It wasn't long ago that conventional wisdom among Democratic strategists handicapped Mitt Romney as President Obama's toughest potential Republican challenger. But lately there has been a big shift.
In fact, it is becoming clearer and clearer that Mitt Romney is the very embodiment of the political narrative that will likely define the 2012 Presidential race. Unless there is a miracle, the outcome of next year's election will likely be determined by whom the public blames for the lousy economy.
Of course the Republicans will argue that the culprit is the "overreaching," "innovation-stifling" big government and its leader, President Obama. Their prescription to solve the country's economic woes: eliminate every regulation in sight, cut taxes for the wealthy and free Wall Street bankers that lead us into the promised land.
Democrats, on the other hand, will pin the blame exactly where it belongs -- on the reckless speculation of the big Wall Street banks, their Republican enablers -- and the stagnant middle class incomes that have resulted from the top one percent of Americans siphoning off virtually all of the country's economic growth since 1980. They will fault the "do-nothing Republican Congress" for their insistence on defending the status quo, and their refusal to create jobs.
Earlier this summer -- when Republicans had succeeded in making "fiscal responsibility" and "deficit reduction" the touchstone of American political discourse -- a businessman like Romney appeared to many to be just the ticket. But the tide has turned.
Once they got the debt ceiling "hostage taking" episode behind them, the administration has used its jobs package -- and its own budget proposals -- to draw a sharp line in the sand. The President has demanded that Congress take action on jobs and pay for it by raising taxes on millionaires.
Then came the Occupy Wall Street Movement -- and the worldwide response -- that has tapped into the public's fundamental understanding, and anger, at the real nature of the economic crisis. The fact is that one of the only people around more unpopular than politicians are Wall Street bankers.
Finally, of course, the economic facts on the ground have made it clearer and clearer that right wing economic theories that blame "bloated entitlements" to seniors who make an average of $14,000 a year -- and demand "fiscal austerity" -- are just plain stupid. According to the Washington Post, even the International Monetary Fund (IMF) -- long the world's leading advocate of deficit reduction and "austerity" -- has now warned that "austerity may trigger a new recession and is urging countries to look for ways to boost growth."
As the national economic dialogue has shifted, the public's view of Mitt Romney has also come into focus. His out-of-touch "1% moments" proliferated.
On August 11, the blog Think Progress captured the now-famous video of Romney opining, "Corporations are people, my friend." Of course, given his record of dismembering and bankrupting companies at his old firm, Bain Capital, if "corporations are people," then Romney is guilty of murder.
On August 29th Romney disputed an account about the expansion of his beach front home. "Romney: Beachfront home is being doubled in size, not quadrupled," The Hill reported.
Then, just a few days ago, the Center for Responsive Politics reported that Wall Street donors had abandoned President Obama in droves and flocked to Romney.
Finally, an extraordinary photo surfaced from Romney's days as CEO of Bain Capital, where he made massive profits while five of the companies under his firm's direction went bankrupt and thousands of workers lost their jobs.
Apparently their difficulties in finding places to stash their profits became a joke among the young hotshots at Bain. They posed for a photograph with money stuffed in their pockets -- even their mouths. There at the center of the picture was the grinning CEO, Mitt Romney, with money overflowing from his pockets and his suit jacket.
There he is -- posing as the poster child for the 1%.
The picture could be the iconic image of the iconic line from the film Wall Street: "Greed is Good."
Increasingly, many Democratic strategists have begun to feel that Romney could be the best possible opponent for President Obama next year.
Think about the way swing voters make political decisions. They don't make their judgments about how to vote based on "policies or programs." They evaluate the personal qualities of the candidates.
In determining who is on their side and shares their values -- do swing voters choose Romney -- the poster child for the 1% -- or President Obama?
In the coming campaign, who is more likely to appear as an insider defending the status quo that people don't like -- and who will appear to be an outsider trying to bring change? Normally you'd have to say that the consummate "insider" is the guy who is President of the United States. Not necessarily so if his opponent is Wall Street's own Mitt Romney.
And several factors unique to Romney make his situation even worse:
Much of the Republican smart money is going to Romney because it thinks he is increasingly likely to be the nominee. I can understand why the Wall Street money is going to Romney -- they want their guy to be President.
