Archive

2024

Browsing

Former President Donald Trump held a rally in Michigan on Friday night where he slammed Vice President Kamala Harris for ‘partying’ while tension in the Middle East boiled over.

Trump spoke in Traverse City, as Israeli fighter jets were bombarding Iranian military targets and Harris was at a rally in Houston with Beyonce.

‘You know where she is tonight?’ Trump asked the crowd. ‘She’s out partying. So Israel is attacking. We’ve got a war going on, and she’s out partying. At least we’re working to make America great again. That’s what we’re doing. Kamala, Kamala, she’s the worst president in the history of our country.’

Israel launched its largest ever attack on Iran Friday in a wave of retaliatory airstrikes after the Islamic Republic fired a barrage of missiles toward Israelis earlier this month. 

Additionally, the Trump campaign put out a press release with a photo of Trump in Austin earlier in the day when he highlighted ‘the tragic human cost of Kamala’s border invasion’ and was joined by the mother of Jocelyn Nungary, whose daughter was murdered allegedly by illegal immigrants.

‘Kamala, meanwhile, will be partying with celebrities in Houston as she makes another desperate attempt to salvage her flailing campaign,’ the campaign said. ‘Don’t expect her to apologize to the families of Jocelyn Nungaray or any of the other American citizens victimized by illegals she imported into our communities — she couldn’t care less. In Kamala’s America, illegal immigrants are the priority as Americans are relegated to the second tier in their own country. The split screen tells you all you need to know.’

Harris was campaigning in Houston, Texas on Friday night at a rally where an estimated 30,000 people showed up to hear from the presidential candidate as well as music superstar Beyonce. 

Beyoncé, whose hit song ‘Freedom’ has been adopted by the vice president as her campaign trail anthem, spoke ahead of Harris and introduced her at the event, which leaned heavily into reproductive rights.

‘It’s time for America to sing a new song,’ Beyoncé said as she formally endorsed the vice president in her White House race against former President Trump. ‘Ladies and gentlemen, please give a big, loud, Texas welcome to the next President of the United States, Vice President Kamala Harris.’

And she emphasized that ‘I’m not here as a celebrity, I’m not here as a politician, I’m here as a mother. A mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in. A world where we have the freedom to control our bodies.’

Trump added during his rally that ‘Kamala is also in total freefall with the Arab and Muslim population in Michigan. She’s in a freefall. She sent their jobs overseas, brought crime to their cities and tonight in the Middle East, it’s like a tinderbox. It’s ready to explode. People are being killed at levels that we’ve never seen before and that’s taking place right now. In Michigan she is in literally a freefall. They’ve had it with her. Nobody’s in charge. Joe Biden is asleep. Kamala is at a dance party with Beyonce.’

Fox News Digital reached out to the Harris campaign for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

‘During his low-energy speech in Michigan tonight, @realDonaldTrump, Arrived 3 hours late and spoke to a dwindling crowd, Insulted Detroit, Attacked Beyoncé, said his handlers tell him women don’t like him,’ Harris spokesperson Sarafina Chitika posted on X on Friday night.

Fox News Digital’s Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

LOS ANGELES — The Major League Players Association has yet to has yet to speak to MLB officials about where the Tampa Bay Rays might play in 2025 with Tropicana Field’s severe roof damage caused by Hurricane Milton.

“I don’t have a sense yet but diligence – formal and informal – is still being done on the ballpark itself,’ said Tony Clark said, executive director of the players association. ‘The determination is going to have to made as to whether or not adjustments to that ballpark can be made either into 2025, 2026 or later.

‘In the near term, we have to ensure that if the facility the major league players aren’t going to be playing in for 2025 isn’t a major-league ballpark, it is of major-league quality at the time the players step onto the field. All of that is in process.’

MLB would like at least a temporary home near the St. Petersburg-Tampa area to cause the least amount of disruption to players and fans.

“Depending on the facility, depending on the location of the facility, depending on how it’s going to otherwise affect the schedule,’ Clark said, “all of that’s being taken into account at the same time Tampa is being assessed.

Follow every MLB game: Latest MLB scores, stats, schedules and standings.

“Right now, formally, there’s nothing that we’ve sat down and suggested that the league has determined that they’d like go to here. At that point in time, we will have to step in and make sure that the ballpark and the standards are again major-league [quality].’

Clark, who said it’s not ideal that two of their major-league teams could be playing in minor-league facilities, also said he was pleased that MLB determined that natural grass, instead of artificial turf, will be used by the Athletics when they play their home games in Sacramento.

