Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elmatador who wrote (45001)	1/20/2004 12:55:52 AM
From: que seria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

el mat: The U.S. election will not be decided by Iraq, but it could be decided by the decisions of a few Japanese and Chinese about U.S. gov't and agency debt. Most U.S. voters do not share the prevailing view on this thread regarding Iraq (or the U.S.). It is no doubt harder to appreciate that without a U.S. frame of reference. U.S. voters do, however, share humanity's high concern with making ends meet on the micro scale (their household, not their nation). Clinton "got" that. Sadly, Bush "gets" it too, and is proving even worse than Clinton on the domestic front. He says "yes" to nearly all high-dollar programs--a choice he can make only because it is funded by foreign nations who think they come out ahead buying U.S. debt and expanding their own money supply. Keeping all the economic balls in the air is the single most important among the variables that may carry the day for Bush (or not) with the swing voters. U.S. voters are as susceptible as those elsewhere. A decisive number cast their votes (1) in ignorance of facts they would care about, if only they knew such facts; (2) with credulity toward politicians who explain away inconvenient facts the voters do know; (3) with a time horizon of years to fix a mess that has been made over decades--by pandering to voters; and (4) with a sharp and controlling focus upon what they get from versus pay to government. Sound familiar? Those who will be disappointed in (or never held out hope for) Bush by Nov. 2004, based upon Iraq, are already feeling that way. There is substantial consensus in the U.S. upon staying in Iraq for some "reasonable" time of transition, now that we've destroyed the government there. Don't look for that attitude among voters to change based upon guerrilla warfare. Thread wisdom here is close to a contrary indicator for U.S. sentiment.