It’s finally over: Donald Trump has secured 304 Electoral Votes following the Texas vote (with 2 faithless electors), officially securing the presidency of the United States. Of course, the now official President-Elect Trump took to twitter to confirm the victory:
We did it! Thank you to all of my great supporters, we just officially won the election (despite all of the distorted and inaccurate media).
Texas’ 36 electoral votes for Trump pushed him over the edge at around 4:30 Central Time, even though two rogue electors’ defections deprived Trump of one of those votes. That gave Trump 304 total electoral votes.
A quick recap of the day’s events from the WSJ:
Members of the Electoral College meeting in state capitals across the country on Monday confirmed President-elect Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 election, ending a last-ditch campaign to deny him the presidency. Mr. Trump amassed at least 270 electoral votes on Monday afternoon—enough to officially become the president-elect over his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, according to a tally of votes by the Associated Press.
Typically just a formality, this year’s Electoral College vote attracted an outsize amount of attention after a group of mostly Democratic electors made a late push to block Mr. Trump’s path to the White House. They argued the Electoral College had a constitutional duty to act independently of the will of the voters in extraordinary circumstances. Protesters gathered in several state capitols across the country to encourage electors to reject Mr. Trump.
results of the Nov. 8 election if he were to be unsuccessful in gaining 270 electoral votes. “I will look at it at the time…. I’ll keep you in suspense,” Trump told moderator Chris Wallace. His rival at the time, Hillary Clinton, called the now president-elect’s response “horrifying,” and throughout the accusation of “talking down our democracy.”
Clinton would run as long as she could with accusing Trump of undermining the democratic process by refusing to accepted the election results, making it a solid part of her attack platform from the third debate forward. During rallies, her supporters would boo Trump whenever Clinton mentioned the fact he refused to say he’d accepted.
Well, now it turns out that Clinton’s supporters are the ones who are refusing to accept the election results as they were announced in the early morning of Nov. 9.
A Change.org petition started by a man in North Carolina to persuade the Electoral College to elect Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump has 2,170,188 signatures since its creation on Wednesday night.
The petition reads:
On December 19, the Electors of the Electoral College will cast their ballots. If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win. However, they can vote for Hillary Clinton if they choose. Even in states where that is not allowed, their vote would still be counted, they would simply pay a small fine — which we can be sure Clinton supporters will be glad to pay!
We are calling on the Electors to ignore their states’ votes and cast their ballots for Secretary Clinton. Why?
Mr. Trump is unfit to serve. His scapegoating of so many Americans, and his impulsivity, bullying, lying, admitted history of sexual assault, and utter lack of experience make him a danger to the Republic.
Secretary Clinton WON THE POPULAR VOTE and should be President.
Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump “won” is because of the Electoral College.
Three weeks ago, when we first reported that Qatar had offered to pay the Clinton Foundation $1 million after a hacked Podesta email disclosed that the ambassador of Qatar “Would like to see WJC [William Jefferson Clinton] ‘for five minutes’ in NYC, to present $1 million check that Qatar promised for WJC’s birthday in 2011”, we said that in this particular case, the Clinton Foundation may also be in violation of State Department ethics codes.
SecState Hillary Clinton, left, meets the Prime Minister of Qatar Sheik Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabor Al Thani in 2010.
As we said in early October, while this has been seen by critics of the Clinton Foundation as yet another instance of influence pandering and “pay-to-play”, this time there may actually be consequences for the Clinton Foundation: according to the State Department, the previously undisclosed donation suggests there may be an ethics violation by the foundation, even though the State of Qatar is shown on the foundation’s website as having given at least that amount. There is no date listed for the donation.
Underscoring the potential flagrant abuse of ethical guidelines if the Qatar payment is confirmed, Hillary Clinton promised the U.S. government that while she served as secretary of state the foundation would not accept new funding from foreign governments without seeking clearance from the State Department’s ethics office. The agreement was designed to dispel concerns that U.S. foreign policy could be swayed by donations to the foundation.
Back in January, when it still wasn’t certain that Donald Trump would be the Republican presidential candidate, let alone be neck and neck with Hillary Clinton in the polls days ahead of the election, we explained why Trump should be praying for a market crash, or rather not so much a market crash as a swoon in the market in the three months prior to the election. We were referring to a market-based indicator which had a near flawless 86.4% accuracy track record.
As we noted at the time, the old saying that “people vote their pocketbooks” is more accurate than the average political analyst thinks. While Wall Street typically worries about how politics might affect the market, presidential candidates are far more concerned about how the stock market might affect their political outcomes.
Here is why this is important: historically, the market performance in the three months leading up to a Presidential Election has displayed an uncanny ability to forecast who will win the White House… the incumbent party or the challenger. Since 1928, there have been 22 Presidential Elections. In 14 of them, the S&P 500 climbed during the three months preceding election day. The incumbent President or party won in 12 of those 14 instances. However, in 7 of the 8 elections where the S&P 500 fell over that three month period, the incumbent party lost.
There are only three exceptions to this correlation: 1956, 1968, and 1980. Statistically, the market has an 86.4% success rate in forecasting the election!
The Standard & Poor’s 500 index closed lower Friday for a ninth straight day, marking its longest losing streak in 36 years, as uncertainty and angst related to Tuesday’s tough-to-call presidential election overshadowed a government report showing continued steady job growth.
