BloggeRhythms

Observing all of the media hype, promotion and speculation regarding tonight's presidential debate is remindful of all the business “experts” who spout from the sidelines about dealing with competition. And, unless those experts have been in the exact same situation themselves, facing the exact same circumstances, in the exact same place and time, they have no idea whatsoever as to what to say or do in advance. Nor do they know how “customers” will react until the actual interchange takes place. 

Therefore, when you get right down to it, debating is the same as competing for customers in the business world. Which means that nobody knows in advance what the outcome will be until the “sales-call” is made. And that’s because it’s the customers who decide whether to ‘buy” or not, regardless of anyone else’s expectation, theory or projection of the eventual results.

In fact, the only thing that’s absolutely certain is that if both contestants actually show up tonight, one will win and the other won’t. Unless, of course, it winds up in a dead heat.

As far as the major polls are concerned today, the race itself is in a virtual tie, except for the USC Dornsife/LA Times Presidential Election Daybreak Poll, which has Trump ahead by four full points, 46.3 to 42.4%.

Aside from poll results another, perhaps quite important projection of the election outcome came from bloomberg.com this morning, which reported: “Gold may be in for a bumpy ride in the final quarter as Republican candidate Donald Trump now has a 40 percent chance of winning the presidential election and investors will be preparing for the possibility of higher U.S. interest rates, according to Citigroup Inc.

“Volatility in bullion and foreign-exchange markets may increase, according to a commodities report from the bank as it raised the odds on a Trump victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton in November from 35 percent. There would probably be a single U.S. hike by year-end, it said. A Bloomberg Politics poll has Trump and Clinton deadlocked before a debate later today.” 

And then, in another “real world” happening, Brandon Darby @breitbart.com, reported: “Leaked documents with sensitive FBI data exclusively obtained by Breitbart Texas reveal that 7,712 terrorist encounters occurred within the United States in one year and that many of those encounters occurred near the U.S.-Mexico border. The incidents are characterized as “Known or Suspected Terrorist Encounters.” Some of the encounters occurred near the U.S.-Mexico border at ports-of-entry and some occurred in between, indicating that persons known or reasonably suspected of being terrorists attempted to sneak into the U.S. across the border. In all, the encounters occurred in higher numbers in border states.

At the same time as the terrorist encounters were disclosed by breitbart, Steve Holland @ca.news.yahoo, wrote: “With immigration likely to be discussed at the debate, the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council, a union representing 5,000 federal immigration officers and law enforcement support staff, announced it would support Trump, in what was described as its first endorsement of a candidate for elected office.

“The union's president, Chris Crane, outlined in a statement why his group is backing Trump, saying his union members are "the last line of defense for American communities" and that his members "are prevented from enforcing the most basic immigration laws." 

“Crane said the endorsement was conducted by a vote of the union's membership and that Clinton received only 5 percent of the vote.” 

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. 

This one comes from politico.com’s Kyle Cheney, Isaac Arnsdorf, Daniel Lippman and Daniel Strauss who headed their column: “Hillary Clinton Struggles Most With Truth About Herself” 

While the authors attempted to establish Trump as a continual prevaricator, they presented: “Some metrics on Clinton’s statements this week:

• Number of appearances: two speeches; three TV interviews; one press availability; 114 tweets; two op-eds
• Combined length of remarks (speeches, interviews): 96 minutes, 10 seconds
• Raw number of misstatements, exaggerations, falsehoods: eight
• Rate: one untruth every 12 minutes

Thus, their conclusion was: “Though Clinton is far more practiced at sticking to defensible policy positions and recollections of history, she’s significantly more lax when addressing her own transgressions — the potential Achilles’ heel of a candidacy marred by questions of her truthfulness.”

The article contains considerable evidence of her fabrications. Here’s a link: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=16&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjpo_mdp63PAhXBMSYKHVr8BAsQFgiSATAP&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com%2Fmagazine%2Fstory%2F2016%2F09%2F2016-hillary-clinton-fact-check-week-214286&usg=AFQjCNHvk_mp9d6r50fEeAXyFHR0cTQzSw&sig2=188tea7N360Q_m_J2i1eAA

Therefore, in consideration of potential demand for honesty in the nation’s highest elected office, the ongoing question needs asking again: Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are you guys reading this? 

  

That's it for today folks.    

 

Adios 

PS: The game of golf, and the world in general, lost an irreplaceable icon yesterday. Arnold Palmer will be dearly missed. 

Having spent many years as a dedicated fan provides a rather firm basis for my opinion and reverence. He truly deserves every aspect of it. 

MB