Last
weekend I wrote
In
the case of Brexit, polls
were mostly skewed towards establishment interests (Bremain)
only to see an opposite outcome. At present, polls and establishment
media has largely been projecting a win by administration’s
protégé. Will next week be a reprise of Brexit which may
cause revulsion in the financial markets? Or will next week send a
massive short covering?
I
mentioned Brexit because I had a hunch of déjà vu.
Why?
Either the pre-election environment looked like a political bubble or
it was entirely a veneer which constituted the establishment’s
machinations.
Just look at how one sided everything was prior to the elections
The
New
York Times
had the pre-election odds for Clinton at a shocking 80:20 or 4:1!
Prediction
markets revealed betting odds against Team Trump at 5:1 (courtesy of
political analyst Ms. Pippa Malmgren via her tweeter.
Incidentally Ms Malmgren’s prediction, like the Brexit episode, hit
the nail on the head)
The
Zero
Hedge
points to another betting platform the Ladbrokes Politics, where
betting odds again was stacked heavily against Trump.
Pro-Clinton
Business
Insider blustered about the near unanimity of mainstream media’s
endorsement of the administration’s bet which they wrote as “the
most lopsided batch of newspaper endorsements the US has ever seen”
Yes,
history is in the making!
The
Economist
looked pretty confident, if not sure, of a Clinton victory—a
sentiment apparently shared by the mainstream.
Aside
from the FED, the FBI now has become a market mover.
The
FBI’s second U-turn predicated on “the newly discovered
Hillary Clinton emails found no evidence warranting
charges” sent US stock markets to an eight month high!
Panic
buying or an aggressive pumping had been predicated on a inevitability
of a Clinton victory! (headline from the Chicago tribune)
With
polls, betting markets, media, financial markets and everyone else echoing and
repeating the same thing, a Clinton victory was portrayed as imminent or
seemingly a “certain” outcome.
And
yet when everyone thinks the same, then no one is thinking.
This
should serve as an example of how one sided traded would look like.
From
one aspect, the above looked like a political bubble.
On
the other hand, the discrepancy between outlook and outcome could
have been part of a grand political design.
Look
at the preliminary results of the election (from CNN: 30 electoral
votes still not included)? Does the 289-218 differential in electoral
votes, which signified a virtual landslide, merit a lopsided 5:1 or
4:1 bet or survey?
Though
popular votes had been tight, Mr. Trump has taken a significant share
of states which essentially gave him the winning votes through the
electoral college.
How
can all (except one) surveys and betting odds have gotten it so
wrong?
For me, such
massive chasm is something to suspect.
Yet
not everyone was that strikingly blind.
And
more signs of Brexit déjà vu.
The only survey firm that allegedly
accurately predicted a Brexit victory also foresaw an upset win by
the election's underdog, Donald Trump
According
to Breitbart
“Democracy Institute was the only public poll to correctly predict
Brexit, according to the organization’s press release.”
Actions
have consequences. Bubbles and or manipulations eventually meet their
moment of reckoning.
As
for the continuing election saga…watch Italy’s
constitutional referendum on December 4.
No comments:
Post a Comment