Forget Trump and Bernie: Here’s Why Clinton or Bush Will Be the Next President

Forget Trump and Bernie: Here’s Why Clinton or Bush Will Be the Next President

Political elite has absolutely no fear of Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders

Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are rising in the polls and seemingly pose a threat to the political establishment.

Come the 2016 primaries, however, Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton will likely be at the top of the pack.
The oligarchy that has controlled American politics for generations is still firmly in control despite the illusion of change. In no way do Trump or Sanders threaten this control despite the corporate media’s fascination with them and polls that appear to show them gaining favor among potential voters.

A CNN-ORC International poll conducted between July 22-25 demonstrates the dominance of the establishment’s candidates. While Donald Trump matches Jeb Bush, his unfavorability rating is high. Clinton’s is higher, but despite this she remains solidly at the top of the pack.
Trump’s brash commentary has pushed him up in the polls, but many believe he has reached his peak. Diehard Republican insiders hate the real estate mogul.
“The McCain smear and giving out Graham’s cellphone? What an asshole,” a New Hampshire Republican insider told Politico. “Trumpism does not represent some deeper sentiment within the party, nor has he tapped into something a more conventional candidate can now co-opt. His candidacy has as much substance and meaning as cotton candy. I didn’t like him before. Now I loathe him.”
The liberal Daily Beast admits the socialist Bernie Sanders presents a tangential threat to Hillary Clinton and in a worse case scenario may even best her in the Iowa and New Hampshire caucuses, but he will never take the Democrat nomination. “Bernie Sanders will never be president,” writes the Newsweek merged website.
The progs over at Daily Kos point out how corporate and banking money control elections. Bernie Sanders “may not be able to overcome the massive money disadvantage” of Wall Street. The Daily Kos also admits “there is a chance that his name recognition will never reach Hillary proportions and he may lose the primary election, but once the debates roll around, don’t be surprised to see a lot more of him on your TV pushing his ‘radical’ ideas of what America should be.”
Michael Krieger, writing for Liberty Blitzkrieg, notes the “pantsuit revolutionary” takes big bucks from the likes of Microsoft, Exxon Mobil, the telecommunications industry and the prison-industrial complex. Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Lehman Brothers also gave millions to the Clinton campaign.
“Clinton, a former New York senator, has deep ties to the financial sector. Citigroup and Goldman Sachs employees had been among the top contributors to her Senate campaigns, according to data compiled by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics,” USA Today noted on July 16.
Liberals, ignoring how tight Clinton is with the bankers, lament Jeb Bush’s bankster donations from Goldman Sachs.
“Goldman Sachs isn’t the only Wall Street firm with employees hoping to see a third Bush in the White House. Credit Suisse Group AG, Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan Chase & Co. also were among the top sources of donations,” reports Bloomberg.
This banker and corporate oligarchy will decide who sits in the White House and it really does not matter if it is Clinton or Bush.
This control over the political system was underscored in April when a Princeton study concluded the elite drive politics in the United States.
“The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy,” researchers Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page write, “while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence.”
In April Ellen Brown took to the liberal website Alternet to explain how bankers and the monied elite control the political process. She cited the Princeton study and also quoted the theologian and environmentalist Dr. John Cobb:

The influence of money was greatly enhanced by the emergence of private banking. The banks are able to create money and so to lend amounts far in excess of their actual wealth. This control of money-creation . . . has given banks overwhelming control over human affairs. In the United States, Wall Street makes most of the truly important decisions that are directly attributed to Washington.

Domination of the political system will continue, Brown notes, until the American people once again gain control over the monetary system. “If governments are recalling their sovereign powers, they might start with the power to create money, which was usurped by private interests while the people were asleep at the wheel,” writes Brown.
The puppet masters behind the political facade have absolutely no fear of a Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders. Both are part of a traveling sideshow on the road to the primaries and the November 2016 presidential election.
Bush or Clinton will sit in the White House come January, 2017 and everything between now and then is little more than pure political theater. Short of an all-encompassing and dedicated political revolution — and an outright dismantling of the Federal Reserve and putting and end to the stranglehold of the financial elite — this situation is unlikely to change.