‘We have been vocal about the surface for awhile,’ Clark said. “So that the decision was formally made that its going to be grass, it ensures that on that issue player sentiment was part of the conversation, as it always is when it comes to health and safety. There’s still a lot of work to be done in other areas, but that was a big one.’

Follow Nightengale on X: @Bnightengale

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

UFC 308 is shaping up to be a pugilist’s delight as Ilia Topuria takes on Max Holloway live from Etihad Arena, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.

It will be a daytime affair for those stateside who can watch a bevy of prelims unfold ahead of the main card, which features two of the better punchers in UFC.

Topuria comes in with a flawless 15-0-0 record, with five of those fights coming by way of (T)KO. What he may lack in reach he fully makes up for in a balanced and measured attack.

He takes on the equally heavy-hitting Holloway whose last two fights ended in knockout. He took down Justin Gaethje in the fifth round in UFC 300 and took three rounds to take down Jung Chan-sung at UFC Fight Night in Aug. 2023.

Here are all of the updates and what you need to know about UFC 308 and Topuria vs. Holloway.

Ilia Topuria vs. Max Holloway: TV, time, streaming info

Ilia Topuria takes on Max Holloway in the main event for UFC 308 live from the Etihad Arena, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Here is what you need to know about the fight.

Date: Saturday, Oct. 26
Time: Main card: 2 p.m. ET; prelims start at 10 a.m. ET
Streaming: PPV on ESPN+; prelims on ESPN+
Location: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

Catch UFC 308 with ESPN+ subscription and Topuria-Holloway with an ESPN+ PPV

UFC 308 start time

Prelims: 10 a.m. ET / 7 a.m. PT (ESPN+)
Main card: 2 p.m. ET / 11 p.m. PT (PPV on ESPN+)

UFC 308 odds

All odds are for moneyline bets (as of Friday), according to BetMGM.

Ilia Topuria (c) (-250) vs. Max Holloway (+200)
Robert Whittaker (+200) vs. Khamzat Chimaev (-250)
Magomed Ankalaev (-400) vs. Aleksandar Rakic (+300)
Lerone Murphy (-300) vs. Dan Ige (+240)
Shara Magomedov (-175)vs. Armen Petrosyan (+145)
Raul Rosas Jr. (-1000) vs. Aoriqileng (+650)
Ibo Aslan (+105) vs. Rafael Cerqueira (-125)
Geoff Neal (-300) vs. Rafael Dos Anjos (+240)
Mateusz Rebecki (+240) vs. Myktybek Orolbai (-300)
Abus Magomedov (-145) vs. Brunno Ferreira (+120)
Kennedy Nzechukwu (-700) vs. Chris Barnett (+500)
Farid Basharat (-650) vs. Victor Hugo (+475)
Ismail Naurdiev (-190) vs. Bruno Silva (+160)
Rinat Fakhretdinov (-225) vs. Carlos Leal (+185)

UFC 308 fight card

Main card

Ilia Topuria (c) vs. Max Holloway (featherweight title bout)
Robert Whittaker vs. Khamzat Chimaev (middleweight)
Magomed Ankalaev vs. Aleksandar Rakic (light heavyweight)
Lerone Murphy vs. Dan Ige (featherweight)
Shara Magomedov vs. Armen Petrosyan (middleweight)

Prelims

Ibo Aslan vs. Rafael Cerqueira (light heavyweight)
Geoff Neal vs. Rafael Dos Anjos (welterweight)
Mateusz Rebecki vs. Myktybek Orolbai (catch weight)
Abus Magomedov vs. Brunno Ferreira (middleweight)
Kennedy Nzechukwu vs. Chris Barnett (heavyweight)
Farid Basharat vs. Victor Hugo (featherweight)
Ismail Naurdiev vs. Bruno Silva (middleweight)
Rinat Fakhretdinov vs. Carlos Leal (welterweight)

Rinat Fakhretdinov vs. Carlos Leal (welterweight): Results, Analysis

Round 1: Fakhretdinov took a minute to get this fight on the ground, But Leal did well to get this back onto his feet. Leal is clearly comfortable getting out of takedowns and also connecting punches to Fakhretdinov’s face.
Round 2: Leal is elusive and is proving to be an issue for the favorite Fakhretdinov who can sure take a punch. Leal has had the better of significant strikes. But the round comes to a close with Fakhretdinov taking Leal to the mat. Too little too late.
Round 3: Both fighters left it all out there in this first prelim fight. It’s a shame that there was but a drizzle of fans to see it unfold at the Etihad Arena. Leal was inspiring in his takedown defense and ability to cause problems with his strikes.
Result: Rinat Fakhretdinov wins by unanimous decision (29-28; 29-28; 30-27) – Not sure what the judges saw, but Fakhretdinov continues his win streak to 23.

