Washington, DC -- (ReleaseWire) -- 08/30/2016 -- DAWN BENNETT: Bo Polny is a financial trends forecaster and the publisher of Gold2020Forecast. He actually publishes three reports. The first one is called Polny's 2020 Gold Index and that's for the buy-and-hold gold investor. I get this report, and it's really good. The second is Polny's Exclusive Turn Dates. This is more for the active trader/investor who's looking to keep the pulse on the gold and silver markets on the daily and weekly basis. The third is the 2015/2016 Stock Market Index, which looks at four Index points. The first Index time point is the final 2015 market cycle top, the second an important cycle low after the first drop, the third a critical cycle high and start point for the crash, the fourth and final Index timing point is the 2016 cycle bottom. Bo, welcome back to Financial Myth Busting.

BO POLNY: Dawn, thanks for having me back. Absolute pleasure to speak with you again, so thank you.

BENNETT: So, I watched you discuss markets in your most recent analysis where you took on the cheerleaders who were triumphing the Dow and the S&P reaching all-time highs and you sighted something called 'the megaphone top chart pattern' and you use this to describe the current market moves. For those who have never heard this term before on Financial Myth Busting because I've never used it – what does that mean?

POLNY: Okay, so first off, what you're describing, Dawn, is a YouTube video that I created on my YouTube channel so for those listening they should take a few minutes this weekend or sometime in the next few days. It's very important. Go watch the video: it's called Chaos 2016, and my YouTube is channel is named the same as our website: Gold2020Forecast. As I say, a fifteen minute video. Very, very informative and illustrative is a good word. In that video we describe what you just mentioned. It's a megaphone top chart pattern and what it is—it's like a megaphone. That's why I used that word. Another name for it is 'jaws of death', and basically what it means is you have three tops and each is followed by a drop, so basically that's what it equates to when you look at the Dow. You had a top in the year 2000 and a drop into the year 2004. That's the first jaw. Then you have arrived back up to the year 2007—the top—and then a drop down into 2009, and then a third rise into 2015. Now, in July we called a top on the 20th of last year and that top has just recently been broken but the amazing part is if you draw a line from 2000 and right to the top of our top in the year 2015 with all the wonderful news like you just mentioned with the media, the news channels, how wonderful everything is in the market; everything's just fine and hunky-dory and the world is beautiful, especially U.S. markets are absolutely fine? Here is a huge problem, Dawn: the megaphone top is not broken, and what that means is that it took a year longer so from the mathematical and the biblical calculation you have to add a year, a jubilee year, that was basically the whole hiccup we had here between last year to this year, but between 2015 into 2016, if you take a line, a point at 2015, it's a megaphone so it's going higher so that's why you have a slightly higher top this year in 2016 but it's nothing but the end of the end of the end so all that happens from here is the bubble bursts and then just chaos. That's in essence what happened. Our stock cycle has had 36 incredible turns since the 20th of November of 2014 and all that's changed is an inverted cycle to complete this final push up that started in the very early part of March of this year, 2016, so you push a six and seven month cycle all you get into is the end of August and into September, and come September it's going to be bad. This jaw pattern or this megaphone is complete so then you get collapse, you get chaos.

BENNETT: All right, so let's talk about that chaos. You're anticipating it in September of 2016. Is that correct?

POLNY: Yeah, because the higher high just came in, the megaphone's unbroken. You can look at it on the Dow, you can look at it on the S&P 500, on the NASDAQ, on the Russell and the pattern is unbroken, so the megaphone is unbroken and all this is just sitting at the upper cusp of how high you can go and then the other world markets...

BENNETT: The very difficult part for all of our listeners out there is you hear Obama and the media, even Yellen, constantly saying the U.S. economy has never been stronger and then at the same time you're sitting here telling us that the market has yet to break this megaphone top chart pattern. My question is why is that significant?

