some of the promises that President-Elect Donald Trump made during his campaign as they apply to economic considerations. And what I see is enough to make me literally salivate. Of course, he is not yet in the White House, and the House and the Senate need to be onboard with any plans the Trump administration may lay before them. But there is a positive here if you have not noticed.

The republican party, and even some of the most staunch never Trumpers within the republican party are all now clearly and openly rallying in favor of the president-elect.

Seeing Ted Cruz moving in and out of Trump tower negotiating with both Trump and Pence and other members of the transition team, and hearing Cruz now speak to the American people about his now positive views on what Trump will offer is one thing. But Mitt Romney has also apparently moved on over to the Trump train as well, even after virtually calling for the election of Hillary Clinton early on in the campaign.

It's one thing that the GOP controls both the House and the Senate. It's entirely another that they are in support of the president-elect, and by all accounts, appear to also be entirely onboard with much of his agenda as well. Even Ted Cruz specified that Trump's overwhelming defeat of Clinton and the GOP win over democrats, despite what all thought would be considerable odds, defined a clear mandate by the American people that they want the campaign promises to be fulfilled. And if the GOP wants to maintain their power, they are going to have to deliver on that mandate or face their ouster come the next round of mid-term elections.

So, when it comes to the economy, it looks like we may see the ratification of a good number of some of the ideas that Trump offered to right the listing economic ship. And from an investors perspective, this means we may see some very interesting positive developments in the stock market going forward.

And by the way, it's not just the stock market that will benefit. If Trump can get done what he wants to do—especially in the first 100 days—of course American workers will see massive benefits as well. It's really not rocket science to understand that the underlying factor of more Americans working, even making higher wages, coupled with other factors are the benchmark of a strong economy.

Think of the impact of the middle class and my point is proved. When the middle class is vibrant and strong the economy flourishes. When the middle class is in jeopardy, the economy slips and falls.

One thing that seems clear to me is that if Trump can get done even half of what he advocated for during the campaign, we are going to see massive upswings in jobs, and even massive upswings in median income across the United States. I honestly believe that a whirlwind of economic growth is right around the corner, and if the economic policy put forth by the Trump administration looks anything like I think it will, we are headed for long term growth that may even make the undeniable success of Reaganomics pale by comparison.

In the following series I will outlay some of the factors that I think will spur on this economic growth, and the reasons I think they can be powerful enough to potentially uplift the American economy in very short time. I don't think we're looking at four or more years to see results here. I think we will begin to see results, actually, after just two years into the Trump administration. And in some ways if I am to be totally honest, even two years may be a conservative estimate.

Why?

Because if the American people can see the light at the end of the tunnel, and if there is a positive attitude toward what our economic future holds, this will reflect very early on (and in some cases is already being evidenced a mere 10 days after the election results) in how Americans react to it. Things to watch with abided attention are the U-6 unemployment figures, consumer confidence figures, retail sales, and the housing market—particularly housing starts as opposed to depletion of existing inventories.

My shortlist advice? You better have some cash lying around to toss into the markets, and I will be telling you where I will be putting a lot of mine, because waiting too long may well put you miles behind the curve once this thing really gets going.

I told you all along that Trump would win, and win big, and laid out all of the reasons I saw that coming. Now am I going to tell you that the economy is the next big winner, and will lay out all of the reasons why I see that coming as well.

Why I Still Believe Trump Wins It All

Well, here we are. A mere four days before the fate of the nation will be determined by the American voter. And what do I think is going to happen? Of course, I think Donald J. Trump will become our 45th President of the United States. My belief that this will be the case has not changed, however it has been solidified by recent "revelations" about Hillary Clinton's emails. Why the quotations on the word? To my mind if you have been following the real news, these new "revelations" are more like affirmations. With clear indications that the Clinton camp rigged it's own nomination process, was complicit in hiding emails originally said to be benign correspondence about wedding preparations and yoga classes, and released information by the FBI that it is possible that at least five foreign intelligence agencies hacked those accounts and gained American secrets, no matter how much the media has worked to silence the news, shape the news, and mislead the American people in a concerted effort—the American people are a bit more privy this time around to what is going on. And while I am not a true believer in what the polls say, the massive swings following the announcement by the FBI that their investigation into Hillary Clinton was being reopened after discovering correspondence in Anthony Weiner's case clearly shows that Americans are paying way more attention than they have in the past.

