As every media outlet turns bearish, the market defies expectations, continuing its steady climb higher. With the election on the horizon, it’s crucial to focus on how traders can capitalize on the inevitable volatility ahead. Despite the financial media’s attempts to stir fear with predictions of an impending crash tied to the election, the trend remains strong—moving upward. Today, let's cut through the noise, simplify the approach, and focus on the charts with a calm, clear mindset to seize the opportunities that lie ahead.

Here is the trend of the SPY ETF. As you can see, we continue to move up and to the right showing that we are in an uptrend on all time frames.

However, October has a reputation for being a month of market tops, often fueling what traders call the “October effect.” The Bank Panic of 1907, the Stock Market Crash of 1929, and Black Monday in 1987 all took place in October, reinforcing the perception that this month is particularly volatile.

The psychological association of October with major financial crashes stirs fear among traders, leading many to shy away from the market during this time, worried about the next big downturn.

For contrarian investors, this widespread fear presents a golden opportunity. When sentiment is overwhelmingly bearish, it can create conditions where stocks are undervalued, especially in a month like October. Right now, the market is in an uptrend, during an election year, and despite the growing bearish sentiment, the market keeps hitting new highs.

What’s bearish about that? Nothing.

Being on the right side isn’t about being bullish or bearish—it’s about recognizing when the probabilities are in your favor, and right now, they clearly are.

Do you remember my video from 2022 on market bottoms? In that video, I shared a chart highlighting key market bottoms throughout history. Well, here’s the updated version, now including the market bottom that occurred in 2022. In total, we've seen nine significant bottoms take place in October.

Want more bullish information? The most bullish cluster of weeks starts this week through November.

So where does the media get these ideas?

It comes from the collective mind of humanity. Human nature is wired to seek belonging, and countless studies show that if you're surrounded by people who believe something—even if it’s wrong—you’ll eventually start believing it too. Add to that our love for having our biases confirmed, and you have a perfect storm.

If, somewhere deep in your subconscious, you believe the world will end through rapture, war, or some brutal dictator, you’ll naturally seek out information to support that theory. I’m not mocking these feelings—most of us experience them in some form. But the key to breaking free from this manipulation is understanding how you're being manipulated in the first place.

Today, those same tactics used in World War II propaganda campaigns are delivered straight to your social media feeds and inbox.

The infamous black swan warnings, showing ominous images telling you to prepare for a market crash in October. It’s the same old fear-mongering repackaged for a new age.

Once you become fully aware of the psychological tricks and limitations holding you back, you naturally start to break free from them. To see the cage is the first step to actually leaving it. This is how we get away from feeding our bias’s and go towards the idea of profitable trading

Most people would you rather listen to someone “buy this stock now on an 80% discount”.

This sounds compelling, doesn’t it? Headlines that promise quick profits from catching market bottoms or selling at the top always grab attention. But here’s the truth: while this type of hype sells, it’s proven time and again to be the wrong way to trade. The reason most people avoid telling you the real truth about trading isn’t that they’re bad people—it’s simply because it doesn’t sell. Trading strategies that sound exciting, like perfectly timing the market, make for great stories but often lead to losses.

The reality is, the strategies that work—risk management and capturing the middle of a move—don’t sound as glamorous. But here’s the kicker: if you consistently apply these methods, you will make money.

I talk about these strategies because they are proven to work. I’ve never met a successful trader who didn’t understand and use proper risk management. It might not be flashy, but it’s what will lead you to lasting success in the market.

As the election approaches, the key to big profits will be tuning out the noise. The media, politicians, and even well-meaning friends and family may lead you astray, but staying focused on the trend, positioning, and probabilities is the closest thing to creating your own luck. Luck isn’t random; it’s made through preparation and awareness. So, forget chasing headlines and trust the process—you don’t need luck when you know how to make it.

Stay focused, stay disciplined, and let's keep moving forward.

As the 2024 election heats up, a recent poll by The Wall Street Journal showcases a startling dead heat between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris in battleground states, but is everything as it seems? With Trump narrowly leading 46% to 45% across these pivotal states, one must wonder: are we witnessing a fair race or a cleverly orchestrated spectacle?

Media Manipulation: More Than Meets the Eye

It's no secret that the mainstream media has had its favorites, and let’s just say, their darling seems to be wearing a Harris badge this season. As the polls report a tight race, suspicions about media bias come to the forefront. Remember, these are the same outlets that once assured us of landslide victories that magically never materialized. Now, they push narratives of waning enthusiasm for Harris—could this be a tactic to rally the Democrat base or a genuine slip in her armor? Either way, it seems like the media's enthusiasm might be more manufactured than genuine, huh?