Ismail Naurdiev vs. Bruno Silva (middleweight): Results, analysis

Round 1: Naurdiev is the clear aggressor to kick off the proceedings. He managed to get in a rear naked choke just before the end of the round but couldn’t quite finish the move.
Round 2: The best way to describe what we are seeing out of Silva is lackluster. He isn’t fighting with the same measure of urgency as Naurdiev who is clearly dictating things.

We occasionally recommend interesting products and services. If you make a purchase by clicking one of the links, we may earn an affiliate fee. USA TODAY Network newsrooms operate independently, and this doesn’t influence our coverage.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

As someone who used to write regularly for the newspaper, it has been a long time since I have had an occasion to say this but . . . Bravo, Washington Post.

This week, the Post announced that not only would it not endorse a candidate this year, but it would not do so in the future. Over two decades ago, I wrote a column calling for newspapers to end the practice of all election endorsements. (Yes, before all things seemed to turn on how you feel about Donald Trump). I have continued to push the press to abandon this pernicious practice.

When I first came out against political endorsements, the media had not taken the plunge into advocacy journalism, which is now strangling the life out of this industry.

As former New York Times writer (and now Howard University journalism professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones has declared, ‘all journalism is activism.’

After a series of interviews with over 75 media leaders,  Leonard Downie Jr., former Washington Post executive editor, and Andrew Heyward, former CBS News president, reaffirmed this shift. As Emilio Garcia-Ruiz, editor-in-chief at the San Francisco Chronicle, stated: ‘Objectivity has got to go.’

The result has been trust in the media plummeting to an all-time low. Revenues and readership are falling as outlets struggle to survive. Yet, reporters are still refusing to reconsider the abandonment of neutrality and objectivity.

Recently, Post owner Jeff Bezos brought in Washington Post publisher and CEO William Lewis, who promptly delivered a truth bomb in the middle of the newsroom. He told the staff, ‘Let’s not sugarcoat it…We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right? I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.’

The response was calls for Lewis and other editors to be canned. These reporters would rather give up their very jobs than their bias.

Now Lewis is under fire again after announcing, ‘We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates.’

The Washington Post Guild immediately went ballistic at the thought of not openly supporting Kamala Harris, though many would point out that the Post has hardly been subtle in its coverage on that point.

The Guild expressed alarm at the thought of leaving readers to reach their own conclusions ‘a mere 11 days ahead of an immensely consequential election.’ According to the staff, the Post needs ‘to help guide readers,’ and ‘according to our own reporters and Guild members, an endorsement for Harris was already drafted, and the decision not to publish was made by The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos.’

Perish the thought that the Post would start to raise free-range readers left to reach their own conclusions.

The Post and other papers are writing for each other and core Democratic readers. The rest of America is moving on to new sources of information on social media and elsewhere.

Former executive editor Martin ‘Marty’ Baron and others went into absolute vapors. Baron declared, ‘This is cowardice, with democracy as its casualty.’

Others retreated into anonymity to denounce their management, with some making precisely the case for not making such an endorsement: ‘It very disingenuously draws false equivalencies. This is not, for example, Kamala Harris vs. Mitt Romney. This is Kamala Harris against someone who tried to disenfranchise the electorate last time.’

It is ironic since, at the time, Romney was portrayed as a fascist, as were prior Republican nominees.

One of the most curious responses came from Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders: ‘This is what Oligarchy is about. Jeff Bezos, the 2nd wealthiest person in the world and the owner of the Washington Post, overrides his editorial board and refuses to endorse Kamala.’

An oligarchy is defined as ‘government by the few.’ That is precisely what the public sees in an effective state media and why ‘Let’s Go Brandon!’ became a type of ‘Yankee Doodling’ of the political and media establishment.

Sanders’ objection is that the owner decided not to exercise the power of the few but instead left the choice to voters. According to Sanders, that is the definition of oligarchy in declining to act as an oligarch.

As discussed years ago, the decision of newspapers to engage in political endorsements has had a corrosive influence for years. It destroys the separation between newspapers and those who are supposed to be the subjects of their investigatory and journalistic work.