I think the polls are still wrong, and by a lot by the way. But it's not the final number that matters. It's those massive swings that tell a story.

So where do I think all of these votes are going to come from to propel Donald J. Trump into the White House? For one thing, one has to wonder where all those Bernie supporters are going to go? Obviously it is now clear as a bell that the Clinton camp and the DNC all worked against his campaign—and not in the usual way which is the important part to consider. I think many of those Bernie supporters, even if they have been telling pollsters otherwise, are going to vote for Donald Trump on election day. Some may already have done that.

You also have the dynamic of the primary results which I think factor in, and that is the fact that during the republican primaries Trump received more votes in a republican primary than any other candidate in the history of the republican party. And it wasn't just by a few votes. It was massive. In fact, the win that Trump accomplished to receive the republican nomination was so massive that words like decimation, annihilation, and okay major ass kicking would all accurately describe how badly the other republican candidates on the stage were defeated. The thing that is important to understand about the importance of this alone is multi-fold, but rather simple actually.

• In order for Donald Trump to have done this is to attract independents and democrats to the republican party.
• Clearly voter enthusiasm for this candidate was as well, massive.

Voter enthusiasm and gaining the independent vote are essential to winning an election. And of course, one cannot ignore the rallies, and it is something I have been talking about for a while. The rallies are an important gauge on voter sentiment and the direction of the vote.

One clear thing to keep in mind is that of those people attending Trump's rallies, how many of them—or rather what percentage of them—are actually registered republicans? I'm going to say that many of them are not. In fact, I think many of them are in fact democrats, and certainly many of them are independents. You have to ask yourself the question, if those attendees of the Trump's rallies were largely republican, would the party have fought so hard initially against his nomination?

I hardly think so, especially because for years the party has longed for this kind of response to any candidate they've put before the American people. This time it just so happened to be someone who was not necessarily who they had hoped for.

Primary election results, voter enthusiasm, the republican party having record registrations, a very high percentage of democrats who have changed their vote or their registration during this election, the numbers of attendees at Trump rallies, and the ability of sources other than the traditional news outlets to share the truth about Hillary Clinton will all lead to Donald Trump winning the presidency. And while I cautiously suggest that he will win by a landslide...

I think Donald Trump just might indeed win by a landslide.

Trump Wins 2nd Presidential Debate

I know how the pollsters and news media are trying to slant the 2nd presidential debate. They are slanting it the way one would fully expect.

That Hillary Clinton won.

But, and I say this despite any admitted bias I may have with regard to Donald Trump's candidacy, I think it is clear and undeniable that Trump came out of this debate as the clear winner. Hands down. Look, I try to be fair in any analysis I make—on both sides for that matter. I thought Trump also clearly lost the first debate, and for a variety of reasons. That is, to my mind, a fair and honest judgement.

One thing that stood out for me in this second round was that Trump appeared way more prepared than usual to discuss the issues, and to lay out in more detail exactly what he wants to do, and more importantly, how he intends to do it. He was also considerably more contained than is his usual modus operandi as well. Something that I think is exactly what he needed to do in order to sway some on-the-fence voters, and perhaps to also solidify any voters in his base who may have been considering, for whatever reason, to jump ship.

Forget any establishment republicans who may have already jumped that ship. They are jumping for other reasons—of course.