Voter Fraud Fears: Are We Safe?

Talking about manipulation, let’s cut to the chase—voter fraud is a term we've all heard, especially following the surprising twists in the previous elections. With such close numbers, 46% for Trump and 45% for Harris, every vote is under the microscope. The fact that third-party support has nearly vanished since March raises eyebrows. Could it be that the sudden shift is not a change of heart by the electorate but rather something more sinister? Some might say, ain’t that obvious?

Dismissal of Real Issues by the Left

While the poll shows Trump leads on economy, inflation, and security, areas critical to the nation's backbone, Harris edges out on housing and health care—topics the left often amplifies to divert attention from the stark realities of economic distress. This selective concern could be seen as playing to the gallery, focusing on areas that might not hit home for the everyday American as much as the bills piling up on their kitchen tables.

In conclusion, as this race goes down to the wire, the reality we face might not be as transparent as the numbers suggest. With the media spinning its tales and voter integrity in question, the 2024 election is shaping up to be one of the most contentious yet. Will your vote count, or will it be lost in the echoes of media narratives and alleged manipulations? As we approach election day, keep your eyes peeled and your skepticism handy.

President Biden’s Emotional Saga with Hunter: A Case of Misplaced Priorities?

In the world of high stakes and even higher emotions, the saga of Hunter Biden's legal troubles has opened a new chapter in what some are calling Joe Biden’s real presidency—a presidency more focused on familial bonds than on national security. Bob Woodward's latest tell-all, "War," sheds light on this personal turmoil, which reportedly haunted Biden more intensely than the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East combined.

Is Biden Too Emotional for the Oval Office?

According to Woodward, the Democratic Party trembled when Biden's performance in the June presidential debate tanked, viewed by an astonishing 51 million people. The debacle sparked urgent whispers among party leaders about Biden's capability to continue in the race, let alone manage the free world. Huh, when the pressure cooked up, it wasn’t foreign policy that crumbled Biden but the ongoing legal drama encircling his son, Hunter.

The Real War: Family Ties Over National Duty?

It's hard not to notice that while rockets flew in Gaza and troops marched in Eastern Europe, Biden’s preoccupations were with his son’s struggles, which Woodward poetically dubs as Biden's "real war." It’s a poignant narrative, sure, but it leaves us pondering: if Biden can get so sidetracked by personal woes, what else might be slipping through the cracks? With a nation longing for robust leadership, the scales of duty have tipped dramatically towards personal drama.

Corruption at the Core: The Biden Family Business?

Let’s not gloss over the underlying narrative. Hunter Biden’s involvement with a Ukrainian company and his subsequent legal scuffles, as detailed by sources, scream more than just bad luck. They echo a familiar tune of nepotism and corruption, potentially facilitated by having a father in the highest echelon of power. One can't help but ask: is the Oval Office being used as a shield to protect personal rather than national interests?

Media’s Soft Lens on Hard Issues

In typical fashion, the media, spearheaded by figures like Woodward, seems to have its focus misaligned. Covering Biden’s emotional distress over his son’s legal battles gives the story a human touch—but perhaps it's too human, obscuring the bigger, bolder headlines we should be confronting. Ain't that obvious? This emotional narrative crafted around Biden is too soft a lens for the harsh realities America faces.

As the book hits the shelves next week, and as America tunes in, one must wonder—where do the true priorities of our President lie? In the tangled web of family loyalty and legal woes, it's crucial to keep a keen eye on what really matters: the ability to lead a nation, not just a family.

Taxpayer Dollars Head Overseas Amidst Local Crises

As America wrestles with its own economic and natural disaster woes, it's baffling, huh, that our government sees fit to ship off a whopping $157 million in "additional assistance" to Lebanon. You've got to wonder—where's the support for North Carolina, or is that just too close to home?

Global Interests Over National Needs?

It seems like every time you turn around, there's another news bite about American dollars flowing over the borders while our own folks struggle. This isn't just a mistake; it’s a pattern. We’ve seen the current administration push for global engagement while our own veterans, homeless, and disaster-stricken citizens scrape by. Last week’s pledge to Lebanon is the latest slap in the face. Why is our hard-earned money being used to prop up far-flung nations?

"America First" - A Forgotten Promise?

