Trump vs. Clinton: Which One to Choose

With Labor Day now behind us, you can expect the Presidential campaign to be amped up now. Elections impact markets. Investments will react one way or the other depending on whether Trump or Clinton is elected. In this light, we share a couple of views of the upcoming election in hopes they may stimulate your own thinking. These views are not from the main stream media (MSM), since what they have to say is widely distributed, and generally either imbecilic or prejudiced in favor of - well, you know who.

First, we have an interesting view from Richard Maybury, an analyst whose letter looks at markets from an historical and geopolitical point of view. Although the letter requires a subscription and is copyright protected, he has given permission to share the contents of his latest missive. (If interested in learning more about Mr. Maybury's "Early Warning Report," click HERE. NB: I receive no compensation of any sort for providing this link.) Here is a selection from that letter:

To ask who I think should be president is to ask
who I believe should be emperor of the world.
The answer is nobody. The human has not been
born who could wield that much power without being
corrupted by it. I’m sure that, except perhaps for
Eisenhower, six months after every presidential election
since World War II, even the winner’s own
mother has not recognized him.

Trump is fascinating. Looking back over the past
year, the closer he has gotten to the Oval Office, the
more flaky he has become. I think he is giddy at the
thought of being emperor.

Clinton, on the other hand, has maintained a
quiet, comfortable, steady level of flakiness. She
apparently got her giddiness over with long ago, in
private.

A different, and more partisan view was expressed by Paul Craig Roberts. I occasionally read his publicly available comments, although he does have a somewhat slanted view on some matters with which I usually disagree. For example, he tends to speak favorable of Vladimir Putin and the Russian government. Since he is published online by "RT" - a Russian publishing concern - I don't think he can be in any way objective when speaking of things Russian. In any case, his view of the candidates caught my attention the other day:

We don’t know much about Trump, and anti-Trump propaganda rules in the place of facts.

But we know many facts about Hillary. We know about her violation of classification laws and the refusal of the Democratic administration to do anything about it. The Democrats prefer to control the White House than to enforce the law, another nail in the coffin in which the rule of law in the US lies.

We know from their words and deeds and material success that the Clintons are agents for Wall Street, the Big Banks, the military/security complex, Israel, agribusiness, and the extractive industries. Their large personal fortune, approximately $120 million, and the $1,600 million in their foundation, much of which came from abroad in exchange for political favors, attests to the unchallengable fact that the Clintons are agents for the oligarchy that rules America, indeed, that rules the American Empire from Australia and Japan, through North America and Western and Eastern Europe to the Russian border.

We know that Hillary, like Bill, is a liar.

We know that Hillary is a warmonger.

We know that Hillary made the most irresponsible statement ever uttered by a presidential candidate when she declared the President of Russia to be the “new Hitler,” thereby raising tensions between the nuclear powers to a higher level than existed during the Cold War.

We know that Hillary is allied with the neoconservatives and that her belief in the neocons’ ideology of US world hegemony is likely to result in war with Russia and China.

All we know about Trump is that the oligarchs, who sent America’s jobs overseas, who flooded the country with difficult-to-assimilate immigrants, who destroyed public education, who bailed out Wall Street and the “banks too big to fail,” who sacrificed American homeowners and retirees living on a fixed income, who intend to privatize both Social Security and Medicare, who have given the public killer cops, relentless violations of privacy, the largest prison population in the world, and destroyed the US Constitution in order to increase executive power over the American people, are violently opposed to Trump. This opposition should tell us that Trump is the person we want in the Oval Office.

(You can read the full text of his remarks HERE.)

As you can see, while Maybury and Roberts share the view that the American government rules an "Empire," Roberts is much more strident than Maybury and prefers one candidate to the other. Whether you agree with everything he says here, it sure looks like his quick perusal of "facts" about Hillary hit the mark. As for concluding that one ought to vote for Trump because of these facts, that's something for you to noodle over. I do think a segment of the voters, though, may be thinking this way, but that's just a personal impression.

I hope you found these two views interesting and that they helped stimulate your own thinking. So...what do you think?