How could an assassination attempt on a former president change the course of the US elections? Join us on this episode of Skeptic's Guide to Investing as we navigate the chaotic and unpredictable landscape of the current US elections. We kick off by scrutinizing Joe Biden's recent debate performance and how questions regarding his age and competence are coming to the forefront. Then, we delve into the harrowing assassination attempt on Donald Trump and its possible ramifications on his popularity and political comeback. We also discuss the intriguing selection of Trump's potential vice president, who many liken to a younger version of Trump, and the controversial dismissal of his classified documents case by Judge Eileen Cannon.
Could President Biden step down, and what would that mean for the Democratic Party? Our discussion then shifts to the strategic maneuvers in the 2024 presidential race, pondering the potential withdrawal of Biden and the rise of Kamala Harris. We break down the financial and logistical hurdles that could accompany such a transition and analyze whether Trump has truly peaked politically. The role of the media in shaping public perception is scrutinized, with fascinating comparisons to how controversies are handled in the sports world, providing a fresh perspective on the electoral narrative.
Wrapping up, we explore the Republican Party's potential future directions and the intricate dynamics of the political landscape. We examine the influence of key figures like Trump and Vance, the importance of capturing the median voter, and the potential impacts of third-party candidates. Furthermore, we assess how a Democratic victory could affect sectors like technology and healthcare, particularly in terms of regulatory challenges. Amidst discussions on media disinformation and its effect on voter behavior, we underscore the critical need for reliable information in these politically charged times. Don't miss out on our comprehensive analysis and engaging dialogue as we unravel these pivotal developments leading up to the elections.
How could an assassination attempt on a former president change the course of the US elections? Join us on this episode of Skeptic's Guide to Investing as we navigate the chaotic and unpredictable landscape of the current US elections. We kick off by scrutinizing Joe Biden's recent debate performance and how questions regarding his age and competence are coming to the forefront. Then, we delve into the harrowing assassination attempt on Donald Trump and its possible ramifications on his popularity and political comeback. We also discuss the intriguing selection of Trump's potential vice president, who many liken to a younger version of Trump, and the controversial dismissal of his classified documents case by Judge Eileen Cannon.
Could President Biden step down, and what would that mean for the Democratic Party? Our discussion then shifts to the strategic maneuvers in the 2024 presidential race, pondering the potential withdrawal of Biden and the rise of Kamala Harris. We break down the financial and logistical hurdles that could accompany such a transition and analyze whether Trump has truly peaked politically. The role of the media in shaping public perception is scrutinized, with fascinating comparisons to how controversies are handled in the sports world, providing a fresh perspective on the electoral narrative.
Wrapping up, we explore the Republican Party's potential future directions and the intricate dynamics of the political landscape. We examine the influence of key figures like Trump and Vance, the importance of capturing the median voter, and the potential impacts of third-party candidates. Furthermore, we assess how a Democratic victory could affect sectors like technology and healthcare, particularly in terms of regulatory challenges. Amidst discussions on media disinformation and its effect on voter behavior, we underscore the critical need for reliable information in these politically charged times. Don't miss out on our comprehensive analysis and engaging dialogue as we unravel these pivotal developments leading up to the elections.
Straight Talk for All - Nonsense for None
Please check out our other podcasts:
https://skepticsguidetoinvesting.buzzsprout.com
Clem Miller:
Hello everybody, this is Skeptic's Guide to Investing, with Steve Davenport and Clem Miller. Today we're going to be talking about the US elections. There have been, I would say, some really stunning developments in this election. First, first of all, the disastrous, for Joe Biden debate which, I, I don't think you can say that Trump won the debate, because he wasn't so great either, but certainly Biden, lost that debate by a mile, lost that debate by a mile and of course, all sorts of questions came out about his age and competence and so on, with lots of calls from within his party to withdraw from the campaign and to allow somebody younger to take over. So that was one development.