My prior column called for the termination of not just presidential endorsements, though it is a good start. There should be a commitment to total neutrality in all elections, from judges to senators to presidents.

The Washington Post is not alone. The Los Angeles Times has declined to make an endorsement, which also led to a staff revolt.

The decision not to endorse in this election could prove a critical moment for mainstream media in turning the corner on the era of advocacy journalism. While skeptical, I genuinely hope that Bezos has decided to reconsider the course of the Post. We need the Post and the rest of the mainstream media. The media plays a critical role in our democracy as a neutral source of information on government abuse and corruption.

However, that role also needs the trust of the public. Otherwise, as Lewis told the Post staff, ‘no one is reading your stuff.’

That is evident from the very closeness of this election. After years of unrelenting anti-Trump coverage and a billion-dollar war chest to sell Harris to the public, the country is still divided right down the middle.

The Post and other papers are writing for each other and core Democratic readers. The rest of America is moving on to new sources of information on social media and elsewhere.

For those of us who loved the old Post and want our ‘Fourth Estate’ to be strong, this is a meaningful start.

So Bravo, Washington Post.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

A Republican presidential candidate endangering democracy, threatening the Constitution and such a menace to America he could foment a civil war? 

Yes, this is what Fire-Eater Southern Democrats said about former Congressman Abraham Lincoln during the 1860 presidential campaign. And their irrational fear of him winning the White House made all their dire predictions come true.

Lincoln, the so-called abolitionist ‘Black Republican,’ endured nonstop personal attacks. The Charleston, South Carolina, Mercury wrote, ‘a horrid looking wretch he is – sooty and scoundrelly in aspect – a cross between the nutmeg dealer, the horse-swapper, and the nightman [who empties the privies].’ He was ‘a creature, fit evidently, for petty treason, small stratagems, and all sorts of spoils.’

The Southerners were also terrified by the 1860 Republican Party platform, which they denounced in frenzied language similar to contemporary progressive critics of Project 2025. 

The Tarboro, North Carolina, Southerner declared that ‘the Platform on which Abraham Lincoln was nominated… is tantamount to a declaration of War against Southern rights and institutions.’ If Lincoln took office the ‘Constitution would be a dead letter’ and attempts to resist would be a ‘signal for revolution.’

Democrats kept Lincoln off the ballots in the South, just as they’d later endeavor to deny former President Trump access earlier this year. But Lincoln won the four-way race regardless, and Republicans gained a majority in Congress. The worst fears of the Fire-Eaters were realized.

This in itself did not signal the apocalypse for the pro-slavery South. A president, even an abolitionist, could not end the grim institution of slavery with the stroke of a pen. Nor could Congress, even with a Republican majority, bring about slavery’s demise through normal legislation. The pro-slavery Taney Supreme Court had seen to that in the Dred Scott case.

Had the Southern Democrats been less obsessed with Lincoln they could have simply bided their time and let the politics play out. The moderate Richmond, Virginia, Whig argued that Lincoln’s victory was not an existential threat because the United States was still a nation of laws. 

‘Lincoln, within the Constitution and the laws, will and must be sustained,’ the editors wrote. ‘Lincoln, transgressing the laws or abusing the Constitution, will be rebuked, checked or punished.’

But the Fire-Eaters were so apoplectic at Lincoln’s victory that they drove seven Southern states to secede from the Union even before the new president took office. Their blind fear of the new order overwhelmed any rational reaction. 

Some even imagined a preemptive insurrection, and Lincoln had to be smuggled into the capital for his inauguration. 

The Fayetteville, Tennessee, Observer stated flatly, ‘the South will never permit Abraham Lincoln to be inaugurated President of the United States… whether the Potomac is crimsoned human gore, and Pennsylvania Avenue is paved ten fathoms in depth with mangled bodies.’ Southerners would never consent to the ‘humiliation and degradation’ of Lincoln’s ascent.

This is the context to Lincoln’s first inaugural address on March 4, 1861, in which he pleaded with the rebel states that there was no cause for apprehension and that he did not threaten even the institution of slavery they were intent on preserving. All would be forgiven if only they would return. 

‘We are not enemies, but friends,’ Lincoln said, invoking ‘the mystic chords of memory’ to ‘swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.’

But the better angels were outgunned by the lesser demons. The same day Lincoln delivered his plea for unity, the Confederates raised their first national flag over their then-capital in Montgomery, Alabama. Congressional attempts at cooperation and reconciliation, such as the famous Crittenden Compromise, failed. 

