Did you think Mitt Romney was too rich?

[asdfjkl]

He was too intellectually and culturally isolated and his opinions demonstrated that.  I think having a lot of money (particularly if you also grew up with it) can be the cause of that kind of isolation (bubble), but it doesn't have to be and there are plenty of examples to the contrary.  Romney just wasn't one of them.

[ECB]

Aug 23, 2015 10:22:14 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

He was too intellectually and culturally isolated and his opinions demonstrated that.  I think having a lot of money (particularly if you also grew up with it) can be the cause of that kind of isolation (bubble), but it doesn't have to be and there are plenty of examples to the contrary.  Romney just wasn't one of them.

All of this.  Money absolutely plays a role in why people are out of touch, but having money doesn't automatically mean that.  And being rich in and of itself isn't going to cause me to not vote for anyone.  Because, really, when it comes down to it, I have yet to meet a poor politician.  At least at the level of government that we're talking about. 

[oscarnerdjulief]

The very same arguments against Romney could be used against Hillary in this election, yet they will not be.

People on the other side can't have it both ways re political candidates. They can't lament Romney's intellectual and culturally isolating wealth then bitch about Rubio's lack of money management when he's ONLY worth 300-some thousand and has the very same money issues that the everyday American has. Hillary's pretty damn rich and living in the bubble (my god, she hasn't driven in 30 yrs) for someone who first made her name in a speech bemoaning our 'corporate, acquisitive' way of life. I believe those adjectives were the exact ones from the Wellesley speech.

I say, look to Gore and Kerry. Did the lefties talk about intellectually and culturally isolating wealth in regards to them? Wonder why not. No, now I think about it I don't.

It's the same mindset that will let the liberal establishment, especially women, jump on Palin for being stupid yet allow dumb women on their own side like Granholm go unchallenged, unscathed.  I don't remember a Canada Barbie storyline like Alaska Barbie, and Granholm tanked the hell out of her state.

[asdfjkl]

Aug 23, 2015 10:31:49 GMT -5 oscarnerdjulief said:

The very same arguments against Romney could be used against Hillary in this election, yet they will not be.

People on the other side can't have it both ways re political candidates. They can't lament Romney's intellectual and culturally isolating wealth then bitch about Rubio's lack of money management when he's ONLY worth 300-some thousand and has the very same money issues that the everyday American has. Hillary's pretty damn rich and living in the bubble (my god, she hasn't driven in 30 yrs) for someone who first made her name in a speech bemoaning our 'corporate, acquisitive' way of life. I believe those adjectives were the exact ones from the Wellesley speech.

I say, look to Gore and Kerry. Did the lefties talk about intellectually and culturally isolating wealth in regards to them? Wonder why not. No, now I think about it I don't.

It's the same mindset that will let the liberal establishment, especially women, jump on Palin for being stupid yet allow dumb women on their own side like Granholm go unchallenged, unscathed.  I don't remember a Canada Barbie storyline like Alaska Barbie, and Granholm tanked the hell out of her state.

How so?  I will say that Hillary is not liberal enough for me so I'm not looking at her as some kind of socialist savior, but I feel pretty confident that if Hillary becomes president, her Federal (including supreme) Court appointees aren't going to be of the Citizens United/Hobby Lobby ilk as Romney's would have been and as Bush's HAVE been.  I can look at Hillary and see that her opinions on access to health care for children and the poor have included support for a public option for the better part of 25 years now.  I think Romney is part of the group of conservatives that follow the social-worth solipsism that if you need help from your government (social welfare), it's proof of the fact that you don't *deserve* to be helped and that that is largely because Romney has never NEEDED help.  From anyone.  I don't see Hillary participating in that thought process at all.  Hillary's bubble is a power bubble.  She has been part of the Washington elite for so long and has been so powerful in it, that she thinks she can do whatever she wants and there won't be any repercussions.  E.g. email scandal.  But an intellectually and culturally isolating wealth-bubble?  No.  

