The historical significance of the 2016 U.S. Presidential contest isn’t yet generally recognized. Consider the evidence regarding this historical significance, in the links that will be provided here, and from which the argument here is constructed:

For the first time ever, a Republican campaign ad against Hillary Clinton is entirely truthful about her and focuses on the most important issue facing voters:

For the first time since 1932, an American Presidential campaign presents an opportunity for the public to overthrow the aristocracy.

And, for the first time in U.S. history, a realistic possibility exists that the voters’ choice between the two Parties’ Presidential nominees might turn out to be between two enemies of the aristocracy: Bernie Sanders versus Donald Trump.

However, if it turns out instead to be between Trump v. Clinton, then what will be the aristocratic backing of each?

On Clinton’s side will be Wall Street — and this includes the ‘shadow banks’ (the non-“bank” sellers of what Bill Clinton and the Republicans caused to become unregulated credit derivatives), from which Hillary Clinton is also receiving donations, and from which the Clinton Foundation is supported and overseen — along with other Clinton funders).

Clearly, this is the first Presidential contest since 1932 in which the interests of the aristocracy versus the interests of the public will be presented to the voters, for them to decide which of the two sides they’re actually on.

And, if the election turns out to be between Trump versus Sanders, then this will be the first U.S. Presidential election ever in which both of the major-Party nominees will have committed themselves to policies (Trump clearly on foreign affairs, Sanders clearly on domestic affairs) that the aristocracy vigorously oppose, and that present a severe threat to the aristocrats’ continued rule of the country.