Ultimately, the Fire-Eaters forced the issue by attacking Fort Sumter, Lincoln mobilized troops, the upper South joined the rebellion, and the Civil War was on.

When reviewing the four-month period from the 1860 election to Lincoln’s inauguration, one can’t help but conclude that the Civil War was completely avoidable. There was no sound cause for secession. There was no reason for outrage.

Lincoln was not a dictator, nor could he be. But the country was driven into the abyss by a small group of radical Democrats who stubbornly refused to accept Lincoln as a legitimately elected president. 

Likewise, today, reporters hound Trump for not pledging to back the outcome of the election but can’t be bothered to ask Democrats if they would do the same should Trump emerge the victor. We saw after 2016 that the answer to this question is no. 

In the years that followed, Democrats used every means at their disposal to hobble, hinder and delegitimize the Trump first term. The current never-Trumpers are motivated by the same irrational, blind hatred that animated the anti-Lincoln Fire-Eaters who would rather drive the country into violent civil conflict than see the object of their disgust as president. 

But as Lincoln said, truth and justice ‘will surely prevail by the judgment of this great tribunal of the American people.’ And if President Trump wins, the better angels will have to work overtime to keep the peace.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Joel was down from Boston with a few of his heavily accented friends and fellow members of the National Association of Government Employees sent by the Kamala Harris campaign to shore up support in Pennsylvania.

Even they know, things are not going well for her.

‘I don’t know why she can’t answer questions,’ Joel told me, in what was about the most blunt assessment against one’s own interest I’d heard in months.

I think a lot of people on all sides are confused by this.

As a guy born and raised in Philly who lived for two decades in New York, I felt it my duty to explain, in a good-natured way, to the fellas why I hate Boston. After all, it’s a treasured ritual of the Northeast. With that out of the way, Stanley, who appeared to be the group’s leader, had another explanation for Kamala’s woes.

‘She’s only been in the race three months, she’s barely out of the gate. That’s a lot to ask.’

Billionaire mogul Mark Cuban echoed that in an X post, ‘Think of it this way,’ he mused, ‘a candidate that started only 13 weeks ago, is now, worst case scenario, in a dead heat with a former president.’

Aside from being bad at imagining the worst-case scenario, what we see from Mr. Cuban is the beginning of the excuses for a Harris loss. But as the playwright David Mamet once wrote, ‘your excuses are your own.’

I was thinking about all of this Friday as I wandered around Scranton under beautiful skies and amid old stone monuments to America’s greatness. At one point, and my hand to God, I’m not making this up, I found myself literally on Biden Street. 

Biden street. That Biden. 

I bring this up because there were sirens blaring and flashing lights as cops shut down traffic. ‘The drivers are annoyed,’ I heard one cop say, ‘maybe they’ll remember it was a Democrat who did this on Election day.’

A guy comes up to me and says, ‘why’d they shut down traffic?’ 

‘Tim Walz is in town,’ I explained.

‘Time Walsh?’ he asked.

‘No, Tim Walz.’

‘Who?’

With a gentle sigh, I said, ‘It doesn’t matter.’

And it struck me, the Democrats passed on a guy who literally has a street named after him in Scranton for Kamala Harris and a goofy sitcom dad nobody knows.

Joel and Stanley are good dudes, stand-up guys who love the country and just disagree with me about who is best to serve it. Even if they are Patriots fans. There is nothing wrong with them organizing as employees to fight for the future they want. That’s America.

But I didn’t leave convinced Harris is who they really want.

‘I didn’t like how it went down,’ Joel told me, regarding the ousting of Joe Biden from the race. And he meant it. I often say that polls don’t have faces, people do, and I could see it in his eyes.

When I asked Stanley why he supports Harris, not why he doesn’t support Trump, but why Harris, he said, ‘Why can’t I say why I don’t want Trump?’

And he can, and he did, but I think even he knew it was an evasion.

The biggest misconception about American politics is that it’s all an algebra equation, even when the polls are wrong over and over. It’s not math, it’s a story, and Kamala Harris isn’t telling one beyond her middle-class upbringing. 

‘I don’t know why she can’t answer questions,’ Joel said, and yeah, he had a point.

Harris still has a chance to become the president of the United States, but before that can happen she has to answer one simple question: ‘Why you?’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

There are no magic bullets, but we can improve our trading edge by starting our selection process with two proven concepts: trend and momentum. These are perhaps the two most powerful forces in the market. The idea is relatively simple: stay on the right side of the trend and focus on the leaders. This is basically dual-momentum. Starting our process with these two steps will increase the odds of success. We will first choose the timeframe and then select two indicators.