The truth is that Donald Trump was on message, and frankly on-target. The one thing that few in the liberal media will give him credit for is how he effectively managed to shut down the discussion of the leaked tape. Both the moderators and Hillary Clinton, I think, quickly drew the conclusion that if they were to further discuss the issue, Trump would have effectively unloaded myriad talking points with regard to Bill Clinton's infidelities and misdeeds—and Clinton would have been in a very uncomfortable and difficult situation defending that. It took only a few strong words and a suggestion to allow the moderators, and even Clinton, to move on to the next issue. Had Trump not been so effective in his response to this issue, it may well have been the entire focus of the evening and he would have lost.

And of course, winner of the best line of the night also goes to Donald Trump when he suggested that had Trump been in charge of the law, Clinton would have been in jail. Despite obvious gasps from some in the audience at that remark—but I suspect many of those gasps came from Clinton supporters—I think the audience at least understood more clearly the seriousness of the issue of her emails as a whole. In preceding and following remarks I think Trump was able to convey two key issues with regard to the emails.

• Hillary Clinton has stated over and over again that she is best equipped to handle classified information, yet clearly her handling of the emails sent and received while she was Secretary of State via an unsecured server clearly breach that assertion—Trump also reminded voters that she lied to the FBI, and even reminded Clinton herself of her statement that she did not know what the letter "C" meant.
• It is impossible to know who may or may not have had access to her server and who may have gotten hold of any of the emails she sent or received—missing or not. This is potentially a serious threat to national security.

There is one more thought on the question of whether or not anyone who may be our enemy may have potentially gotten hold of classified information. How do we know that someone may not be holding on to that information to use it much later against us in some way? The server was not secured, no one really knows whether or not it was in fact compromised, and if it were, it would be difficult to know who was responsible for it.

Trump was very right to point out that only the media has seen this issue of her emails as "one to sweep aside as not that big of a deal." And I think he did so brilliantly.

And of course Trump also, I think, won the argument about taxes when he pointed out that even had he not paid taxes, he was still operating within the law—unlike what she had done with her emails—and that he was simply using the tax code as it was written by lawmakers. And he was very good to point out as well that singling him out for using the tax code as it was intended was foolish since every single rich person, armed with accountants and lawyers, would use the tax code in exactly the same way regardless of their party affiliations. His comments regarding this issue were much more effective, I think, than simply saying he was "smart." This laid out a more detailed rationale. And I think the audience got it when Trump also effectively pointed out two key things about taxes.

• Trump was not in a position to CHANGE tax laws. He was only in a position to FOLLOW tax laws, and to USE provisions in the tax laws as they were written by lawmakers. Clinton, on the other hand, was clearly better positioned in her former roles to make changes or push for changes if that is what she had wanted to do. She did say she was always against this or that item in the tax code—but while touting 400 pieces of legislation with her name on it, she did not single out a single piece of legislation with her name on it that addressed changes to the tax code. 
• He clearly stated an area of the tax code he wanted to change, and that would be carried interest. He said he used it like anyone would because, under the current tax code, it's what you do. But if he had his way, he would change it.

I think all in all Donald Trump explained most of his positions well. Be it his position on Syrian refugees, illegal immigration, the corporate tax rate and how lowering it would help businesses to better compete, and put more money in the pockets of the middle class, to explaining effectively why it can be harmful to let our enemies know what our intentions or timelines happen to be in any action we may take.

I have always advocated that nations need some secrets in order to ensure national security. 

Clinton, on the other hand, and for the first time for me, looked a bit frazzled—even surprised—by what was going down. I think Clinton was thoroughly convinced that this debate would go entirely a different direction. I can just hear the discussions before the debate, "With this tape out there, Trump will have nothing else to talk about...and we finish him." But that of course did not happen, and Clinton did not see any of what Trump delivered coming. The fact that he delivered with mostly tact and only once really raised his voice, and was well versed in the issues—all of this put Clinton clearly off kilter, and if anyone looked unprepared for this debate it was Hillary Clinton.