Clem Miller:
A second development was the assassination. Okay, major development was the assassination attempt on former President Trump. Which occurred just last Saturday evening, and so you know there's a lot of speculation about, you know, whether that's going to give former President Trump a boost in the polls, whether it's a short-lived popularity or sympathy effect. I think, generally speaking, , or think that the sympathy vote will take Trump over the top that iconic picture that was taken of him raising his fist with the flag behind it. That you know, that's the photo that everybody will remember in their minds when they go into the polling booth. I think that's. You know that's questionable, but certainly a lot of people I think getting getting away.
Steve Davenport:
We've got four more months of this show. It's spectacular.
Clem Miller:
I don't think anybody now in July canance as the potential vice president for former Trump, and I think we can talk about him in this call. I think my own take is that he is something of like a clone, a younger clone of Trump himself, which is not surprising. I mean, he's going to take, you know, he's going to be second fiddle to Trump just like just like Pence was. So we'll see what, we'll see what happens with that. And then, you know, some people say that you know, maybe he'll bring or cement some more votes out of the Midwest. We'll see about that.
Clem Miller:
And then the last thing I would mention, less important but I think I think just as relevant, given my own views on this, is you have the judge in Florida, eileen Cannon, who basically dismissed the classified documents case, claiming that special prosecutor, uh, special prosecutor, special counsel, jack Smith, uh, was uh, uh inappropriately appointed, and you know, of course, she happens to do that on the first day of the convention. So that raises some interesting questions about at least the timing of why she did that. Um, as well as you know the court and Supreme Court and how they're approaching questions regarding the immunity of the presidency and so on, and we can talk about that. So there's a lot to talk about today.
Steve Davenport:
Yeah, I think we need to break it down piece by piece. And so let's start chronologically, with the debate. I mean, I was taken aback somewhat by both of the candidates because they both, in my mind, went on either side of what you would have expected. Expected Biden to come out. He's the one who called for a June debate, which we've never had before. Before the conventions, there's never been a debate. And so for me, if you're going to call for this debate, you've got to have a pretty good plan for how you're going to implement and switch things around to get a different result.
Steve Davenport:
And from this moment, from the beginning of that debate, I never felt like Biden was comfortable. I never felt like he was on his toes. And I'm sitting there saying I think I would have waited a month. Why do this in June? Why put all that risk and front load it, knowing you only have one other debate in September? It just felt like that was a move that I'm not sure
Steve Davenport:
Anybody going back in history will look back at this and say why would he do that? Why would you not come into the debate after your convention with all that positive energy and then have a debate right, because you build yourself into this storyline around the convention that says here's who we are. Let's mark our opponent as this and make sure that we come across as this and make sure that they come across as that. I just felt like he was stepping out there without a plan, without a I mean to say Trump's not telling the truth. I'm not sure that's a you know enough reason to have a debate in June right, yeah, most people realize that politicians don't tell the truth.
Steve Davenport:
Correct. I mean, it's not like oh wait a minute, he's a politician and he's not telling me just something that I can believe in so that I feel better. It doesn't excuse it.
Clem Miller:
It doesn't excuse the volume of untruths I just think it's like the casino in Casablanca.
Steve Davenport:
Yeah, I'm shocked. There's gambling going on here. Let's be honest, there is always going to be in politics, half-truths which we pass off as gospel. And Trump is going to pass off his half-truths and Joe is going to pass off his Trump. It's a part of politics in America. It's a part of politics worldwide. I don't think it's an American phenomenon. I think that all of these things to me, glenn, speak to what do we expect from our politicians? And at this point and at this point I mean my summation of the debate was Trump just didn't do much to hurt himself because he seemed more controlled.
Steve Davenport:
He let the call me a liar roll off his back and all of a sudden, just by doing that, he put Biden in a position where he needed to finish. You know a couple of statements and his process just you know his thought process and the way he was acting made you more concerned for him. Whether you're moderate, conservative or liberal, I think everybody had a in their heart when they saw him struggling for words and struggling for ideas during the debate. I thought it was more about. To me, this is about why does America have 280 octogenarians as the people that represent the whole country and I think we saw in real light what it's like for AIDS in America and I think it was a very frightening.