When it comes to trend-momentum strategies, my research suggests that longer timeframes work better than shorter timeframes. This means 200 days works better than 50 days. Short timeframes, such as 20 and 50 days, are better suited for mean-reversion strategies, which trade pullbacks within uptrends. 200 days covers around nine months. This is long enough to absorb a 2-3 month correction and short enough to allow for extended trends.

Next, we need a trend-following indicator. While there are dozens of options out there, a simple 200-day SMA works quite well for long-term trend identification. The idea is to filter out stocks that are in downtrends and only focus on stocks in uptrends (above their 200-day SMAs). Negative outcomes are more likely when below the 200-day SMA and positive outcomes are more likely when above. It is as simple, and effective, as that. 

The chart above shows META with the 50 and 200 day SMAs. In the indicator windows, we can see the Percent above MA indicators, which show the distance between the close and the moving average. META broke the 50-day SMA several times, but none of these breaks resulted in a trend reversal. These breaks simply marked tradable pullbacks within the bigger uptrend. It would have been more profitable to accumulate on breaks of the 50-day as the stock held the 200-day and extended higher.  

After filtering for stocks in uptrends, we then need a momentum indicator to quantify performance. Here again we have dozens of choices. Rate-of-Change is the purest momentum measure and also works quite well. As with the SMA, I will use the 200-day Rate-of-Change to capture long-term performance. We can then rank stocks and focus on those with the strongest momentum.

The CandleGlance charts above show the top performing S&P 500 stocks. I created a ChartList with S&P 500 stocks, viewed the list as CandleGlance and sorted by the ROC(200). This puts the top performing stocks at the top and I can then scroll through this list to create a short-list for further analysis.

This coming week at TrendInvestorPro we are introducing two new rotation strategies using variations of these concepts. These strategies are fully systematic and trade once per week. They are aimed at investors because they trade less frequently than our rotation trader strategies. Note that our S&P 500 rotation trader strategy is up 38 % in 2024. The image below shows the equity curve for this strategy (green line) and buy-and-hold for the S&P 500 (black line). This strategy is up more than 3 times buy-and-hold and the drawdowns are much lower because of the market regime filter. Click here to learn more.

Systematic Strategies at TrendInvestorPro

Rotation Trader for S&P 500 Stocks (+38% in 2024)

Rotation Trader for Nasdaq 100 Stocks (+17% in 2024)

Rotation Investor for S&P 500 Stocks (debuting next week)

Rotation Investor for Nasdaq 100 Stocks (debuting next week)

Click here to learn more and get two bonus reports.

/////////////////////////////////////

The over-deviated markets continued to extend their losses for the fourth week in a row. The Nifty remained largely under sustained selling pressure over the past five days, barring a few feeble attempts to stage a technical rebound. The markets extended their downsides while giving up key supports on the daily charts. The trading range widened again; the Nifty oscillated in a wider 904-point range before ending with a decent cut. The volatility also spiked; the India Vix surged by another 12.23% to 14.63 on a weekly basis. Following a largely bearish setup throughout the week, the headline index closed with a net weekly loss of 673.25 points (-2.71%).

The coming week is a truncated one; Friday is not a trading holiday but it will just have a very short, one-hour ceremonial Mahurut Session. Overall, the volumes are expected to remain low given the festive season.  The Nifty has violated the 100-DMA on the daily chart which stands at 24591. It has already given up the 20-week MA which is placed at 24702. Given these adverse technical developments, the Nifty has dragged its resistance levels much lower to 24500-24700 zones. Any technical rebounds will find resistance here. In other words, so long as the markets trade below this zone, all rebounds are more likely to get sold into.

The coming week may see a tepid start; the levels of 24450 and 24650 are likely to act as resistance levels. The supports are expected to come in at 23950 and 23700. The trading range is likely to stay wider than usual.

The weekly RSI stands at 49.95. It has formed a fresh 14-period low; however, it stays neutral and does not show any divergence against the price. The weekly MACD is bearish and trades below the signal line.

The pattern analysis shows the high point of 26277, which is confirmed as an intermediate top for the markets. The decline has also seen Nifty breaching pattern support at 24750 levels. This pattern support is in the form of a rising trend line which begins at 22124 and extends itself. The 20-week MA and the 100-day MA also stand violated meaningfully on a closing basis. The resistance levels have been dragged lower; all technical rebounds will find resistance in the 24500-24700 zone from a short to medium-term perspective.