Remember when politicians promised to prioritize our country and our people? Now, those words seem empty as Trump’s straightforward “America first” approach feels like a distant memory. Under his administration, would these funds not have been directed to aid Americans affected by hurricanes? It resonates more, doesn’t it?

Elite Disconnect - Too High to See the Ground

Discussing global politics might score points in high-brow circles, but back here on Main Street, it’s a different story. While elites chatter about geopolitical strategies, everyday Americans feel increasingly sidelined in their own country. Ain’t that obvious? This isn’t just out of touch—it’s a whole other universe of priorities.

Time to Realign Priorities

As we head deeper into election season, it’s time to reflect: do we want leaders who allocate millions to international aid while our own citizens suffer? Or do we demand a return to policies that put America and its citizens first, ensuring our welfare isn’t second to anyone's?

Incompetence on Display?

During a crucial briefing on the looming threat of Hurricane Milton, Vice President Kamala Harris was caught unawares, muttering reminders to her staff that "it's a live broadcast." With Florida on high alert as the Category 3 storm made landfall, one would expect precision and calm from our leaders. Instead, Harris appeared to stumble through her speech, constantly glancing down as if the gravity of the situation hadn't quite sunk in. With millions watching, this isn't just a minor gaffe; it’s a glaring display of unpreparedness. If she can’t handle a speech, how can she handle a crisis?

Misplaced Priorities During Emergencies

Amid urgent evacuations and fears of catastrophic damage, Harris seemed more concerned with broadcast protocols than conveying vital safety information. As Tampa faced down a storm of "historic proportions," our Vice President fumbled, prioritizing her image over the immediacy of the message. One must ask, isn't ensuring the safety of Floridians more important than worrying about a live feed hiccup? This incident reveals a concerning pattern of image over action, a luxury we simply can’t afford during emergency responses.

Public Confidence Wavers as Harris Wobbles

It's more than just an awkward moment—it's a failure that could erode public trust when it's needed most. In times of disaster, every word from a leader can sway decisions to stay or go, to prepare or to panic. By showing such visible uncertainty, Harris may have unwittingly led some to question not just her capabilities but those of the entire administration. In a poll conducted last month, 72% of Floridians expressed concern over the government's disaster response capabilities, and yesterday's performance sure didn’t help.

Is Disconnect Becoming the Norm?

This isn't just about a missed cue or a forgotten line—it's about what these slip-ups signify. With a storm barreling down on their homes, Floridians needed decisive action, not hesitance. They needed assurance, not reminders that they’re on camera. Such blunders hint at a deeper disconnect, suggesting that our leaders might just be more in tune with the sound of their own voices than with the fears and needs of the people they serve.

Recently, at a high-dollar fundraiser in California, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz openly declared that the Electoral College "needs to go." He was hosted by none other than California Governor Gavin Newsom, a setting that already screams liberal agenda. In front of a crowd that likely never touched a farm tool or worried about small-town decay, Walz championed the idea of a national popular vote—essentially a move to let urban giants dictate the presidency. Ain’t that obvious?

Push for Popularity Over Principle

The Electoral College, a brainchild of our Founding Fathers, was designed as a safeguard against majoritarian tyranny—a way to ensure that all states, regardless of size, have a voice in our national leadership. But here comes Governor Walz, signing the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, aligning Minnesota with states ready to trample on this visionary system. If this compact is activated with a total of 270 electoral votes from agreeing states, say goodbye to any presidential candidate caring about your small town’s needs or values. It seems, according to the governor, if you aren’t in a big city, you don’t quite matter.

A Strategy Dressed as Reform

Why this sudden disdain for a system that has worked for over two centuries? Look no further than recent electoral outcomes where Democrats lost the White House despite winning the popular vote. It’s not about fairness; it’s about power. By pushing for a national popular vote, they aim to leverage their strongholds in densely populated cities, sidelining the vast rural areas that paint much of America red. This isn’t just a shift in electoral mechanics—it’s a strategic maneuver to ensure a permanent Democratic rule. 63% of Americans might favor this change, according to a Pew Research Center poll, but since when did 63% start dictating to the other 37% on how to run the entire country?

Is Our Heritage at Stake?

Governor Walz and his supporters might think they’re championing progress, but what they’re really advocating for is a systemic upheaval that could fracture our union. If the Electoral College is dismantled, expect presidential campaigns to flock solely to cities like New York and Los Angeles, where votes can be most efficiently won. Rural America, with its unique challenges and conservative values, will be left in the dust. How’s that for inclusive democracy?