[NewOrleans]

Aug 23, 2015 10:31:49 GMT -5 oscarnerdjulief said:

The very same arguments against Romney could be used against Hillary in this election, yet they will not be.

People on the other side can't have it both ways re political candidates. They can't lament Romney's intellectual and culturally isolating wealth then bitch about Rubio's lack of money management when he's ONLY worth 300-some thousand and has the very same money issues that the everyday American has. Hillary's pretty damn rich and living in the bubble (my god, she hasn't driven in 30 yrs) for someone who first made her name in a speech bemoaning our 'corporate, acquisitive' way of life. I believe those adjectives were the exact ones from the Wellesley speech.

I say, look to Gore and Kerry. Did the lefties talk about intellectually and culturally isolating wealth in regards to them? Wonder why not. No, now I think about it I don't.

It's the same mindset that will let the liberal establishment, especially women, jump on Palin for being stupid yet allow dumb women on their own side like Granholm go unchallenged, unscathed.  I don't remember a Canada Barbie storyline like Alaska Barbie, and Granholm tanked the hell out of her state.

Don't know who Granholm is.

I hated that Diane Feinstein who wanted some gun control measure about gun parts but didn't know what the parts were or did. I still side-eye her every time I see her name.  Talk about setting back the movement.  

I don't actually know the Barbie thing, either. The only Barbie thing I know is how Righters called Wendy Davis Abortion Barbie and then photoshopped her face onto a naked Barbie doll to parade around on trucks in Texas.  

I don't much care how rich candidates are.  I do care if they plan to grease their own wheels, help people like them get richer on the backs of the middle and lower classes, or punish the poor.  

However, I think you overall pose a fair question about does this only apply to rich white Republicans. On the other hand, white men, particularly Republicans, continually prove how out of touch they are, lol.

[StrawberryBlondie]

I honestly didn't give a damn how much money he had.

[Deleted]

It wasnt his wealth, it was his smug "others are poor because they are too stupid to be rich" attitude.

That, and everything he said and did.

[asdfjkl]

Aug 23, 2015 10:52:48 GMT -5 NewOrleans said:

Aug 23, 2015 10:31:49 GMT -5 oscarnerdjulief said:

The very same arguments against Romney could be used against Hillary in this election, yet they will not be.

People on the other side can't have it both ways re political candidates. They can't lament Romney's intellectual and culturally isolating wealth then bitch about Rubio's lack of money management when he's ONLY worth 300-some thousand and has the very same money issues that the everyday American has. Hillary's pretty damn rich and living in the bubble (my god, she hasn't driven in 30 yrs) for someone who first made her name in a speech bemoaning our 'corporate, acquisitive' way of life. I believe those adjectives were the exact ones from the Wellesley speech.

I say, look to Gore and Kerry. Did the lefties talk about intellectually and culturally isolating wealth in regards to them? Wonder why not. No, now I think about it I don't.

It's the same mindset that will let the liberal establishment, especially women, jump on Palin for being stupid yet allow dumb women on their own side like Granholm go unchallenged, unscathed.  I don't remember a Canada Barbie storyline like Alaska Barbie, and Granholm tanked the hell out of her state.

Don't know who Granholm is.

I hated that Diane Feinstein who wanted some gun control measure about gun parts but didn't know what the parts were or did. I still side-eye her every time I see her name.  Talk about setting back the movement.  

I don't actually know the Barbie thing, either. The only Barbie thing I know is how Righters called Wendy Davis Abortion Barbie and then photoshopped her face onto a naked Barbie doll to parade around on trucks in Texas.  

I don't much care how rich candidates are.  I do care if they plan to grease their own wheels, help people like them get richer on the backs of the middle and lower classes, or punish the poor.  

However, I think you overall pose a fair question about does this only apply to rich white Republicans. On the other hand, white men, particularly Republicans, continually prove how out of touch they are, lol.