The markets have entered a technical setup that is likely to create a challenging environment. The risk-off setup is evident; it would be imperative to stay invested in stocks that have strong relative strength against the broader markets. Such investments shall offer greater resilience if the weakness in the markets persists for a longer time. While staying highly selective, a cautious approach is advised for the coming week.

Sector Analysis for the coming week

In our look at Relative Rotation Graphs®, we compared various sectors against CNX500 (NIFTY 500 Index), which represents over 95% of the free float market cap of all the stocks listed.

Relative Rotation Graphs (RRG) continue to show a few pockets of resilience building up in the markets. The Nifty Services Sector, Pharma, Consumption, and IT indices are inside the leading quadrant. They may continue relatively outperforming the broader markets.

The Nifty FMCG index has rolled inside the weakening quadrant. Besides this, the Midcap 100 index is also indie the weakening quadrant.

The Nifty Auto and Media Indices have rolled inside the lagging quadrant. This group is likely to relatively underperform along with the Energy, PSE, and Energy. The Infrastructure,  Commodities, PSU Bank, and Realty Indices are also inside the weakening quadrant. However, they are seen improving their relative momentum against the broader markets.

The Nifty Bank, Metal, and Financial Services indices are inside the improving quadrant; they are likely to improve their relative performance against the broader markets.

Important Note: RRG™ charts show the relative strength and momentum of a group of stocks. In the above Chart, they show relative performance against NIFTY500 Index (Broader Markets) and should not be used directly as buy or sell signals.  

Milan Vaishnav, CMT, MSTA

Consulting Technical Analyst

www.EquityResearch.asia | www.ChartWizard.ae

LOS ANGELES — Los Angeles Dodgers starter Jack Flaherty remained comfortable in front of his home fans, contributing to the 6-3 Game 1 World Series victory on the mound against the New York Yankees.

A product of nearby Harvard-Westlake prep, Flaherty produced another solid outing for the Dodgers while battling against his counterpart – and UCLA alum – Gerrit Cole of the Yankees.

Flaherty allowed five hits and two earned runs while striking out six in 5⅓ innings.

“Just one pitch at a time,” Flaherty said about working his way through the game. “It was an incredible atmosphere and an unbelievable setting.”

Roberts was impressed with Flaherty’s overall performance outside of ‘one bad pitch.’

Follow every MLB game: Latest MLB scores, stats, schedules and standings.

In the sixth inning, Giancarlo Stanton crushed a two-run homer down the left field line off Flaherty on a 1-2 count, giving the Yankees a 2-1 lead – prompting Roberts to remove Flaherty.

The Dodgers bullpen gave up one run the rest of the way in the series-opening win.

Flaherty was up for the challenge against a lineup that featured Aaron Judge, the likely American League Most Valuable Player. The pitcher got the best of Judge, striking him out in each of their three meetings Friday.

“It was great,” Dodgers manager Dave Roberts said. “I think obviously he used the breaking ball, and that 3-2 strikeout with the fastball was a big strikeout right there.

“Aaron is an MVP. He’s going to win it this year, and you’ve got to be careful (with him).”

Said Flaherty: “Judge is unbelievable. I was able to make some good pitches. Some days that’s the way it goes. I made some good pitches and it worked out. We’ll figure out the next time how to get him out in different ways because that’s a good hitter that’s going to make adjustments.”

The Dodgers announced their seventh sellout of the postseason with 52,394 in attendance to watch the start of the series and pay tribute to another pitching legend.

Flaherty worked from a mound that had the No. 34 painted on it in honor of Fernando Valenzuela, who died Tuesday. The 29-year-old Flaherty walked into the stadium before the game wearing a Valenzuela jersey.

“He was a legend,” Flaherty said. “That was a tough loss for the Dodgers community. … I just tried to go out and channel the emotion and pitch with it and enjoy the stakes.”

Flaherty is coming off a National League Championship Series that saw him experience extreme highs and lows. In Game 1 against the New York Mets, he tossed six scoreless innings and allowed just two hits. But in his Game 5 starter, he surrendered eight earned runs in three innings.

Flaherty will be on regular rest to start a Game 5 on Wednesday at Yankee Stadium.

The USA TODAY app gets you to the heart of the news — fastDownload for award-winning coverage, crosswords, audio storytelling, the eNewspaper and more.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Former President Trump taped ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ podcast for nearly three hours on Friday. 