POLNY: No other world market has even come close to the high of last year, of 2015. Because the U.S., you know, they print money, it's just a button you press, and so their market can be stronger but the problem is it gets to the point of exponential growth and at some point you just can't keep printing money anymore before the bubble bursts, so when I look at the patterns and more going back historically it's insane. You know, from the year zero you add 252 years times 8 and you arrive to 2016, this year. You may not know what that means but that's a biblical calculation, so everything is pointing to the fact that you can't go past this year before the bubble bursts but the problem is they can keep propping it up like they've been doing it, pushing it higher until the dollar breaks. When the dollar breaks because of the factor of currency of the entire world it's going to take every single paper asset with it downwards so between now and in the next few months forward we've got chaos coming in. That dollar breaks, the stock market breaks, every paper asset breaks, and I think we're going to be able to look back at this several months or a year down the road and we'll know that the month of September was the month that the whole world changed and it all just turned down, but it's not going to be a slow down because the problem is they printed so much money and it's just a bubble that bursts and all you get is chaos. It's just going to explode and it's going to be terrible.

BENNETT: Right. So let's talk about that what you call an explosion or collapse. You recently wrote there appears to be a 42-year cycle at play where we had a depression in 1806 and then 42 years later we had another in 1848 and then 42 years later then another continuing along until 2016. But there's only three months left in 2016 so do you really expect everything to explode, collapse so quickly?

POLNY: Yeah. It doesn't mean the bottom is going to come in 2016. The bottom could come in—just like you look at in the year 2000, even though this will be much quicker but in the year 2000 the bottom took four years to come in; in the year 2007 it took a year and a half for the bottom to come in down to the lows from the year 2007 top. So don't be surprised, it might take a few months but the initial shockwave is going to be just horrendous and it will be too quick and too fast to react. That's the problem, so people who are not positioned I just don't think are going to have time to react. My charts that I'm looking at, especially which we've got in the Stock Index, we have a cycle time point which is a final-final, basically a day or two to act and after that day—I'll send you the pattern and you'll see it's just straight down so it could be really, really, really bad.

BENNETT: I don't really like to work day-by-day but here we are heading into September 1st. Do you have daily prediction for September for our listeners?

POLNY: Well, we're not giving out the exact dates, we give that to subscribers, but I will say that in the subscription of the Stock Index we actually have a final-final time point before all pandemonium is supposed to break free and when that happens you have to remember what is the one asset class that's not paper. You know, you've got gold and silver. We nailed the bottom, but that's just the warm-up. We had nine or so months of warm-up, slightly pushing higher prices but when this bubble blows don't be expecting to see slow moves, it's going to be very dramatic so boy, come September we've got a turn point and it's going to be very dramatic between oil markets, gold, metal, stock markets... a lot of things are going to start to change and you're right, Dawn, there is not a lot of time left between this time point and year's end. We're really getting into crunch time and like you said, if you look at the video that I've laid out there, that 42 year pattern is unbroken going back to 1764. It's a 42-year crash cycle that occurs every 42 years, and then that's overlaid on the bigger cycle. You can start at birth of Jesus which would be zero and you add eight cycles of 252 years and you again arrive at the year 2016. I believe what we're about to see here is something the world has never seen before because when the world currency gets smashed or gets hit it's just something the world has never experienced and this is going to be just catastrophic.

BENNETT: Let's talk about that. Gold and silver I consider a currency, but you're not talking about gold and silver as a currency getting hurt, you're talking about paper, fiat currency and I think the gold market, of course, is so interesting because of how the price can be distorted by buying and selling of paper gold (as in the future sale or purchase of gold). In fact, I think 500 ounces of paper gold are being sold for every ounce of actual physical gold available out there. Is this different from other commodities and if so how is this all affecting the actual value of gold today?

POLNY: Well, if there were no 500:1 ratio right now, if they didn't print 500 pieces of paper for every ounce of gold you'd have, just as a fun guesstimate, you'd probably have gold 500 times higher so it's a paper game to suppress the price of precious metal because you can print as much paper as you want but there's only so much physical available. That's the problem, but eventually everything ends. Whatever event you're thinking in your head is going to go on forever, it's an impossibility. It can go on for 100 years or 200 years or 3000 years, it can go on for 2016 years but eventually that has to burst, so what's basically happening here is we're at a finite point and all I know is it's the patterns are unbroken on the stock market and on gold or the charge we've got, so nothing's broken down at all, and all I know is that the mathematical calculations are still pointing towards chaos, and we're really, really tight on time. If they printed that amount of ounces of gold all that's done is it creates what's called 'a flag pattern' so the price goes up from 2000 into 2011, makes the highest over $2,000 and then it drops from $2,000—what we call the top—and as we're going downwards for 5 years, now it's getting to a point where they can't push it down anymore no matter how much paper they're printing. Even though they're throwing billions of dollars at it gold drops $10 or $15. You see, it's not working anymore and eventually it's just going to burst and it blows and then it just goes vertical and then you're going to have massive price moves in gold and silver because neutrality has to be found and that's not with gold at $1,800 or $1,500. You know, gold has to get above $2,000 and quick.