Steve Davenport:
You know, I'm 60 years old and I thought, sheesh, I would hate to be in that position, not able to, you know, perform as I have performed for most of my life and as a child of someone who had Alzheimer's and seen Alzheimer's up front, up close and personal, I was just saddened by the whole thing Because I said long ago why don't we find a 60 year old in this country who can run for president? Yeah, is it that there's no one capable? Is it that there's no money? And there are people who are successful who could do it? But it's become such a rough sport that these aren't the kind of rules that protect a quarterback In politics. You attack the quarterback and he has no protection. So I don't know. I thought it was a sad commentary on America.
Clem Miller:
Yeah.
Steve Davenport:
More than it was. It was a sad commentary on America.
Clem Miller:
Yeah, more than it was an individual failure, I think. I mean, you know to your point. You know the Economist came out with a cover. I don't know, Did you? I don't know if you saw this right after the debate, which had a walker with the presidential seal on it, and I was just.
Clem Miller:
it was just that was just a sad cover, but it reflects, it reflects what's going on. But let me, let me just say another thing to Steve. This is my basic theory, okay, my basic premise. Uh, the question, and you and you kind of, I don't know, you kind of alluded to it a little bit when you were talking about well, why june right, why too early um, timing? You know, just like in sports, just like sometimes in markets, uh, things peak too early, right?
Steve Davenport:
yeah, you can. You can be a star, like they were saying in the football games in Miami. That basically all that confusion of the teams and getting the tickets people into Miami both teams suffered because they get ready for that moment when the game's supposed to start and you delay it 45 minutes or an hour and you have to reset up and redo it. It's hard. You've got an hour and you have to reset up and redo it.
Clem Miller:
It's you know it's hard, you've got to perform when you need to perform. So right now, right now, my own view is that Biden is going to withdraw from his candidacy, his candidacy. I believe that he is waiting until after the Republican convention, because the Republican convention, conveniently, has him to complain about right now. Once the Republican convention is over, I think that at some point he will withdraw. He's waiting for a moment that's closer to the Democratic Convention in order to take advantage of this timing effect so that they can start building up support for Kamala Harris, or whoever is going to be the, for kamala harris, or whoever is going to be the it's likely kamala harris, but it could be some somebody else, kind of builds up.
Steve Davenport:
I've heard this talk about other people and I I just follow the money right now. Biden and kamala harris have a fund for their re-election for $320 plus million, their reelection for 320 plus million. And when you look at that money, it can only be used if either Kamala or Joe are the presidential candidate. So somebody else Newsom or anyone else has to start at zero, that zero to build up their election Well, except for their own campaign, chests.
Steve Davenport:
Except for their own, which, let's just say, Trump and Biden have been fighting each other to be at 300, 320, 350. That person is going to. You know, there aren't that many people with 300 million sitting in their campaign chests, Right? Well, I would say that it's. You know, it's nice to think that, oh, the Democrats, they're supportive of a woman and they really want a person of color in the White House. Well, no, they don't want to have to start again and raise from those people who they told Joe's the guy. We're with them all the way. The part of this that I found offensive.
Clem Miller:
So you think if there's a withdrawal, it'll be a Kamala Harrison?
Steve Davenport:
Yes, Cause they can't turn around now with four months to go and go to all those donors and say oh, by the way, we told you that Joe is the guy, but you know who knows.
Clem Miller:
So let's, let's plan this out a little bit. Okay, let's say that just before, or maybe a few weeks before, the democratic convention, uh, that uh biden withdraws, uh, then, uh, the convention. Even though kamala has the money, you know she's not, she won't be the official candidate until the convention. There'll be discussion at the convention about that. It creates this discussion and this, this energy around the democratic convention that you won't have on the, you know, on the Republican side anymore. So my, my basic theory, you know, going back to the peaking issue, is that we may well have seen Trump peak this week for several reasons, as I mentioned earlier. One, the assassination attempt. Secondly, the convention. Third, appointing or nominating his vice president candidate and then the dismissal of the Mar-a-Lago trial.
Steve Davenport:
So I think there's reason to believe that Trump has peaked and I like that theory. The part of this that I think is a little bit questionable is how many people knew that Joe was not functioning like he should be. And when did they know? And then, like you saw the outrage from Clooney who was at the fundraiser, saying, hey, this guy's got a lot of issues here. It's not a one-time thing. You know, he was up close and personal and said, and I thought it took a lot of courage and I don't know where he really got it from because I don't know if he is that much of a political. I didn't know he was that politically active. I guess I knew he was active.