But I'm guessing that if he gets the nomination, by this time next year, Wall Street's investment in Romney will look about as "smart" as all that money they put into sub-prime mortgages and credit default swaps four years ago.
Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the book: Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win, available on Amazon.com. He is a partner in Democracy Partners and a Senior Strategist for Americans United for Change. Follow him on Twitter @rbcreamer.
Follow Robert Creamer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rbcreamer
Romney, Cain Under Fire at Feisty GOP Debate
Playing word association with Cain, Romney and Perry
It's time for Americans to put Mitt Romney's religion aside
Romney says foreclosures should "hit the bottom"
Mitt Romney sidesteps boycott issue as he underscores support for NH primary
Fact-checking Mitt Romney on hiring illegal immigrants
Newt uses Herald column to slam Mitt
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
Obama's ratings are collapsing along with the economy and many will vote for Romney because they don't want four more years of Obama - just as Obama won in 2008 because a majority did not want four more years of a GOP president.
The GOP might have imploded if Perry or Bachmann or Palin were the front runner. If Romney is the choice, the Democrats will be miserable.
You know. I know. Everyone knows it. But a little rosy optimism is helpful sometimes, however absurd.
Much depends on OWS as a political force. If it grows in power -- and it already has popular support -- Romney will be seen as what he is, part of the 1%. And that's a bad place to be the ways things look now...
The left-wing hypocrisy of OWS is deep and growing. You overlook the wealthy who happen to have the 'correct' political associations - like Democrats.
The obvious place for these protesters to go would be Washington - but instead you go after businesses.
The destruction of capitalism is not as popular an idea as you may think. It will be very difficult to convince the majority that it will improve life.
1). The GOP in both houses is on record voting for the Ryan plan to END Medicare.
2). Obama will fight to prevent benefit cuts.
No difference? As someone on Medicare, there d@mn sure is!
"Beachfront home is being doubled in size, not quadrupled."
And the Bain Capital photo.
What a perfect Obama campaign ad those stories could make! Be sure to write in "let them eat cake" at the bottom.
But ten bucks says the Democrats won't run that ad. The opposition hands Democrats painful truths like these fairly often, AND THE DEMOCRATS DO NOT USE THEM.
Another ten bucks says that even if the Democrats made Romney's plutocratic ways a CAMPAIGN issue, they will not follow through and make POLICIES which curtail the influence of plutocrats in American life.
Both Clinton and Obama seemed to squander their first two years in office, when their parties controlled Congress and the White House -- and then, to "fix" things, they compromised with Republicans even more than before? Not even a Democratic-controlled Senate can ever seem to put a filibuster together -- while for a Republican minority, a filibuster is the ASSUMED strategy and they have to think hard about being CONSTRUCTIVE.
I fear that the professed progressive economic values of Democrats are simply a way to win elections. We the People are being subjected to a game of Good Cop, Bad Cop.
Occupy Wall Street needs a Presidential candidate. While Romney is clearly against us, Obama is not looking so good himself.
Cactusman
Sorry, but NOT helpful. The GOP is most definitely more guilty than the Dems for the pushing of such destructive policy, but when it comes to the actual "enabling" of Wall Street, elected Dems have been every bit the enablers that the GOP has. Just because they typically aren't overtly propagandizing for these policies doesn't absolve them of guilt for their record in Congress.
I'd like to see a third party, but have no hope for it.
Mitt's story is one of wealth and privilege from the moment he came into this world. He has never missed a meal, had to decide between rent and utilities or worry about paying off his student loans. I don't blame Mitt for his inheritance or success. I blame him for not being humble about it. He loves to tout his experience in business as though he started with an idea then turned it into a fortune. Its a lot easier to be successful if you were born with the money already there to do it.
Republican conflate wealth with virtue. Being born on third doesn't mean you hit a triple.
People like G W Bush, Donald Trump, Mitt Romney, Koch brothers were all born with the platinum spoon planted firmly in the mouths and yet they carry themselves as though they are somehow exceptional.
The real exceptional people are Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerburg, Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet. These people with an idea and made something out of it.
No wonder these people understand the necessity of society have social ladders because they themselves needed it.
and fyi Mitt ran Mass. and did a damn good job...
No fair minded person can say otherwise.
As far as Mitt running Mass is concerned that Mitt isn't the same person he was then. Mitt was a liberal by GOP standards. Now he is nothing more than a extreme right wing panderer.