Adding on:  No one is saying Mitt was too stupid to be president.  That's not what I mean when I say culturally and intellectually isolated.  I am talking about whether people's wealth-bubble has prevented them being able to identify with or at least understand the issues of the middle and lower classes in this country such that the policies they create and the government they build will support people-with-pulses rather than corporate entities.  Dumb Barbies (whether Alaskan or Canadian) doesn't really have anything to do with it.  But I will say that what liberals found offensive about Palin wasn't that she was dumb.  It was that she was such a cynical choice for VP.  The GOP felt they needed someone to capture the Hillary voters.  And that, y'know, any old woman would be fine.  Even a pro-life, anti-intellectual, with fundi-christian leanings.  Us lady-folk don't care much about actual issues.  We'll vote for any old vagina, amiright?  

When I think about Romney and the kind of intellectual and cultural isolation his wealth bubble caused, I think about the candidate who suggested that Americans who are down on their luck should be more entrepreneurial.  They should, like, get out there and start a business.  Borrow money from your parents if you have to...  Not all people who grow up with money end up being that out of touch.  But Mitt sure was.    

[ttt]

Aug 23, 2015 10:31:49 GMT -5 oscarnerdjulief said:

The very same arguments against Romney could be used against Hillary in this election, yet they will not be.

People on the other side can't have it both ways re political candidates. They can't lament Romney's intellectual and culturally isolating wealth then bitch about Rubio's lack of money management when he's ONLY worth 300-some thousand and has the very same money issues that the everyday American has. Hillary's pretty damn rich and living in the bubble (my god, she hasn't driven in 30 yrs) for someone who first made her name in a speech bemoaning our 'corporate, acquisitive' way of life. I believe those adjectives were the exact ones from the Wellesley speech.

I say, look to Gore and Kerry. Did the lefties talk about intellectually and culturally isolating wealth in regards to them? Wonder why not. No, now I think about it I don't.

It's the same mindset that will let the liberal establishment, especially women, jump on Palin for being stupid yet allow dumb women on their own side like Granholm go unchallenged, unscathed.  I don't remember a Canada Barbie storyline like Alaska Barbie, and Granholm tanked the hell out of her state.

People absolutely talked about Kerry's being completely out of touch with the average person. I know I did. Didn't we on this very board (well, the old one) laugh about his ridiculous Nascar comment?? 

Who specifically bitched about Rubio's lack of money management? All I remember is people saying that if he's hiring a former cheerleader without a college degree and no professional skills to manage his campaign finances, then that does not bode well for his judgment. 

The difference between Romney and Hillary is that Romney advocated for policies that specifically help the wealthy while Hillary is advocating for policies that help the poor and middle class. It's not the wealth itself that's a problem - it's the attitude of "I've got mine and I don't care about anyone else, they can just get rich themselves if they want" that is the problem. 

[ttt]

When Hillary suggests that the way out of poverty is to borrow $25,000 from your parents to start a business, then I'll agree with you on this.

[ESF]

I think a lot of Americans are "too rich" in that I have issues with a lot of executive compensation packages, the consolidation of wealth amongst the richest people in this country, and some of the other tax advantages that the wealthiest Americans enjoy. In that sense, sure, Mitt Romney is "too rich."

I don't think anyone is "too rich" to be president. They are two very different things. Having wealth doesn't tell me anything about how they will or won't govern. As the others have said, Romney's issue was that he was isolated from reality and came across as if he looked down on the poor (see, e.g. the 47% comment). That's not a "too rich" problem. I know middle class people who think the same way, and they shouldn't be president either.

The best example of how a person's wealth in and of itself could cause me and an electorate to be turned off was Meg Whitman's governor race in 2010 here in CA. She approached that race like she was just going to use her personal fortune buying the seat outright. She lead huge in the polls for months and months and months because of how she used her enormous personal wealth. Jerry Brown won by a not insignificant margin on a shoestring budget. And I know a lot of people who changed their votes because by the time the election rolled around, they were disgusted by the way Whitman threw money around. Whether they'd judge a man who did that in the same light, I can't say, so I'm not discounting that sexism did play somewhat of a part. But it was off putting. To be honest, I don't mind Meg Whitman. I think she could have been good for the GOP. I don't think she would have been a terrible governor. I wasn't a Brown fan at the time, nor were a lot of people. Now Jerry Brown is in his second term after turning the state around successfully, and Whitman is stuck with Fiorina's HP leftovers.