To be honest, despite my misgivings regarding the moderators which still leaned obviously left, I did find myself a bit surprised by some of the audience questions which put Clinton a bit in the hot seat. But, it was a town hall style. And even staunch Clinton cohorts will readily admit that when it comes to town hall's, Clinton always fares poorly. 

My thinking is because she has trouble actually talking about issues that aren't rehearsed, has trouble with questions she does not expect, and does not resonate well with the American people in general. 

As I said in an earlier post, the media and the polls that follow will all do their best to tell a story about a Clinton victory. They will do their best to suggest that the entire election is tilted in Clinton's favor. They will continue to flaunt any gains she may make in polls as "huge support gains" even though we all know that the steepest gains during this entire election has come from Donald Trump. 11 point swings are huge support gains in polls. Not 1 or 2 percentage point swings, But that's not how the media likes to tell the story.

In a nutshell, Trump won. Nuff said. Will he go on to win the final debate? Who knows? It depends on whether or not Trump can continue in the way he did with this last debate, and it depends on how well he can defend or deflect from any other garbage the left may try to pull out of the woodwork to shift the discussion from the issues, to what Donald Trump says or does.

The Gang of Two In the GOP

I have to admit that these days it is becoming real tough for me to call myself a republican, because as much as I have long identified with the party and its core principles, I also happen to be an American, and I believe in the will of the American people over all other things. The republican party these days seems more interested in making their own pick for nominee than what the American people and many in the party are deciding.

That would be Donald Trump of course.

You could say, as many have implied throughout this race, that Trump has turned the presidential race into a circus. But I would argue that the real circus is being created and directed by the republican party itself, and by the other candidates in the race who—let's face it—are clearly losing as the delegate counts stand right now.

Sure, maybe there is some hope on a second, third, fourth...whatever...ballot. But even if Trump does not get the necessary 1,237 delegates needed to be an uncontested nominee, there is no way at this point in the race that either Cruz or Kasich are going to get anywhere near the number of delegates Trump will ultimately wind up with. Now we of course have this "teaming up," which I will just go ahead and call it ganging up, between Cruz and Kasich to try to keep delegates from going to Trump in the final leg of the journey to the nomination. In a word it's simply ludicrous to me. For all of the complaints of whining the others on the trail have lambasted Trump for, this seems to me to be the ultimate whining.

It's not fair! It's not fair! He's not one of us and now he's winning and it's not fair!

So what is the core argument they are making for the teaming up? Trump can't win, and in order to protect the country from Hillary Clinton they have to stop the front-runner dead in his tracks to "save the party." But let's be clear about one glaring thing I see—if the American people feel that the nomination has been hijacked, and they will feel this way, what makes anyone think Cruz or Kasich are ultimately electable? They're not. They will be considered shills of the party, the "chosen" ones, not by the electorate, but by the establishment, and whether or not any rules were in place and followed through the course and into the selection process, the American people will not care. And they will not perceive things any other way than an election and candidate was literally stolen from them at the hands of the very people that the voters love to hate these days.

You are NOT going to win ANYTHING if, when all is said and done, it is clear that you are the runner up and are GIVEN the trophy anyway. Rules be damned, the voters will not give a rat's ass about that. And Hillary will get to be president by default.

I am actually quite a bit surprised that the GOP is failing to see this. It seems to be one of the dumbest and most naive maneuvers I have seen the republican party attempt in a very long time.

Let's take a moment to examine one other thing here. So the republican party thinks, with certainty, that Trump cannot win in the general. But all throughout this race Trump has defied every poll, every odd, that showed him in a bad spot. Whose to say he can't do it again? In the general.

I just think that the republican party is shooting itself in the foot right now with all of these antics and tactics it is trying to deploy against the clear front runner. It will all backfire if Trump comes out the clear winner even without the needed 1,237 delegates and he does not get the nomination. What's more, you mean to tell me that if Cruz had the most with 1,236 some rule would not be changed to allow the lack of needed delegates and make Cruz the nominee?

