Socionomics and Presidential Politics

The socionomic hypothesis holds that social mood drives the collective activities in a society, including presidential elections. If social mood is up during a presidential year, the incumbent will get reelected. If it is down, the incumbent is out, usually by a landslide. The most reliable gauge of social mood is the stock market, so, given that the Wave Principle is forecasting a down market into the fall, we can anticipate that Obama will not be reelected.

The larger question, in my mind, is what we might be seeing when the next election rolls around. The major market cycles and the Wave Principle now indicate 2016 as the most probable year for the bottom of the Grand Supercycle Bear market underway for the past twelve years. It should be a very difficult time. The previous bear market of this magnitude occured in the eighteenth century. Like today, the global politics in that era were extremely contentious and the fury of the politically disenfranchised people–everyone but the elites–was extreme. The resulting angst produced two revolutions, the American and the French.

Should this time be any different? The only reason to think so is that we want to believe that middle class Americans  are incapable of taking matters into their own hands and storming the Capitol in the manner of their forebears. I have to think anything is possible.

My real hope is that the era will produce statespersons who can galvanise the American electorate and clean house in both parties and get government back in the direction intended by the founding fathers. Unfortunately, when I try to imagine how things might go over the balance of this decade, the cynic in me thinks this outcome is even less likely than outright revolution.

My feeling is that the election this fall will not produce any significant change because, while the polls show little confidence in our elected officials today, there is not enough anger for revolution yet . I want to concentrate on who might emerge as viable candidates in 2016 when the mood is sufficiently negative to foster major change.

I voted Republican most of my life. I finally became disenchanted in ’08 and switched sides. For me, the outcome was no better. I don’t think any party deserves my loyalty now, so I’m looking for individuals who are independent thinkers and, hopefully, not aligned with the 10,000 Superzippers (http://rodroth.com//2012/02/20/on-the-american-project/) presently running the country for their personal benefit.

Here are two people on my list to consider:

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (Republican)
http://wiki.ask.com/Chris_Christie

Elizabeth Warren, Massachusetts candidate for Senator (Democrat)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren

I’d like your input on this. Send me your views on these people if you have any, and please send me the names of potential candidates you think might be good for the country.

I don’t intend to advocate for anyone in particular. I just want to gather and share the names of people that might be good candidates to represent a mandate for a complete overhaul of our broken system.

Thanks,

Rod

This entry was posted in Socionomics. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.