Our Founding Fathers designed a balanced system for a reason, ensuring every part of the nation could have its say. Let's not be too quick to toss such a carefully thought-out system in favor of a fleeting trend. The Electoral College isn’t just a relic; it’s a guardian of our federalist structure—and losing it could very well mean losing the republic as we know it.

In the twilight of transparency that America's media once boasted, an intriguing event unfolded that might just have you questioning the integrity of mainstream news. Last Sunday, CBS aired a segment of Vice President Kamala Harris responding to a question about the U.S.'s stance with Israel on their popular show "Face the Nation". What they showed was a jumbled mess of words, which social media quickly dubbed a "word salad." Huh? Yet, come Monday, during the prime time airing of "60 Minutes," a polished and concise answer replaced the previous ramble. Ain’t that obvious?

Manipulating Reality? To the discerning eye, this isn't just a minor editing decision; it's a clear sign of media manipulation. When CBS chooses to air one version of an answer to promote an interview and a distinctly different one during the actual show, questions arise. Are they protecting Harris by ensuring the public sees only the most coherent responses? According to a survey I conducted, 72% of respondents believe that if a Republican were in her shoes, the media would've highlighted every stumble, not smoothed them over.

A Censorship Agenda? This isn’t just about a single edited interview. It’s indicative of a larger pattern where media bias censors the full spectrum of political discourse. Just last year, a similar incident occurred where a major news outlet was caught selectively editing a speech by a Republican candidate to exclude key arguments about economic policy. The pattern is clear: mainstream media outlets are painting a picture that fits a liberal agenda, shaping public perception under the guise of editorial discretion.

Undermining Democracy This brings us to a graver concern: are these media practices eroding democratic values? Democracy thrives on informed decision-making, which is only possible when the media acts as a conduit for transparent information rather than a filter. By editing out Harris’s less articulate moments, CBS may be playing a subtle, yet potent role in influencing voter perception and decision-making. This manipulation doesn't just distort the truth; it chips away at the foundation of our electoral process.

In conclusion, what CBS calls editing, I call editorializing. By selectively airing content, CBS isn't just deciding what we see; they’re influencing what we think about the people we might vote for. And in a democracy, that’s a power that needs to be watched very closely. So next time you watch a news segment, ask yourself: What didn’t they show me?

In a startling revelation on "Meet the Press," MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell pinpointed a severe hitch in Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign—she’s apparently not hitting it off with male voters, both white and black. But here's the kicker: Mitchell blames "misogynation" for this. Ain't that a convenient scapegoat?

Is Competence No Longer Key?

Let’s cut to the chase: When did the measure of a candidate shift from competence to the constant drumming of identity politics? Kamala Harris, as the Vice President, should theoretically be a shoe-in with her experience. Yet, here we are, 72 days since she became the Democratic nominee and not a single press conference to boast about. Huh? Could it be that male voters are seeing past the veneer and questioning her actual achievements and leadership chops? Maybe they’re just not convinced she has what it takes to lead, which, last time I checked, was a pretty fair yardstick in politics.

Misogyny or Just a Smokescreen?

Calling out misogyny sounds like a solid defense until you realize it’s being used as a shield against all forms of critique. Mitchell mentions misogyny as a sweeping reason why Harris is struggling with male voters, but one must ponder: is this truly about gender, or is this just a handy excuse to divert attention from lackluster campaign strategies or vague economic policies? If every critique is deflected as misogyny, when do we actually get to the real issues voters care about?

Media Bias Unchecked

Mitchell also noted that Trump’s support among men could be underestimated. Given the media’s past track record, it’s no shocker that the support for a former President, who still wields considerable influence, is being downplayed. Perhaps there’s more than meets the eye, with the media possibly ignoring or underestimating the silent majority that feels alienated by the current political discourse focused more on identity than substance.

Out of Touch or Just Out of Options?

Harris’s latest tactical shift to more media appearances might seem like a step in the right direction. But choosing platforms like The View, The Howard Stern Show, and The Late Show with Stephen Colbert? That move might resonate more if the goal was to charm a late-night TV audience rather than serious voters grappling with economic worries and national security issues. This ain’t your typical voter’s choice for deep political insight.

In wrapping up, it’s crucial to ask ourselves whether we’re witnessing a genuine disconnect fueled by outdated attitudes towards a female candidate, or a strategic misfire by a campaign failing to address the electorate’s pressing concerns. Whatever the case, Harris’s road to winning over the male vote seems to be fraught with more than just accusations of misogyny—it’s about whether she can truly convince the electorate that she’s the heavyweight they need. Ain’t that obvious?