Steve Davenport:
And then I see when those questions start to get asked. I mean there's going to be Did Kamala know all along that Joe was not? And how do you go to donors and say we really want your money for Joe in June and in July? We really want your money for Kamala? It's the fundraising people and the people within the Democratic Party who just went along. I mean, I know there's errors of commission, but I think this is an error of omission when you ignore what's going on with Joe and say, hey, he's going to be our guy. He's just. Did you know there hasn't been a cabinet meeting since October?
Steve Davenport:
There are several instances of missteps along that. They kept all of his infidelity issues off of the screen and still talked about Tiger being this ideal golfer with an ideal past, and you were meant to believe that he was the greatest. And I sit there and I say all of these PGA writers at all of these events see him doing certain things and they don't report it. And we see Joe doing things that indicate he's got issues and they don't report it. So does your confidence in the press greater or less than, or the same as, now that you've heard all these things about Joe?
Clem Miller:
Oh, I have very little confidence in the press and I think when do you get the news? What? Where do you get your news? I get it from other sources. Let's just leave it there.
Steve Davenport:
Skeptics Guide to investing?
Clem Miller:
No, but you know the reason. Okay, I think you have to look not just at the media not adequately covering Biden until recently. I think you also have to look at the media not covering some of the outrageous things that Trump has said and done. And so I think it works on both sides that the media is not focused on those things op hidden some of those things from view. The Biden administration, let's call it the Biden advisors. They are culpable in keeping Biden out of view. No question about it. Trump is out there talking all the time. He can't keep his mouth shut and he says all these crazy things. So the media was the media is culpable in not relaying to the public the crazy things that Trump says. And I would say the media was kind of ignorant, I'd say, of what the Biden folks were doing to try to keep that under wraps. So that's how I would.
Steve Davenport:
So you would say that there were people actively involved with disinformation about Biden's health and concerns.
Clem Miller:
Correct. I believe that and I believe the media is really too scared or too used to what Trump says in his orations about. In his orations about. I think it's like when someone swears all the time.
Steve Davenport:
Yeah, really, the effect of the swears isn't the same. All right, I mean, if you use it, if you use it precisely when you use words and ideas more accurately, then you're likely to have more effect. I mean, I'll tell you Trump was on the stand talking about. You know the inaccuracies of the. You know january 6th I think that you'd be seeing that every day.
Clem Miller:
All right, um, yeah, I mean. Uh, you have to believe what you see with your own eyes and that's what I'm.
Steve Davenport:
I I would characterize it as there were people willfully trying to deceive me and I ignored some of my own instincts because I believed what they were saying, right and so that's why, when you are the person deceiver. I think the person who is supposed to be an evaluator of information and giving people a full picture were not fully in their role, doing what they're supposed to
Steve Davenport:
do.
Clem Miller:
Yeah, I totally agree with that. You know things that the mainstream media to expression, overused expression you know are not covering is yesterday when Trump said that basically, you know he doesn't really care about defending Taiwan. It's sort of an insurance, we're like an insurance policy and they should pay us a lot for defending them. You know he said that kind of stuff in the past but you know that's sending. You know, the markets open in three minutes here and all these semiconductor stocks are going to plunge at the open. So I think because of that statement. So he makes these kind of random statements. Some of them you can just say well, they're not relevant or that's just you know Trump's rhetoric or whatnot. But some of these statements he makes have real life consequences and I think you know I'm just pointing to that one because it has a real market consequence.
Steve Davenport:
Yeah, I, I, I think that rambling and bravado and ego and narcissism, you know, hey, let's put it all in the pot. And there there's. There's a lot going on with Trump and and I think that it will be with Vance, and I think that you know. My question is is what do the Democrats do to stop the bleeding and turn this around? And in my mind, it's going to be Kamala and it's going to be probably somebody else who will be younger, and and suddenly the age issue that the Democrats have will turn around and not be an issue, and you'll look at the age of Trump and you'll look more closely at his rantings and his follies, and I think that, like you said, I think his sympathy quotient might be the highest right now, but as he continues to do things that upset markets, I do think that there is one part of this.