BENNETT: So, Bo, is that your prediction, that there is going to be a breakout to 2,000 in 2016? I mean, if your forecast proves true.

POLNY: Yeah, absolutely.

BENNETT: And what about for silver too? Try to get to that too.

POLNY: Well, silver is going to be more powerful because of the ratio. You see, in ground silver's 10:1, so right now they print it into a ratio of I'm guessing around 75:1 or maybe 70:1, so for every ounce of gold you buy you can buy 70 ounces of silver but in ground it's 10:1 approximately, so if gold doubles silver is going to go quadruple so don't be surprised if silver gets to $60 quickly. When this bubble bursts it's just going to blow and silver and gold are going to go vertical, silver is going to outperform. However, we have a high coming in next year, 2017, for gold but silver, like gold is from a mathematical and from a cycle point: gold bottoms first, silver bottoms second; silver hits the top first and then gold hits the top second. We do have big prices still for this year because it's going to be breaking out and going absolutely powerfully vertical, but then that won't stop until next year and then we've got a specific time point for that as well.

BENNETT: Bo, we're back and I wanted just to talk a little bit more about where you thought gold and silver were were going to go as a price for 2016, because you said there is going to be a vertical breakout, as well as the timing and the price of what you think for both those commodities in 2017.

POLNY: Well, we did an interview probably a year and a half ago or so and we were calling for three digits on silver this year possibly, 2016. I need to talk with that for a second because the pattern that we've had, what happens with gold and silver is the patterns we have don't get specific prices but they get direction, right? So the patterns we've had have been playing out incredibly accurately. Since we called the bottom December of 2015, the patterns have been playing out beautifully so there is nothing wrong at all. The only thing is we're still not above $1,500 on gold so what we're seeing right now is when this initial thrust goes through we should be at $1,500 pretty quickly and then we should be by year end easily into new highs for gold and for silver so silver should be about $50 and gold should be about $2,000. Again, it could go higher, but because we'd have the six months of pattern since March, we had the six or seven month cycle inversion into now September. Now, that pushes the cycle possibly six or seven months forward, so without giving up the specific time point for next year, I see no reason why silver would not be at three digits by next year and I'm definitely not talking about end of next year, it's far earlier than that.

BENNETT: I was reading that the Federal Reserve expects rates to be someplace between zero percent and 4.5 percent. Now, how on Earth anyone can actually do any type of capital allocation decisions on a forecast like that with guidance from zero to 4.5? What it's saying to me is that this wide range is indicating that they're going to be raising rates. As a matter of fact, I think Stan Fisher this past week basically spoiled a run up in stocks and bonds and even gold, and even the dollar stating that Yellen's comments are pretty much consistent this week with possible September hike. Can you factor that into what you think gold and silver are going to do?

POLNY: Well, right now gold has been falling. We did a post last week on multiple websites. We were basically talking about gold going down this past week and basically seeing gold go down this whole past week with silver. So, we have a down cycle for gold but when this cycle ends and it's not too far off into the future, you know, we're talking about a short time, a bottom is going to come in and then it's going to reverse. The reverse will be powerful to the upside. Yes, I've looked at the rate hike and I think there's going to be a lot of issues at that time point. It doesn't matter what anybody wants to believe or what they're going to say. All I'm saying is that gold is going to be going up this year and it's going to be powerful so whatever they say is going to be bullish for gold and it doesn't matter. It has to happen right away when they speak but the point is metals are not going to look back after this final low comes in here in the near future, so metals are up, markets are supposed to be turning down so it's going to get ugly and I believe this September time point is going to be very critical. We've got the patterns readied into the charts but it's going to be a critical inflection point, I think, in our world.