Hogwash!

The only reason the delegate rule is being so coveted right now is because the candidate who is winning is not one of their own, not the one they want, and frankly the GOP doesn't give a damn what the American people or even many republicans want—

And that, folks, makes me ashamed right now to call myself a republican.

Boy or stream Jim Bauer's PINK FLAMINGOES LP on iTunes

Trump: South Carolina And Beyond

I am not sure I will classify the Trump victory in South Carolina as necessarily a commanding lead. But the fact remains that Trump's win was by a margin of 10% over the second place winner Marco Rubio, and of course one of Trump's biggest critics, Jeb Bush, is no longer in the race. We have the Nevada primary coming up this coming Tuesday, and of course the big tell, Super Tuesday, is on March 1st. Something tells me that even if Trump doesn't win in Nevada, although he is predicted to win—again by a double digit margin—I think he will do very well when all of the numbers are in on Super Tuesday. And of course the field is going to narrow after Nevada's Tuesday primary, and by the time we get to the final call after Super Tuesday I think we'll be down to three candidates.

Donald Trump, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz. If Kasich's numbers don't add up in Nevada I think he'll drop out. So, perhaps, will Ben Carson.

In my opinion it is still too early to necessarily predicate on the idea that The Donald is an unstoppable force. But if we are looking at just the margins over the course of the campaigns, Trump at least appears to be the presumed nominee. The thought that crosses my mind is how can Trump have his Howard Dean moment in this race? He's said some fairly nasty things, and he said some things in the CBS debate just before the South Carolina primary that not only did not resonate with me, it rubbed a lot of voters the wrong way.

Yet he still won, and it wasn't really all that close actually.

If Donald J. Trump takes home the prize on Super Tuesday I think we can safely assume the republican voters in the caucuses have chosen who they want to see run against whoever is going to be the nominee on the democratic side—who I still think will be Hillary Clinton when all is said and done, and I am fine with that.

When I talk to most of my fellow republicans and conservatives of course I am chastised every which way but Sunday when I mention that I actually am rooting for Trump. Why do I like the guy?

•  He holds nothing back and takes no prisoners.
• He is the ONLY guy I think will actually address immigration reform even if I do not think he will be successful in having Mexico pay for the wall.
• He is the ONLY guy who I think understands fundamentally that trade is good, free market capitalism is good, but that we also have a rigged system that has stacked the deck in favor of OTHER nations while leaving American workers behind.
• Therefore Donald Trump is the ONLY one who is actually going to begin the process of renegotiating trade deals and ultimately to bring back jobs to American workers who badly need better than Walmart jobs to feed their families and pursue the dying American dream.
• He is deeply concerned about the advancement of ISIS, the instability in the Middle East, and takes seriously the very real threat of terrorism in the Homeland.

On the last point, I think all of the candidates left in the race have serious concerns about terrorism as well, and aside from Bush

who I thought was extremely weak on the subject, I think all three top tier candidates—Trump, Rubio, and Cruz—would all take steps to curb the threat from Islamic Jihadists. Trump may take the strongest stance however, and with that said, I do think that while Trump has good intentions, on this issue at least, he is going to have to surround himself with the best military and foreign relations people to get his head wrapped around a strategy that will work, that will circumvent unintended consequences, and that will not cause more damage in an already sticky situation.

The one thing that does sort of twist the knife if you'll let me put it that way is that while Trump is getting all the attention on the republican side, the fact remains that where Trump has missed the mark is on substance. He's missed the how's and the why's and how come's. And I think in a general election this detail is extremely important. When Trump gets to the big stage alongside Hillary Clinton who, love her or hate her, has command of her policy, and is well spoken, Trump cannot rely on personal attacks to get the attention of the American people. He has to shred every single idea and statement that Hillary puts forth. He has to command every single issue. He needs to explain in detail why his policies would work, and why he thinks Hillary's would fail. He has to be tough on Barack Obama and his failed policies, which of course Hillary will tout as grand successes, but not just by saying the president was weak or incompetent, but by explaining in detail why he believes the president's policies were bad, how they affected the American people, and if continued how they will continue to affect the American people.