Steve Davenport:
My brother was a venture cap in technology and I think that Vance's experience in tech and in VC really make a lot of people in California happy. Right, there's a lot of investors who would love to have someone in the White House who understands the venture cap process and the idea of startups and how to get these companies to produce and develop in the United States new things that are going to make us a stronger economy. So if I were looking at the traditional Republican values of capitalism and business, vance really takes a step for the Republican Party, if not old industry and oil and industrials, but hey, this guy's working in the space of VCs and technology. So you think that kind of takes Trump's apprentice experience, which we don't think necessarily plays in the White House, and it adds a dimension to the Republican ticket that I think that, based on the excitement I see from VCs around the country, they really like the idea of somebody who will listen to them.
Clem Miller:
My question on that though I guess I agree with you on that, but you know, my question is is this a step back to mainstream republicanism or is Vance still going to be this mega Trumper? Okay, and I tend to think the latter yeah.
Steve Davenport:
I think that it's you know. It's too early on to really come to a conclusion, because I don't think we really know you know to a conclusion because I don't think we really know. You know, first of all, I don't think I don't think we really know enough about I thought it was interesting that his experience in the Senate was about the same amount as Obama's experience in the Senate, and I remember someone told me that Obama was the perfect candidate because he didn't have many votes. He hadn't voted on many issues and he voted present on a lot of issues. So you couldn't really, when he was running for president, you couldn't really say, well, what's your feelings on transportation, how do you feel about energy usage and how do you feel All those things were not things that he had to deal with as an Illinois representative. So therefore, he was kind of free to kind of create his own little image, and I think that Vance will have some of that same freedom as as far as him being a MAGA, I I think it's like. I mean, I was shocked that you know Marco Rubio was on the ticket as a potential, you know, on the discussion, as a potential candidate. I mean there couldn't have been a person who I think had more animosity after the debates last time than he did, and I sit there and I go. Well, wait a minute.
Steve Davenport:
No-transcript was designed by our founders, was created for just this. That it would be. You could have one group that wants to take the country in this direction, but the other two groups, which are much slower moving and much more slow to change, they might not want to go in that direction, and so it's this balance of power that I think makes the US economy a little bit safer, and I think that what everybody is hoping for is that we just end up with a mix, right? Maybe the Democrats strengthen themselves in the Senate. They lose the House by more. They have the presidency, but if they don't have all three, I think that I am a child of the messy middle. I'm a middle child. I believe the middle is where, unfortunately, you have to reconcile in order to get direction, and I don't think either the Democrats or the Republicans are in strong enough position to run all three.
Steve Davenport:
So my fear is lessened by the fact that I don't think they're going to control all three Right Biden's withdrawal, which I expect is going to help with the Senate.
Clem Miller:
And the reason why I think he's going to withdraw is because he is a man of the Senate and he doesn't want the Senate to go to the Republicans. So that's why you know he was a senator for how many years? Forty Right, something like that. And and that's why I think he's going to withdraw, because he can't, he won't be able to stomach the fact that he might lose the Senate to the Republicans. So that's a reason why he's going to withdraw.
Clem Miller:
On your point about messy middle, you know there's a theory in political science that the person who you know, whoever captures the median median okay, not voter, wins the election. And so the question is who is the median voter in this country? And right now the median voter is is neither supporting Biden nor Trump, and I don't think Trump and Vance personal opinion here I don't think Trump and Vance will be able to capture the median voter. I think once Biden is, is uh, has withdrawn and Kamala, plus whomever is the uh, is the democratic ticket, unless that whomever is super liberal, right, right and Kamala would be smart not to have that person, a person like that. I think that they will.
Steve Davenport:
I think they'll capture the median voter Right and I think that part of why they picked Vance is that his upbringing and Trump has always been a person of wealth from his father's real estate business.
Steve Davenport:
He didn't grow up that way wealth from his father's real estate business.