BENNETT: Bo, some of your forecast incorporates biblical numerology and I'm wondering do you ever fear these market predictions when you talk like that won't be taken as seriously if it's not based on some hard science of modern market algorithms?

POLNY: That's the beautiful part. You see, I could care less what the algorithms are saying or what the new system is because eventually what happens is everything is going to play into the cycle so the markets will turn exactly as the cycles are forecasting and the cycles precede all those events and because you can see a cycle before it happens you can know. Right now we know the day, right now we are short on precious metals still, we have data, we're going to go long, and eventually the indicators will turn positive but right now the indicators are negative for the precious metals, so it really doesn't matter because the cycles are basically nothing more than people acting into the cycles and so the cycles are already foretold and they're biblically foretold. The problem is from a biblical standpoint there are a lot of problems coming into our world and nothing's going to change. This has been predetermined thousands of years ago and all we're trying to tap into here is what's been predetermined thousands of years ago and it really doesn't matter what anybody thinks because statistically our success rate on calling turns is higher than probability.

BENNETT: Thanks, Bo.

POLNY: Thank you.

For over a quarter century, Dawn Bennett has been successfully guiding clients through the complexities of wealth management. Her unique vision and insight into market trends makes Bennett a much sought after expert resource with regular appearances on Fox News Channel, CNBC, Bloomberg TV, and MSNBC as well as being featured in Business Week, Fortune, The NY Times, The NY Sun, Washington Business Journal in addition to her highly regarded weekly talk radio program - Financial Mythbusting. Through prudent and thoughtful advice, Dawn Bennett has strived to consistently provide the highest quality of guidance.

About Dawn Bennett
Dawn Bennett is CEO and Founder of Bennett Group Financial Services. She hosts a national radio program called Financial Myth Busting http://www.financialmythbusting.com.

She discusses educational topics and events in the financial news, along with her thoughts on the economy, financial markets, investments, and more with her live guests, who have included rock legend Ted Nugent, as well as Steve Forbes and Grover Norquist. Listeners can call 855-884-DAWN a as well as take podcasts on the road and forums for interaction.

She can be reached on Twitter @DawnBennettFMB or on Facebook Financial Myth Busting with Dawn Bennett.

For more information on this press release visit: http://www.releasewire.com/press-releases/release-3.htm

Washington, DC -- (ReleaseWire) -- 08/12/2016 -- BENNETT: Gerard Lameiro is an author, philosopher, economist and an engineer. He was founder and CEO of Lameiro Economics LLC, a company focused on bringing practical economic knowledge about freedom, economic growth, and prosperity to America and the world. Lameiro is also the author of four books. The first one is Great News for America. The second is Renewing America and Its Heritage of Freedom. The third is Choosing the Good Life and the fourth is America's Economic War. Clearly, he's a logical choice to discuss Trump and Hillary's economic tax programs. Gerard, welcome of Financial Myth Busting.

LAMEIRO: Thanks for having me on. I really appreciate it.

BENNETT: Donald Trump made public his team of economic advisors this week to make America great again, and he's going to be unveiling more of this on Monday in Detroit at an economic group there. Among the 13 men on Mr. Trump's list are hedge fund managers, bankers, real estate investors, a steel executive, and a fracking tycoon. Absent are the names of any women, and any well known policy experts, save for one economist with a doctorate, and a tax policy expert. Looking at his team, do you think he actually has got good people surrounding him?

LAMEIRO: Well I know a lot of fairly good economists have been advising him during the primary season. People like Steven Moore, Larry Kudlow. Those are well known names associated more with the supply side, more with free enterprise, free market economics. That plus what I've seen at a high level of Trump tax plan would indicate apparently a pro-growth agenda. Just as he announced his list to the Supreme Court of potential justice nominees that appeared to be strikingly conservative, I think that's also true of his tax plan, the kinds of things he has mentioned appear to be pro-growth from most points of view.

BENNETT: Trump's pitch has long been that the billionaires of the business world know how to save the middle class here in America. Do you think that the advisors that he chose reinforce that idea?