Substance, at the end of the day, is the one thing Trump has lacked throughout the campaign, and the only thing that gives me pause when deciding whether or not even I—a Trump supporter—can ultimately pull the trigger if I were to vote today. Can Donald Trump have a moment like he had with Jeb Bush in the CBS debate where he called former president Bush a liar in a debate with Clinton? I don't think so. I don't think that kind of an exchange would go over very well at all. Although, I do think he can be tough on the issue of Benghazi—but again the approach as to how you do this needs to be careful and calculated. It can't just be name calling and flame throwing. That won't work in a general election.

So all said I give Trump great props for a job well done up to this point, and frankly because of the bullet point issues I am concerned about personally, would love to see him go all the way and get these important things done like nobody else can or will. But as we draw nearer to the strong likelihood that he actually wins the nomination, he really needs to begin the process now of filling in the blanks, and giving us more than what he has given us in the past—he needs to give us the how's and why's and how come's we've been dying to hear.

Because one thing is certain. Hillary will explain her stuff, and whether it is right or wrong, if Trump can't explain his, hers just sounds more thought out and sometimes reality is not what counts. Perspective is everything, and if Trump is perceived as one who doesn't know his way around things, it will cost him the election without a doubt.

Iowa And New Hampshire Will Determine The Road to the White House: This Time

I am no Nostradamus and certainly there is no science behind my "gage of how things might go." Ergo, what most people refer to as predictions. But I am a bit of an analytical mind, taking bits and pieces of this here, and that there, and I think by doing that it is safe to say that I can at least draw a logical conclusion at the end of the day based on a variety of data. It was actually a little bit fun to look back on my Predictions For 2015 post to see how I fared. As one would suspect a couple predictions were spot on while others were close, and of course others never happened at all. Not even close.

I will admit that some of my predictions, perhaps even the one I am about to get into, are sometimes a bit tongue in cheek. Hey. Why not have a go at trying to lay out the details of the future. Political pundits, analysts, sports commentators, and stock market "gurus" all have their hand in a little bit of that and boy do they get paid regardless of their accuracy.

Don't even get me started on meteorologists for crying out loud!

But while we're at it, there is that "donate" button to the right, and of course one can click on my ads or buy something from Amazon. Ahem. But of course that suggestion is, as well, tongue in cheek. But if you happen to be so inclined... {enter a smiley emoticon here, or should that be a smiley emoticon with a tongue sticking out?}

Okay, okay Mr. Bauer. Can you just get the fuck ON WITH IT already? What the hell is this post even ABOUT?

Jeez. It's tough to be a windbag these days. Tough crowd. Very tough crowd.

So we know that for any political junkie such as myself the big Super Bowl of politics is right around the corner. The primaries. And first up is of course Iowa on February 1st. I won't get into how truly insignificant the first of these primaries really are even if for all intents and purposes they seem to always be true indicators of the political climate among the voting public. To those running for their shot at the White House, Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina are no small beans.

What we have here is an amazing set of circumstances. Of course we have an abysmally failed two terms with Barack Obama, and even those of us on the conservative side will readily admit that the last two years or so of Bush the 2nd weren't all that much to write home about either. So when it comes to politics, it's been one hell of a horrible, if not horrific 9 long years for the majority of the American people.

With roughly one year left to go before we can hopefully breathe a sigh of relief.

