Sunday, April 10, 2011
It is very difficult to tell whether the angry author of this sharp-edged indictment of Barack Obama's presidency is right-wing or left-wing. The post is interesting precisely because he could be either, and may be neither in any traditional sense.
Anon Attorney here. I've been a daily reader of ZeroHedge for years.
ZeroHedge is post-partisan, TH, which is why you can't identify whether the author is right or left. From a political perspective the writers on the site are joined by a common thesis that the banking and finance industries have co-opted our federal government and are diligently raping the Treasury.
The site used to be more about advanced trading strategies but has morphed into a site which chronicles the slow death of our current monetary system. A few too many doomers and conspiracy nuts have moved in for my tastes, but it remains an indispensible blog. If you aren't reading ZeroHedge then you don't know what is going on in the world of finance. Period.
It has also proved quite profitable. I've made a boatload of money on trades based on investment theses developed from ZeroHedge.
Smith is wrong, btw. Obama will win in 2012 by a large margin. Depressing but true. I spent 2008 and 2009 arguing against Obama and the Democrats. Failed. In 2010 I gave up and changed my focus to making money, which is like shooting fish in a barrel in this environment. Rome is burning. Nero is fiddling. The Senate is corrupt and feckless. The current crop of Republicans aren't any better. As an average Joe all you can do is to get yours while you can.
“Obama will win in 2012 by a large margin.”
I disagree. I don’t agree with everything in the Zero Hedge piece though.
The electoral map will be tougher for Obama in 2012 than in 2008. He won’t have Bush-Cheney to run against. Obama will have a lot of money and the advantages that come from being a first-term incumbent. He’s already working his base, but he’s only likely to win the West Coast, the Northeast and Illinois. Winning DC with 80% of the vote still only gives you three electoral votes. He’s got a real challenge in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania, and even Wisconsin.
Thus, at this moment, I’d expect a generic Republican to win about 300 electoral votes – more than the magic 270.
But we don’t have a generic Republican – all the current usual suspects have issues.
I also regularly read ZeroHedge. Most of it is really good. Some of it is even true! Hardly any of what it covers ever gets into MSM. But that may change before Nov 2012. That’s the Joker in the deck. If the typical American understood a quarter of what’s on ZeroHedge, we’d have a revolution at the polls.
Per ZeroHedge, we’re in some economic bizarro world where ordinary rules don’t apply. It can’t go on forever, can it? I’ve long expected a double dip stall to hit before Nov 2012. If so, a populist like Sarah Palin would look a lot better than an insider like Mitt Romney at the top of the ticket. Sarah could win big, but also lose. Mitt would likely lose. They aren’t the only choices, but they illustrate the difference.
If Bernanke can continue levitating through Nov 2012, and MSM keeps telling the Big Fibs, then Obama has a shot. I think it’s too long from now for Bernanke to keep defying gravity.
Your points are all good. Further to my argument, PPP has released its latest polling which shows Obama beating each of Huckabee, Romney, Gingrich and Palin handily. Generic Republican wins, actual Republican candidates lose. There's a lot of time left so hopefully things will change, but I think we will be stuck with Obama until 2016.
And yes, the Fed will keep pumping and the media will continue the Big Lie for Obama. Stop fighting it and just get yours. It's sad to watch your country fall apart, but raking in tons of cash takes away the sting a bit.
I have trouble hacking through the cocoon of egocentrism and conspiracy theories at that site to reach whatever nuggets of truth may exist. As of now, one of their deadline articles can be summed up as "Only *I* know the truth! *Everyone else* is lying to you on behalf of the secret elites!"
They need to tone down the crazy if they want their stuff to be taken seriously.
Actually the lead article right now is a simple mathematical explanation of the fallacy in the argument that the Fed can rely on rolling its current asset base to continue funding treasury issuance without a formal QE3 program in place. Couple that with the coverage of Janet Yellen's "What Inflation?" speech and even a dunce like me can read those tea leaves.
The articles which scroll horizontally across the top are guest posts and are rarely worth reading. Ignore 95% of them.
Charles is definitely not either right or left. A true independent thinker, let alone of the radical left.
His blog is enjoyable, even if you don't always agree with his points.
He tackles healthcare decay, government corruption, crony capitalism, financial irresponsibility, and similar topics regularly.
Just take a look at the quote:
"This is mindless Keynesian policy on auto-pilot."
Anyone who says that is not of the left, in my experience!