LAMEIRO: Well I do not know a number of them personally. I'm more familiar with the economists, because that's where a lot of my work is done. So I would say I presume they are. I don't know to be honest. I have not vetted them. I did vet the Supreme Court nominees. I went through each of their bios in great detail, and I can attest to the fact that they were definitely constitutional conservatives. I can't say the same for his economic team to be honest with you.

BENNETT: I know you recently wrote a column comparing and contrasting Trump's tax plan with Hillary's. I was wondering if you could describe in general terms what Hillary's tax plan looks like. I read this week she plans to raise taxes approximately about 1.3 trillion, yet the deficit, of course, is still projected to increase. I'm not certain how that's going to continue to bend like it has for the last eight years. But maybe you can give us some insight.

LAMEIRO: Yes. Well I think you can summarize both plans in two words. Her plan is simply to raise taxes, and the Trump plan, the two words are cut taxes. They as about as opposite as you can get, and that's worth noting, especially if taxes are an issue that you consider important. So to give you the overview you're asking for, in terms of income taxes she would raise the personal income taxes by capping itemized deductions about 350 billion dollars. This is over a ten year period. Corporate taxes, we're looking at an increase of 275 billion. Although as far as I can find I don't know how precisely within the tax code she would do that particular tax increase, there was not a lot of detail I could find.

Then in addition she has a 400 billion dollar, what's called a fairness tax change. There would be a fair share surcharge, and again, not defined very clearly in my view. All I can think of is fair share, it sounds like we're going to tax the rich somehow, and somehow add that into the general fund so that they can spend more on other things. Then there's the issue of taxes on carried interest. I don't know, usually most shows I'm on people are not familiar with carried interest, we could always talk about that. But basically it has to do with investment funds, and your being an expert in investments you would know all about that, some of your listeners might not.

Then of course death taxes. She'd certainly not lower them, and might raise them. In terms of capital gains she would not only increase capital gains taxes, but also the brackets associated with them. In terms of what I could best determine there isn't a firm estimate on how much revenue that would generate. I imagine they're using a static analysis. I, by the way, believe in dynamic analysis because I think it's more accurate.

BENNETT: I agree.

LAMEIRO: Another thing, she would create a new tax on stock trades. That means that people who buy and sell stocks are going to pay some percentage. You might think of it almost like a sales tax on stock trades, but it would be some type of tax on stock trading. Then a new creation, the exit tax, which has to do with businesses who earn income overseas. She would not touch the currently high corporate tax structure and that, but she would add on this new exit tax. In addition, she has also endorsed, or said she is open to, a 25 percent national gun tax. I'm sure the NRA will love that one. And a high soda tax, which is interesting.

BENNETT: Because we know it's about sugar, right. Are candy bars going to be taxed? Are my M&M's going to be taxed?

LAMEIRO: So I actually got a letter from a listener wanting to know if her diet root beer was going to be taxed.

BENNETT: Do you think that Hillary's tax plan is going to be superior to Trump's, or vice
versa?

LAMEIRO: Oh no. I am definitely pro economic growth, which means I look toward a low tax regime, a low regulatory regime. I look for things like a monetary policy that results in a stable dollar. I much prefer Taylor's traditional approach, the economist Taylor at Stanford, and use the Taylor rule, or something similar, as opposed to quantitative easing and ZIRP, zero interest rate policies.

BENNETT: I think the problem that I'm having with Trump, is that whenever he is asked about what he'll do with taxing and spending he talks about hiking taxes on the rich too. Are you at all worried that his tax plan on paper isn't something he is actually committed to, and that it's more of an attempt to win Republican votes?

LAMEIRO: Yes. Well I do not endorse either candidate. My personal point of view is I would like to see pro-growth, and a solid constitutional conservative in there. We do not have such a person currently running that I know of, unless possibly the libertarian and that. But I think Trump is somewhat of an unknown quantity, and he doesn't have a real defined track record in either economics, or virtually any other area of the government, and Clinton does have a record which I don't particularly like. I think her long term record is not pro-growth. I would expect more progressive socialist type programs and policies, and I think that's already doing a bad number on our economy. I think we have the weakest recovery in decades, generations, and I think this tax plan would probably result in literally trillions of dollars that would not be met with her budget expense that is likely to occur.