Steve Davenport:
He didn't grow up that way and I think that story of that working class origins is a big part of who he is. I agree it may be totally different for who he is today, but that story will be repeated over and over again and just to pat ourselves on the back one more time, I think that this question about these other candidates Kennedy, stein, the libertarian, all of those candidates and now you see Kennedy getting, you know I don't think they'd be giving him Secret Service support unless he had enough votes and enough polling right. So as you start to give some of those candidates some voice, I think you're going to see that this race, you know, is going to be tight and I think that when you look at the polling after the debate from Biden, the number one thing was Biden was 4% back, previously was 2% back and now you know if you pulled Kamala, she previously was the same and now she's, you know, 1% back from Trump. So she's pulling better than Biden is going to lead to her as a candidate Right.
Clem Miller:
And that's again another reason why Biden is going to withdraw. But I think the polls might actually overstate Trump. And the reason I say that is because, you know, pollsters have their methodologies and the pollsters all got it wrong in 2016. They got it wrong. They thought that it was going to be Hillary Clinton and after that they adjusted their methodologies to try to, you know, predict. You know, you know, do other kinds of predictions, and I've read some materials, uh, that would suggest that, you know, maybe they have erred in the direction of trump so you might have them going, you know, too far in the direction of giving, uh, giving trump an edge. I don't know if that's true or not.
Steve Davenport:
I think in part, I look at this as who do you support? Yeah. Then do you vote with that support? Yeah. And when I look at this as who do you support, do you vote with that support? Yeah. And when I look at what the Republicans you know, I think they're going more of a you know, mainstream kind of comeback story, like a Vance. I think what you're doing is you're trying to make those people who can't decide on the main candidate, you know, giving them some, some meat in terms of that they can dig into and say, well, yeah, that's the type of person I want, but what's?
Clem Miller:
the average man, sure, but I mean, don't you think that Vance appeals to the same folks that Trump does? I mean he doesn't. He doesn't expand the party.
Steve Davenport:
No, I think. I think he solidifies. So my point isn't that he's going to attract more voters, but those voters are going to be more energized to show up. As I said before about Hillary and Trump, I think that where she got hurt was those people who were Sanders supporters felt not listened to and not heard. True, they didn't show up. It's not that they didn't support Hillary over Trump I think they all would have done that but they just felt like she wasn't you know the way she won and the way she treated him in terms of plank items. I think that that caused them to sit back and not vote, right? So if you take that polls and who actually votes is going to be the right decider.
Clem Miller:
So if you take that analogy right, uh, I think that, if you know, obviously democrats are not excited about biden. If you put in somebody who they can be excited about, that creates an edge over Trump. Now, I don't know if Kamala is that person or not. Kamala, I think, will create a lot more excitement than Biden does. Correct I?
Steve Davenport:
mean, I think she's going to energize the party. I think she's going to get a lot Clem of people behind her. I think people are going to be thrilled to see her on the stage in September against Trump. Yeah, democratic Party. I think she comes from California and she represents a little bit more of the left wing of the party, and so I think it would be great if she had an Amy Klobuchar or Buttigieg or somebody that's more in the middle part of the Democratic Party.
Steve Davenport:
And if you do that, I think that we've got to learn from our mistakes. Right, colin? If you look at that election and say what mistakes were made, then you would do things differently and treat people differently. Than the way that Hillary didn't use Facebook or social media. Yeah, how do you not make that a part of? Because you're confident you're going to win? And so the polls and everything was showing her with the win, and they said we don't need social media. And then, all of a sudden, there was this core part that they ignored and that part kind of felt hey, she's ignoring us now for election. What's she going to be like when she's in office?
Clem Miller:
And so, steve, before we wrap up and we're getting, I think, to our time here um, I just wanted to ask you one more question, which is which is do you think that this election is going to be swarmed by foreign disinformation? I tend to. I think we're going to see a lot coming out of Russia, china, out of Russia, china. But here's my speculation I think we might get foreign disinformation coming out of Europe because they're terrified of what might happen in a Trump administration, so you might have sort of anti-Trump or pro-Biden or pro-Kamala disinformation coming out of Europe.