On the one hand you have Hillary Clinton who has been the "darling" of the democratic party since she lost the election to Barack Obama. She is also the "establishment" when it comes to the DNC. For the RNC we had Jeb Bush step to the stage, and easily one paying attention would have thought immediately, "That's it. That's the end of the race. It's Clinton vs. Bush. Deal done." While Clinton was able to maintain a commanding lead for much of her candidacy, and even before the running was official, once again an "outsider," or someone completely outside the box so to speak, is giving her a newfound run for her money. Bernie Sanders. Clinton is of course politics as usual, and she is not shy to tout the so-called "successes" of the Obama administration, and promises to not undue his policies, but strengthen and finish the work.

Code for, to my mind, "to further toss the Land of the Free into the garbage can forever."

The anomaly of Bernie Sanders' popularity is that of course there are many Americans who have not done better under Obama, and rather than cede that it's his policies that are largely to blame, they have taken the notion that it is instead big bad corporate America and the fat cats who populate it. Bernie Sanders is offering a fix for that. Take everyone at the top, grab them by their ankles, and start letting their change drop out while people scramble to take their "fair share." You'd be surprised how many people actually cheer that on—even if it also happens to be clear to any fair minded individual that it will do more harm than good.

So Bernie Sanders is the "on the other hand."

But there is, of course, also the extremely and undeniably popular Donald Trump on the other other hand. His approach is totally different than Sanders, and to him the blame for America's woes lies directly in contrast to Bernie's claim. It's not the fat cats. They have only been operating under the restrictions and controls of policy put into place by politicians; democrat AND republican by the way.

"Mr. Trump, you say that you are for America and American jobs yet your ties are made in China." How has Trump responded? Brilliantly and accurately actually. A smart businessman operates to make a profit, and right now policy and other factors make it more economical to have his ties made in China. Does he like it? No. Can he avoid it? No. The facts are the facts and the reality is the reality. But the fact that he fundamentally understands the reason it makes more sense to have his ties made in China also makes him qualified to come up with a solution and make it more economical to have his ties made here. Which he has stated often he would prefer by the way. Trump offers a contrast to the Sanders camp which is stark.

Make America great again not by taking from the rich and giving to the poor, not by trying to artificially create income equality, not by taking away incentive and opportunity nor punishing success, but to right some of the wrongs of YEARS of policy in Washington which have made it impossible for America to compete for better wages, better jobs, and to deny other countries advantages in trade against us which we have designed and fostered over the last three or four decades.

With early polls putting, at least on the republican side, all three outsiders in the lead—Donald Trump, Ben Carson, and Carly Fiorina—and with Bernie Sanders leading polls in both Iowa and New Hampshire one thing is crystal clear in this current race to the White House.

Politicians are out. Outsiders are in.

Bernie Sanders, in the most recent polls, is running roughly 9 points ahead of Clinton in Iowa. On the republican side it's Trump with an almost 11 point lead. Originally I thought Iowa winners would be Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton with Bernie Sanders and Trump taking New Hampshire. But I think, especially as we draw nearer to the actual first caucuses, that the winners will be Sanders and Trump in both Iowa and New Hampshire. And this may well be the case in South Carolina as well. I could be wrong. That's the nature of predictions, and of course things change.

But here is my bold prediction. Wow buddy, took you long enough to get here.

Winners in Iowa will be Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. Same goes for New Hampshire. South Carolina I am going to predict a wild card. It probably goes the same way. Super Tuesday will be a mixed bag. But the ultimate result will be that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump may well be the nominees—because Clinton just has too much baggage and she's not as likeable as she is popular. This is America's race this time around. This is the ultimate question of our time. Do we want the world handed to us on a silver platter, or do we want to have to work for it?

But, Donald Trump is offering an alternative to the traditional means to that end. He wants to take away unfair trade which kills jobs and make it so that the fat cats can operate WITHIN our borders. He is not suggesting more of the same that traditionally republicans have fought for which in fact hinders the opportunity to have a fair shot at realizing the American dream.

I think this race comes down to Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. And who will be the next President of the United States?

Donald Trump.

As for his win? I think it will be a landslide.