So I'm for fiscally restrained policies, I'm for things that would, for example, moderate the corporate taxes, which I think are doing a number on our economy. I would pull back regulations, like getting rid of ObamaCare, because I think that has hurt small business growth. I would say a little bit along the lines of what William Buckley used to say years ago when he was active in that. He said you always vote for the more conservative person, or his opinion was you vote for the most conservative. So I think when people go to the polls and vote I presume they will evaluate each candidate on the issues that are most important to them, and pick the one that's closes. I don't know for conservatives if there's an ideal candidate running this year.

BENNETT: You recently wrote a piece arguing that Donald Trump's ascendancy signals the end of the Republican Party. I thought that was interesting. I mean he is such a divisive figure. Do you view this as a good thing, or a bad thing?

LAMEIRO: Actually I wrote the book Great News for America, so I thought it was great. The reason is this. I went back in 2015 because I thought that this election coming up in 2016 was going to be a profound presidential election. I had a sense by looking at numbers, looking at all sorts of things, and being in touch with people all across the country. Because I do about 400 TV and talk radio shows a year I hear a lot of peoples opinions, and a lot of callers too that call in. My sense, going back to 1789, and looking at every big presidential election, this was going to be a giant election, and I saw a lot of change coming. Yet, I didn't think that was bad, I thought it was great.

If you go back, I'll take one election as an example. 1896, William McKinley. That election was preceded by terrible economics. We had in the prior three years about 15,000 bankruptcies, we had law and order issues, we had the Pullman Strike, we had all sorts of things. People were rioting at the time. They did not know if America could survive 1896. They did not know if America could make it into the next century. The American people came out in a record voter turnout, it was an enormous turnout, not a turnout like we're used to seeing by any means. They went, and they shook up the parties, and it started the 20th century on a whole different note. The similarities of the great presidential election versus the typical presidential election, were major. In my book, Great News for America, I identified what that model is, what does it look like when you have a great presidential election.

I wrote the book last year, it came out in the beginning of January. Right before the primaries and caucuses started I made ten big predictions. One of them was the fact that this would be a historical and critical presidential election, and by historic I mean record high voter turnout, which we've seen in the primaries, and also critical in the sense that the political parties would be realigned. Their support groups would change, their leaderships would be shaken up, the parties might even change names, and I suggested names they might get. So I went through and did these ten predictions, and so far they're all coming true.

BENNETT: Interesting. Besides, of course, the political parties renaming themselves, realigning, and the historic record high voters turning out for this, you made some other shocking forecasts, that might spark some interest in our listeners. Can you list out a few more?

LAMEIRO: Well one, you might have a few people listening from the mainstream media. I predicted the end of the mainstream media's impact on presidential elections this year with this election. I saw the business models breaking. Business models is one of the areas I put a lot of time into over the last decade or two. I saw the business models as breaking up on the mainstream media. The layoffs at different news organizations, the changes, the impact of the new media, the impact of talk radio on television even. By the way, look at the Olympics, at NBC's ratings, how they're at a 12 year low this year. But at any rate, yes, I saw a major impact. By the way there's a very interesting thing I discovered about presidential elections. That is any time there is a great, or a critical and historic presidential election there's a change in the media. It's fascinating. But the change in the media helps to drive the change in the political parties, and the political system. It's amazing.

BENNETT: Is it a good change, or is it a bad change?

LAMEIRO: Well you could debate that I suppose. I would say it has always been a good change, because the American people tend to take more control of the country, and get what they want. So if you're a democratic advocate, and I say democratic in terms of having the people involved in the government, it's a good thing. You look at 1828, Andrew Jackson.

BENNETT: One thing I thought was fascinating is when you said how the American people could actually change the media, hopefully, to be much more honest and accountable for what they put out in the public. Because right now there's no accountability. They can put whatever they want out there, and they put it out on the internet, and everyone believes them, and a lot of the stuff is just made up.