The podcast, recorded in Austin, Texas, afforded the Republican presidential nominee exposure to Rogan’s 14.5 million followers on Spotify and 17.6 million followers on YouTube. Rogan, the nation’s most-listened-to podcast host, is extremely influential with young male voters, who Trump is aiming to reach. 

Here are the top takeaways from the podcast that aired on Friday. 

Trump asks Rogan to explain why he’s gotten bad publicity: ‘You said a lot of wild s—’ 

While explaining the process of choosing political nominations once he got into office, Trump discussed his initial appointment of John Bolton, who served as White House National Security adviser. In 2019, Trump fired Bolton, who remains a staunch critic. Trump described how Phil Ruffin, a fellow American businessman, warned him that Bolton was a ‘bad guy,’ but by then, Trump had already hired him. 

‘And he was right. But he was good in a certain way. He’s a nut job. And every time I had to deal with a country when they saw this whack job standing behind me, they said, ‘Man, Trump’s going to go to war with us.’ He was with Bush when they went stupidly into the Middle East. They should have never done it. I used to say it as a civilian, so I always got more publicity than other people,’ Trump said. 

‘It wasn’t like I was trying,’ Trump said. ‘In fact, I don’t know exactly why. Maybe you can tell me.’ 

‘I could definitely tell you,’ Rogan offered. ‘You said a lot of wild s—. … And then CNN in all their brilliance by highlighting your wild s— made you much more popular. And they boost you in the polls because people were tired of someone talking in this bulls— pre-prepared politician lingo. And even if they didn’t agree with you, they at least knew whoever that guy is, that’s him. That’s really him.’ 

Rogan tells Trump ‘the rebels are Republicans now,’ Elon Musk agrees

‘The rebels are Republicans now, though, like you want to be invisible, you want to be punk rock, you want to like, buck the system? You’re a conservative now,’ Rogan said. ‘That’s how crazy. And then the liberals are now pro-silencing criticism. They’re pro-censorship online. … [T]hey come in regulating free speech and now regulating the First Amendment. It’s bananas to watch.’ 

Elon Musk, who took over Twitter — now X — in 2022, responded to the clip, writing, ‘Exactly.’ 

‘You know they come after their political opponent,’ Trump told Rogan in response. ‘I’ve been investigated more than Alfonse Capone.’ 

Trump says he told North Korea’s Kim Jong Un to ‘just relax,’ ‘go to the beach’ 

In his meeting with former President Obama during the presidential transition period, Trump recalled, ‘Obama thought we were going to go to war with North Korea.’ Rogan then referenced how Trump dubbed North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un ‘Little Rocket Man’ early on in his first term. 

‘I said, ‘Little Rocket Man, you’re going to burn in hell.’ And it was rough,’ Trump said. ‘I got to know him better than anybody, anybody. And I said, ‘Do you ever do anything else? Why don’t you go take it easy and relax? Go to the beach?’ You know, kiddingly, I said, ‘You’re always building nuclear. Just relax. You don’t have to do it. Let’s build some condos.”

Trump discusses ‘Make America Health Again,’ initiative, says he told RFK Jr. ‘just focus on health’ 

Rogan praised Trump for partnering with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to ‘Make America Healthy Again’ and asked the Republican nominee if he would completely commit to having Kennedy as part of his administration. 

‘Oh, I am, but the only thing I want to be a little careful about with him is the environmental. Because, you know, he doesn’t like oil. I love oil,’ Trump said. ‘I think just keep him out of the fire. So I’m going to keep him out of a little bit. I said focus on health. Focus. You could do whatever you want, but, I got to be a little bit careful with the liquid gold.’ 

Rogan, showing Trump charts, referenced how ‘there are chemicals and ingredients in our food that are illegal in other countries because they’ve been shown to be toxic.’ 

‘There’s pesticides and herbicides, and there’s a lot of sh– that’s been sprayed on our food that really is unnecessary,’ the podcaster said. ‘And there’s a lot of health consequences.’ Rogan added that Kennedy recently told him that ‘more than 70% of young men are ineligible for the military because of their health.’ 

‘But RFK is going to be – you know I think he’s a great guy,’ Trump said. 

Rogan also asked if Trump faced pressure not to work with Kennedy. 

‘But I would say that the Big Pharma wasn’t thrilled when they heard that,’ Trump said. ‘I’ve actually always gotten along very well with him. I’ve known him a long time. He’s a different kind of a guy. He’s very smart, great guy, and he’s very sincere about this. I mean, he really is. You know, he thinks we spend a fortune on pesticides and all this stuff, and then you end up at that chart is a terrible shot.’ 
 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS