MB Fund Podcast: US Election 2020 – American Civil War

This week we look to the upcoming US election as the country grapples with the coronavirus, civil unrest and a toppling stock market. Can Trump pull off another shock win and buoy markets with more of his trade mark tax cuts and incongruous twitter activity, or will old man Biden clinch the win for the democrats on a platform of covid management, healthcare strengthening and environmental protection. We have a look at the current state of play, and assess the potential impacts on both the economy and markets under each scenario.

In today’s investment webinar MB Fund’s Head of Investments Damien Klassen, Chief Strategist David Llewellyn Smith and Head of Advice Tim Fuller cover US Election 2020 – American Civil War.

View the presentation slides here


Click here to subscribe to our YouTube channel to be notified when this and future episodes go live

Can’t make it to the live series?  Catch up on the content via Podcasts or our recorded Videos.

Take us on your daily commute! Podcasts now available on iTunes and all major Android Podcast Platforms for Nucleus Investment Insights.

Subscribe on Android Subscribe on itunes Subscribe on Spotify Subscribe on Google Podcasts


Tim Fuller is Head of Advice at the MacroBusiness Fund, which is powered by Nucleus Wealth.

The information on this blog contains general information and does not take into account your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. Past performance is not an indication of future performance. Tim Fuller is an authorised representative of Nucleus Wealth Management, a Corporate Authorised Representative of Nucleus Advice Pty Ltd – AFSL 515796.

Tim Fuller


  1. This is going to be a mess for sure, noone will trust the mail in ballot (and for good reasons), the SC is going to have hard time no being discredited, and Pelosi will likely be POTUS this January.

    Interesting times ahead, 2021 could end up being even worst than 2020 !

    • How is the mail in ballots any less reliable or trust worthy then the rest of their electoral system? Their entire system is a shambles designed to give the illusion of democracy.

      1) Proven cases of Electronic voting weakenesses.
      2) Chads.
      3) Exclusion of voters based on demographic reasons…
      4) Votes dont actually count as the college system allows state votes to be cast against the overwhelming will of the voters.

      • Millions are going to receive ballots that are not their, ballots can be harvested, dem or gop likely areas are going to see their ballots disapear (it happened) we all receive previous tenants/owners letters.A mess.

        • Just as easy for either side to rig it, and the electoral process is broken regardless…. Voters don’t vote, they indicate their preferences and the college votes….

          • Yes it s an electoral college, it s far from perfect for sure but without it, only Cal/NY would matter, Hillary got 3 Millions vote more but 7 of them were in Cal/NY (This year Biden will have 80% in these 2 states). Trump had the popular vote in the other states

          • Trump has already publicly urged his supporters to hack the mail ballot system and vote multiple times. Either way it’s no lose for him. If the system fails under stress he harvests unlawful votes . If it doesn’t he says look at everyone gaming the system and the dems never got caught

      • 1) Proven cases of Electronic voting weakenesses.
        Was unware of this. I thought the voting system for sentators was the only part that was democratic. The senators are chosen and backed by billionaires/ corporate or world bank backers. The media and hollywood is rigged with propaganda from murdoch, Israel and the state. The masses vote based on media repitition, that is how elections are decided in a democracy.
        Joe rogan podcast was bought out for $100million. All of a sudden joe has gone right wing. This is how the world works, individuals do not vote, societies do.

        • If your actually interested, do a google search for “electronic election voting system weaknesses”

          As for societies voting..your right in this, I was talking about the idea that when you vote it actually counts for something, not the fact that the majority of voters vote based on social conformity grounds.

          In the US system people are given the illusion of a vote for a president when all they really are getting is the right to indicate their preference, and all the carry on about rigging this election, or this method are distractions as the delegates and super delegates are not required to follow their wishes..

          • Agree, It is exactly how the propaganda works. Keep repeating “vote”, all the NBA players say “vote”, they are all sheep repeating the illusion. As if sleepy Joe is fit to be president in his geriatric state. He was the chosen candidate of those that run the Fed and the world banks and the war mongerors. Trump love him or hate him at least stands up to the gun lobby and nut cases like Bolton. Personally a Bernie Sanders fan but obviously they don’t want a great america for all just the filthy rich.

  2. So you advocate a non popular vote system because it may favour locations with the most voters…..

      • How is that democratic? You could have the situation where 90% of the voters are in 1 or 2 states and they never get a say….

        It’s still irrelevant as the college does not have to vote with the state…. 7 voted against the state’s last time….

        It’s a facade at best.

        • They get a say, just not all the say.It s the system they chose (The dem will change it as soon as they will be able to, and will then be able to keep winning forever (The cities were dems are in since WW2 are fantastic for sure I cannot wait, even CA is now a monstrosity))

          • Created hundreds of years ago without the will of the people where the constraints of travel were huge, and by a bunch of people more concerned with protection of their power against foreign monarchs that they were with actual voters….

        • Calm down crazies. US has a federalist-state model. Yes its fair cause its transparent and you know how it works. If only Dems could win outside major cities. Oh wait its their ideas that let them down.

          • I personally don’t care if the US system is fair or transparent, what I find more disturbing is that someone thinks it’s transparent or democratic….and these people assess their own voting here with this level of analysis.

            There are hundreds is ways their system can be corrupted, to claim it’s corrupt because Trump claims it just shows a lack of understanding of how their system works.

    • The college was designed to ensure another check in the system against a popular vote which was not in the interest of the nation by patricians. In 2016 this flipped as the college and the popular vote contradicted each other but the college prevails.

      • Where did you get that from? All the reading I have seen around this has stated clearly the reason the college system was created because it was not reasonable to expect the states to be able to get their ballot results to Washington, but sending a delegate was easier.

        Regardless, if what your saying is the reason then it was a rigged system from day one.
        Democracy is governance by the rule of the majority, a democratic government doesn’t need to protect itself from the risk of majority vote….

        • That (distance) may have been an ostensible reason but the founding fathers were not democrats in the Athenian sense. Jefferson was quite pessimistic about American democracy, and saw that even violent regeneration may be necessary to protect it from tyranny. The groundwork was done in the shadow of both the Enlightenment and the English Civil War which gave them the core principles and documents in order to craft their own government, ie democracy was for fit gentlemen and ought to safeguard itself from the hoi polloi.

        • Does the House of Lords, nowadays knows as the senate exist for this very reason, to prevent a popular vote alone upturning the system.

  3. Viewer question of the week: How do you think markets will respond to a win in either direction?

    • same – both will need massive stimulus to get things going again. USD will stay stronger against many currencies but ultimately will lose against gold.
      Buy gold, copper and nickel miners. Infrastructure companies like DOW will probably do well as well but I will opt for international global player – BIP perhaps.
      Renewable energy companies too as most countries will be targeting the environment as part of the stimulus (except for us).

      To sum it up – certain sectors will do well but not sure if overall markets will go much higher or lower from wherever they will be at the time results settle.

    • – Doesn’t matter. Does the $ 26 of US government debt go away when either Biden or Trump wins ? (spoiler: No, it doesn’t). On top of that: when Trump introduced the new tax legislation the Democrats also liked the tax cuts for the corporate sector.
      – It’s actually the opposite. the markets determine which of the candidates wins. A “weak” economy is Always bad for the incumbent (party). Think: George H. Bush/Clinton (1992), Obama/McCain (2008).
      – Although the Republicans are busy to rig the elections in favour of their republican friends Think: presidency, Congress, state parliaments. In that regard I wouldn’t bet on Biden to win.

  4. From the outside it all looks like such a shambles that they need to hand over the running of their elections to another country. Even if they did consider that, both sides seem so paranoid that they wouldn’t be able to agree on a country to run it. Picking random people from the populace? Referendums on everything? AI? If they didn’t have so many guns and so much soft power we’d be ignoring them like we do for 90% of the dysfunctional states.

    • Skip, you’re finally getting onboard with the way the real world works.

      You know the drill: an election is an advance auction of stolen goods. 😉

      • Are you daft Dominic … same thing I’ve said since first day at MB and “how it works” no it was not always like that.

        The Road From Mont Pèlerin The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective – Philip Mirowski Dieter Plehwe

        All attributed and referenced and quibbling about time and interest rates between AET and Chicago is a thimble full compared to the mountain of other agreements. The McCrazzypants part is so much of the dogma had already been refuted, models, econometrics, laws [tm], yet all was used to roll back all the firewalls post GD and here we are all over again … Kudos.

        Its this simple … corrupt incentives = outcomes …. some call these liberties and freedoms [tm] …

        • Why do you reference all these works like they’re been delivered from on high by a Supreme Being? Like they are ‘absolute truth’.

          They’re nothing of the sort — they’re just the thoughts and opinions of ordinary people who think they have an angle on something. Maybe they’re biased? Perhaps they have an agenda? More than likely. I don’t even recognise their names — perhaps because the dross they wrote was ignored by most sensible people? Just maybe …

          Skip, I’m one of the very few people I know who’ve seen and assessed both sides of the economic divide — I started out like most do with Keynes and then later in life discovered AET and thought: Fck – this all makes sense (finally).

          I don’t need (nor want ) to be preached to about this — I’ve got this under control. I’m in a comfortable place now. Dismantling contemporary economic theory is like shooting fish in a barrel — it’s so easy, it’s embarrassing. And I must confess, I feel embarrassed for the people who actually attach credibility to some this tripe.

          • Makes sense … bias confirmation …

            Seriously Dominic you seem to have about the equivalent of freshman’s understanding of the topic being discussed and blind sided by an Upton quote.

          • No point preaching to me, skip. You have your views and I have mine. What’s the big deal?

            And it was Mencken, not Upton, just FYI.

      • You can’t make this stuff up …..

        “The application of economic reasoning to a whole range of problems in law, sociology, history, and political science has had a far‐​reaching impact on the way social problems are currently investigated and has given rise to the Law and Economics movement and to Public Choice Theory. This procedure is best summarized by one of its most important practitioners, Gary Becker, who maintained: “The combined assumptions of maximizing behavior, market equilibrium, and stable preferences, used relentlessly and unflinchingly, form the heart of the economic approach as I see it.” That almost any social problem is amenable to economic analysis (i.e., that is allows one to reach original and valid conclusions) does not, of course, preclude approaching these same problems in more traditional ways, as some critics of what has been called the Chicago School’s “economic imperialism” have contended. It simply allows new and different insights into a particular set of social questions and permits conceiving of problems in terms of people attempting to maximize certain values. The economic approach of which Becker writes seeks not to dislodge the more traditional modes of analysis, but to supplement them. This approach, possibly more than anything else, is the defining characteristic of the modern Chicago School: its emphasis on price theory and its unrelenting application to problems of public policy. For all practical purposes, this approach was initiated by Friedman and extended and refined by Becker.

        Libertarians are indebted to the proponents of the Chicago School for bringing to bear their analysis of economic phenomena on misguided political policies and for energizing political forces around the world in support of the free market.”


        But yeah monetarism …. mirth ….

        • I actually read that, skip, and didn’t understand a word. The person who wrote it is either not a particularly articulate person or hasn’t a clue what they’re talking about. You know the old tactic, son: write some convoluted waffle that no one understands but is ultimately impressed by because they don’t understand it. Looks impressive but actually isn’t.

          Not me, old fruit. Way too old (and wily) for that shyte. Translate it into English and I’ll dismantle it.

        • You don’t get to make demands and if your so called knowledge on the topic is so weak just admit it and stop with the pettifoggery.

        • – The nutty followers of Monetarism, the Austrian school, the Chicago school are all who hate the FED, the RBA, the RBNZ, the government (intervention, distortion etc. whatever you want to call it). and are all for a “free markets” (= crony capitalism).

  5. – Joseph Biden, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton.These 3 persons – for me – confirm that the US already has become a banana repuplic. Now with the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg (US high court) the reality of a civil war has become a REAL possibility and – I fear – inevitable. Before the country falls apart in several independent states.
    – The Trump administration has waged (financial, economic) war on the economics engines of the US economy and people are surprised to see that the US economy is tanking ?

    • I don’t know where you live Willy but here in Brissy, we’re pretty sanguine about RBG’s death. Unlikely to change the world, mate.

      • – Yes & No. All appointments for the US high court in the last say 20 years have shown a steady shift towards a more “conservative” (= right wing) pro business US High Court. And that’s to the detriment of the average Joe Sixpack.

        • I would say that fiat money has been to the detriment of Joe Sixpack in a far more insidious way than some Supreme Court pick could ever be. But that’s just me.

          • I would agree with that. The rotten debt system is the problem. Kids in serious debt just to get a useless degree. Like here really..

          • Yes fiat caused all the C-corps to offshore their jobs … caused wages and productivity to diverge in the 70s … force est 34T in fiat to camp out in tax havens … forced more and more public services to be privatized … and forced everyone to submit to supply side economics …

          • Skip, I’m beginning to think you live in a parallel universe. Why? Because in my world, demand-side economics is the only economics I see being practiced.

            Evidence: “lack of aggregate demand”. That’s all the economic commentariat speak about. That’s demand side economics.

            I strongly suggest you look up the definition of supply side economics.

  6. The Traveling Wilbur

    Time to protect your wives, children and small sweater-vest-wearing-dogs peoples (in whichever order you find most appealing).

    Went long ASX-200 this arvo. Very long.

  7. The Traveling Wilbur

    And Trump has come back in to $2.00 even (from $2.05, on Sportsbet). Biden still about 135.

    And paying $1.80.


    • The Traveling Wilbur

      I know, right. But it’s so hard differentiating between complete tat enmass sometimes. Easily done.

      Edit: This is about next year’s Bronco’s playing list picks yeah?