LAMEIRO: Yes. Well there are a lot of issues around the mainstream media, there's quite a bit of debate in that. But the American people are ultimately in control, and that's a theme within the book that I wrote, Good News for America. I think they pursue whatever media they choose, and they're pursuing the new social media with quite an energy level where people put a lot of their personal time into it. But we see the rise of talk radio, clearly conservative. There are about 2,500 talk radio hosts in the United States, which is rather incredible when you think of how many stations you can get in an area, in a market. So that's one particular area. Another one, by the way, I don't think I mentioned earlier, another prediction was the end of the Democratic Party as we know it. I think you're seeing that as well. I think it's going to be a different party. I think you saw the rise of Bernie Sanders. I think it's over. Were it not for super delegates, and if it were not for the DNC putting their thumbs on the scale, so to speak, in Hillary's favor, I think Bernie would be the nominee.

BENNETT: I just can't imagine that.

LAMEIRO: I mean, look at all of the elections he won. But that said, if the Democratic Party morphs into the progressive socialist party, which might be a more appropriate name, or into say an outright socialist party, the equivalent of a European style socialist party, that also means that in likelihood we're talking one to two generations of the Democratic, or whatever the new version of that party could be called, being out of the White House, and being relegated to a minority party status.

BENNETT: Interesting. You know we're beginning to witness almost a sea change out there in the world where people are actually giving up on politicians to solve all of our problems. Of course I'm talking about how Spain voted to solidify its right of center party's hold on its government, and of course, when Britain decided to flee the European Union. Do you think we could finally be starting to learn from them?

LAMEIRO: Well, I don't know if we're learning from them. They may actually be learning from us. It works both ways. This is a global zeitgeist. I like that word, zeitgeist, from the German, meaning the spirit of the times. There is an anti-government spirit of the times. Look at the Philippines, they elected someone much like Trump. He says some rather strange things sometimes. But it's that populism, that anti-government, anti-establishment. By the way, people talk about anti-establishment. The issue with our parties, it's not so much anti-establishment as it's they're not happy with the parties, period. It isn't that they're in power, those particular individuals, it's that the party hasn't been delivering. There was a landslide house election in 2010. 63 house seats changed hands to the Republicans.

In 2010, you remember that was the year that we had ObamaCare, that it came into effect. People were sending people back to get rid of ObamaCare, they didn't want it. 2/3 of the American people were against ObamaCare, but it was passed anyway. 2014 we had a historic senate vote that was conservative, and Republicans took over the senate. Both times after both of those elections, which was a clear signal to the Republican Party what was wanted by the American people, they did not act. That's why this had to be another historic election, because they were going to deal with this at the presidential level now, and that's what's happening.

BENNETT: You're predicting a big Trump win this November. Are you still confident Trump can win?

LAMEIRO: Unless he absolutely decides not to, which he could. But in terms of the dynamics, the numbers, everything that's going on. I look at voter momentum, I look at voter intensity, I look at all sorts of things. Everything that I see right now is a Trump landslide. I know the polls don't agree, but I think the underlying models of the polls aren't right, they're not accurate. If Gallup is still doing what it said it was going to do last December it doesn't even want to get involved in this election. Because they're so worried about, I think, how to accurately forecast it. So I would say yes, I expect a Trump landslide, unless Trump decides to lose it and throw the election.

BENNETT: Great News for America is Gerard's book. It's on Amazon. Thanks.

For over a quarter century, Dawn Bennett has been successfully guiding clients through the complexities of wealth management. Her unique vision and insight into market trends makes Bennett a much sought after expert resource with regular appearances on Fox News Channel, CNBC, Bloomberg TV, and MSNBC as well as being featured in Business Week, Fortune, The NY Times, The NY Sun, Washington Business Journal in addition to her highly regarded weekly talk radio program - Financial Mythbusting. Through prudent and thoughtful advice, Dawn Bennett has strived to consistently provide the highest quality of guidance.

About Dawn Bennett
Dawn Bennett is CEO and Founder of Bennett Group Financial Services. She hosts a national radio program called Financial Myth Busting http://www.financialmythbusting.com.

She discusses educational topics and events in the financial news, along with her thoughts on the economy, financial markets, investments, and more with her live guests, who have included rock legend Ted Nugent, as well as Steve Forbes and Grover Norquist. Listeners can call 855-884-DAWN a as well as take podcasts on the road and forums for interaction.

She can be reached on Twitter @DawnBennettFMB or on Facebook Financial Myth Busting with Dawn Bennett.

For more information on this press release visit: http://www.releasewire.com/press-releases/release-3.htm