Steve Davenport:
Yes, I think this election will be one of the more confusing and difficult elections to really try to make a choice in. I think that people will be flooded with media and I think people will be flooded with disinformation on social media, because social media, to me, has taken over from the mainstream media. I think the people have found whether they're Bloomberg people or Reuters people or CBS people or ABC, you know, bbc people I think that people are looking for some place to find what they consider to be the right stuff and I think it's very difficult and therefore I think that my feeling is it will be about who doesn't show, not who does show for this election, because I think that some people will just raise their hands up and say I give up. I think some people will say I hate both parties and vote Kennedy or Stein or, you know, libertarian, and I think that that combination of effects will create more uncertainty. And this election won't be over a month after it's been voted. Yeah, we will still be figuring it out, and I think that I mean some of the comments that I've heard from Vance about, you know, having the electors change when they. You know, I think he's a dangerous, you know. In many ways his comments are dangerous to stability in this election. I agree.
Steve Davenport:
I would say that the one thing about this whole topic that I wish we maybe spent more time on is the idea of how important it is to have a VP. I was sitting there this weekend going well shit, if Trump were actually killed? Let's take the next step. Who would be the Republican candidate? How would we come up with a Republican candidate? How would we even know what? You know what joins everyone together and create a candidate? It's been this kind of lazy man, you know like. I'm tired of people talking about what this person is instead of seeing what are the collection of ideas that he has and how he wants to do things. I mean, if I hear one more time that Trump supports crypto, it drives me crazy. I sit there and I go. How could this man who doesn't understand how to turn on a computer he's the leader of crypto and I sit there and I know how we feel about crypto and his support of crypto is bringing in millions of dollars.
Clem Miller:
You've just brought up a whole bunch of things. D.
Steve Davenport:
Would I give millions of dollars to somebody Like is this the? You know? We no longer have SBK, we now have, you know, dt.
Clem Miller:
DT likes crypto DJT, which is stock ticker. But you brought up a whole bunch of issues. I don't know if we have time for that. I mean, I would just say that I was astonished that he came out of a meeting with the crypto people and said that crypto is good for the US energy sector, obviously because of all the energy that crypto uses and of course, that's all going to raise energy prices for individual citizens and he didn't say anything or maybe didn't recognize that. I'm sure the crypto people didn't tell him that. Can we just finish on one thing, which is what to invest? Didn't say anything, or maybe didn't recognize that, and I'm sure the crypto people didn't tell him that. So that's.
Steve Davenport:
Can we, can we just finish on one thing, which is what to invest, and so I would say that this, this Trump resurgence has already shown. You know, this week financials and healthcare had an all time high as sectors. We know that he is going to be good for energy. And then, on the other side, I'm not sure what I would say about a Kamala and you know ticket in terms of the three things they're going to be. If you were an investor and you wanted to say, okay, I don't believe that Trump's going to win, I think it's going to be the Democrats, what would you say? The three sectors are that are going to benefit most.
Clem Miller:
You know, I think first. Okay, so we're going to talk about energy on another podcast. So I'm going to have the greatest potential, notwithstanding the carnage that's going to happen to semiconductors. Today, the two greatest sectors are going to be technology and healthcare. Because of all the different innovations that are happening in both those sectors that are happening in both those sectors, I don't think we're going to see much. Despite all the people talking about fintech and whatnot, I don't think that's the area of innovation more than the others. Anyway, I think it's tech and healthcare on a continuing basis, regardless of who's in power.
Steve Davenport:
Yeah, I mean I have a little doubt about healthcare, because I mean it feels like Kamala and Biden both have spoken out about drug price controls and how that could hurt the healthcare sector. Regulation, I think, is going to be the issue, and I think it's a question of what is her platform going to be and how does it evolve, which will be great material for, you know, when we sit down, maybe in August, around the Democratic Convention, I'm sure we'll have more to talk about. But this has been a great podcast. I think we've gotten through a lot of the issues, but there's still a lot to come and I'd say stay tuned, skeptics. There's going to be a lot more upheaval and I think a lot more that needs to get some explaining.
Clem Miller:
Totally agree with that, steve. Thank you very much everybody.