At the close, the index was down 3.48 points, or 0.2%, to 2085.18. The last time it fell nine straight days was in December 1980, according to Howard Silverblatt, senior index analyst at S&P Dow Jones Indices, when Republican Ronald Reagan was celebrating his presidential election win over Democratic incumbent Jimmy Carter. The Dow Jones industrial average fell 42.39 points, or 0.2%, to 17,888.28. The Nasdaq composite declined 12.04 points, 0.2%, to 5046.37.
If stocks fall Monday, it would mark a 10th day of losses for the S&P 500, a streak last seen in the summer of 1975, according to Silverblatt. If election angst drags on beyond Election Day the S&P 500 will be in danger of eclipsing its longest losing streak of all time: a 12-day swoon back in April 1966 — or 50 years ago.
Stocks have been dragged down amid signs the presidential race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is narrowing, which is creating major uncertainty and making investors jittery. Wall Street had been pricing in a Clinton win, but as polls have narrowed following Clinton’s lastest email scandal, investors have opted to hedge against the possibility of a Trump surprise win.
Still the market’s nine-day swoon has only added up to a loss of 3.07%, which is modest, notes Silverblatt, noting that the S&PP 500 has lost more than that amount on a single day 298 times.
If Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton wins the US presidential election next Tuesday it would set off a constitutional crisis that would paralyze the workings of government as she faces criminal investigations, Republican Donald Trump said at a rally in Wisconsin.
“If she [Clinton] were to be elected, it would create an unprecedented crisis and the work of government would grind to an unbelievably inglorious halt,” Trump said on Tuesday. Clinton is likely to face years of investigation from the Federal Bureau of Investigation following the latest revelations from WikiLeaks and the discovery of a cache of 650,000 of her emails and looks likely to eventually have to face criminal prosecution, Trump warned. “She is likely to be under investigation for many years likely to conclude in a…criminal trial,” he said. Trump also noted media reports earlier the same day that the FBI had also started inquiries probing into the activities of several of her closest lieutenants and most trusted staffers.
The India-US relationship would be under threat if Democratic party candidate Hillary Clinton wins the upcoming presidential election. According to the US- based political analyst Arvind Kumar, Hillary’s victory would be a disaster for India. In a detailed article published in the Sunday Guardian, the politics expert has shown how the Clintons have always been hostile to India and pursued policies against India not only vis-a-vis Pakistan but also in relation to the Indian space programme and Hindus. Considering the way Hillary’s husband and former US President, Bill Clinton, carried out his hostility towards India, it is highly unlikely that she would chart a different course of action if she wins the election. Kumar has pointed out that Hillary’s record as the US Secretary of State under President Barack Obama has also been anti-India in many aspects.
Here are 10 reasons that would make Hillary’s win a disaster for India, according to Kumar
1. Hillary Clinton’s victory would bring back the US hostility of the 1990s towards India under Bill Clinton
Kumar says that Hillary Clinton’ victory in the election would bring back the US’ hostility of the 1990s towards India under the presidency of Bill Clinton. He writes that India’s relationship with the US took a sudden downturn after Bill Clinton took office in 1993. For nearly a year, Clinton did not appoint an ambassador to India and he opposed India on a number of fronts. Kumar says Bill Clinton took a number of steps to disarm and weaken India by preventing access to technology and carried out a sustained attack on the Indian economy by imposing several economic sanctions.
2. Bill Clinton’s administration took several measures to “retard” development of India’s space and technology sectors
Kumar writes that in 1991, Senator Joe Biden, who is now the US Vice-President, introduced an amendment in the bill granting aid to Russia. The Bill made it mandatory for Russia that it would not sell cryogenic engines for India’s space programme. The Clinton administration took several measures to “retard” development of India’s space and technology sectors. The then US government also blocked the sale of Cray supercomputers that were approved under the Ronald Reagan administration. In contrast, the Clinton administration allowed the sale of these supercomputers to China.
Despite the constant puke of propaganda that a Trump presidency will bring hell on earth and crash stock markets (remember Brexit?), it appears market participants are much more concerned about a Clinton win…
As Clinton’s lead soared following ‘pussy-gate’, so investors piled into protection, bidding VIX up from 13 to 18…
During the last week, Trump has regained some momentum and VIX (equity risk) has tumbled.
Real-estate firms on October 18 got a rap on their knuckles from the Supreme Court for making tall claims to purchasers which remained unfulfilled due to inordinate delay in completing the housing projects.
“In this country, builders have developed an attitude to make committments to the purchasers and not fulfill them by delaying the projects,” a bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra said.
The apex court’s observation came after real estate firm Parsvnath Buildwell Pvt Ltd said it will give flats to 70 home buyers, who are before the court, by December 17.
“They (home buyers) do not have patience and trust in you and need refund. Money should go back to them and they should not suffer,” the bench also comprising Justices Amitava Roy and A M Khanwilkar said.
The bench, also pulled up the realty firm for seeking time to deposit additional Rs 10 crore, asking “why do you get into all this business when you can’t pay back the money You have to give back the money to home buyers.”
Senior advocate Subramanian Prasad, appearing for the firm, said that as directed by the court, the company has deposited Rs 12 crore with the Supreme Court registry. The bench asked Supreme Court registry to disburse Rs 12 crore to the 70 home buyers on pro-rata basis after proper identification.