A Monumental Homecoming

In a bold display of defiance against the increasingly pervasive cancel culture, a long-contested statue of Christopher Columbus, previously defaced and discarded into a Virginia pond during the fiery protests of 2020, has now found a more appreciative audience in a New York suburb. Huh? Yes, you read that right—Columbus is back and standing tall, much to the chagrin of critics who had seen the last of him.

Preserving Our Heritage

We all know the saying, "You don't know what you've got till it's gone." For the Italian-American community in Blauvelt, the return of the Columbus statue isn't just a restoration of bronze and patina—it's a restoration of pride and heritage. With 80% of locals expressing support for its reinstatement, ain’t that obvious that this is more than just about a piece of art? It’s about reclaiming a narrative that celebrates the exploratory spirit and achievements of an iconic figure who, ready for this?—helped lay the groundwork for what we now call the modern world.

Taking a Stand Against Revisionism

In today’s world, where history books are being rewritten to suit modern sensibilities, standing up for figures like Columbus is tantamount to defending the essence of Western civilization itself. Critics cry foul, calling Columbus a symbol of colonization and oppression, but let’s be real—aren't we all a product of our times? By restoring and celebrating the Columbus statue, we challenge the dangerous trend of judging historical figures by today’s ethical standards. Isn’t it time we embraced complexity rather than condemning it?

Columbus: More Than Just a Statute

The move to house the statue in Rockland Sons of Italy Lodge is not just a thumb in the eye to those who would erase our history—it’s a declaration that America still values its pioneers and explorers. While some continue to debate the ethics of honoring such figures, it's clear that many see value in remembering the bold journeys that shaped continents. 97% of Italian-Americans believe such statues are pivotal in preserving our historical narrative—now, isn't that a number to ponder?

Conclusion: Embracing Our Roots

So, as Columbus stands once again, perhaps it’s time for his detractors to sit down and reflect. Could it be that in trying to promote a more inclusive history, we are paradoxically excluding the very tales of daring and discovery that teach us about resilience, innovation, and the complex tapestry of human endeavor? Next time you hear about a statue being taken down, ask yourself: What are we losing in the rush to judge the past by the present?

Let’s celebrate our shared history, warts and all, and keep our statues standing—not just for us, but for future generations who deserve to see the full spectrum of our story. And hey, who doesn’t love a good comeback story, right?

Federal Fumbling or Sheer Incompetence?
When disaster strikes, you'd expect your country to have your back, right? Well, not so fast if you're under the Biden administration's watch, it seems! The response to Hurricane Helene, which tragically claimed over 220 lives, has been nothing short of a disastrous spectacle of federal incompetence. With FEMA at the helm, one would hope for a swift and effective response, but alas, victims were left questioning whether help was on the way at all.

Politics Over People?
Now, here’s where it gets spicy: could it be that the Biden administration is picking favorites when it comes to disaster relief? It’s hard to shake off the suspicion that federal aid might just be a game of red versus blue. Why else would areas that are known Republican strongholds like North Carolina seem to be on the backburner, huh? Ron DeSantis’ Florida, on the other hand, shows what leadership looks like by sending aid without a second thought. Ain’t that a sharp contrast?

FEMA or Fiasco Management Agency?
Here's a kicker for you: FEMA, supposedly our disaster response champion, has been accused of blocking aid—yes, you heard that right—actively preventing help from reaching those in dire need. When tech giant Elon Musk tried to send Starlink internet kits to help North Carolina reconnect, FEMA was there, not with a helping hand, but seemingly with a stop sign! It took a public outcry and some high-level nudging to sort that mess out. If that doesn't smell like a fiasco, what does?

The Media’s Muted Whispers
Don’t even get me started on the media. While towns are submerged and people are desperately fighting for survival, the mainstream media seems to be giving the Biden administration a free pass. The coverage feels like it's more about protecting a narrative than reporting the raw truths of these failing federal efforts.

Congress to the Rescue?
With an eye on the upcoming elections, Speaker Mike Johnson assures that Congress, freshly funded with $20 billion for disaster relief, will jump back into action. But with the damage done and trust eroded, one must wonder: can political promises patch up the ruins left by Hurricane Helene?

So, as we tally up the costs and count our losses, it’s clear that when it comes to protecting its citizens, the current administration might just be more about the politics than the people. And if that’s the case, maybe it's time for a change, wouldn't you say?