I think Mitt Romney made some of the mistakes Whitman made. He had more advisors and more spinning, and the financing of a presidential race are more complicated, particularly in a post-Citizens United World, so it was not as brazen. But he had an air of "my money entitles me to this job." Obviously HRC's biggest critics will say she acts as though she is entitled to the job too, but the difference is that this entitlement, real or perceived, is not because she made tons of money, ergo it is hers. If the presidential race was a merits competition - as Rubio himself admitted - she'd get it. Honestly, if I think if anyone of us were in her shoes, we'd feel a sense of entitlement too. She's got to work on keeping that in check but it really is an apples to oranges comparison to Romney.

[kadams767]

Nope, I just thought he was an asshole.

[Velar Fricative]

No. I expect people to be rich if they want to run for POTUS. That shit ain't cheap.

[jillboston]

Uh.. Jennifer Granholm is not dumb. Not by a mile. from her wiki page


In 1980, at the age of 21 years, she became a naturalized U.S. citizen,[9] worked for John Anderson's independent run for President of the United States, and enrolled at the University of California, Berkeley. She graduated from UC Berkeley in 1984 Phi Beta Kappa with a B.A. in Political Science and French. Granholm then earned a Juris Doctor degree at Harvard Law School, also with honors. At Harvard Law, Granholm served as Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, the leading progressive law journal in the United States.



She clerked for Judge Damon Keith, a Senior Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. In 1990 she became an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan. In 1994 she was appointed to the Wayne County Corporation Counsel.

[asdfjkl]

Aug 23, 2015 15:03:39 GMT -5 jillboston said:

Uh.. Jennifer Granholm is not dumb. Not by a mile. from her wiki page


In 1980, at the age of 21 years, she became a naturalized U.S. citizen,[9] worked for John Anderson's independent run for President of the United States, and enrolled at the University of California, Berkeley. She graduated from UC Berkeley in 1984 Phi Beta Kappa with a B.A. in Political Science and French. Granholm then earned a Juris Doctor degree at Harvard Law School, also with honors. At Harvard Law, Granholm served as Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, the leading progressive law journal in the United States.



She clerked for Judge Damon Keith, a Senior Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. In 1990 she became an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan. In 1994 she was appointed to the Wayne County Corporation Counsel.

Yeah, but what has she ACCOMPLISHED!?!

[ttt]

Aug 23, 2015 10:31:49 GMT -5 oscarnerdjulief said:

It's the same mindset that will let the liberal establishment, especially women, jump on Palin for being stupid yet allow dumb women on their own side like Granholm go unchallenged, unscathed.  I don't remember a Canada Barbie storyline like Alaska Barbie, and Granholm tanked the hell out of her state.

What do you mean she tanked the hell out of her state? I know nothing at all about her so I'm interested to know what you're referring to. 

[ESF]

Aug 23, 2015 15:29:27 GMT -5 ttt said:

Aug 23, 2015 10:31:49 GMT -5 oscarnerdjulief said:

It's the same mindset that will let the liberal establishment, especially women, jump on Palin for being stupid yet allow dumb women on their own side like Granholm go unchallenged, unscathed.  I don't remember a Canada Barbie storyline like Alaska Barbie, and Granholm tanked the hell out of her state.

What do you mean she tanked the hell out of her state? I know nothing at all about her so I'm interested to know what you're referring to. [/quote
She was the governor of Michigan. This is not the first time I've heard her called dumb.

In the little I've seen, my impression of her is that she can come off as a little more "girly" in her ways of speaking and in her mannerisms, so that's why people think she's dumb.

But whatever. Plenty of smart people can't govern for shit. Plenty of dumb people can role play the job. Performance as governor is just not linked to intelligence. Jindal drove his state into the shitter too and he's a Rhodes scholar.

Sarah Palin is stupid. Not because she was an incompetent governor but because she is actually a dumb person. (Scott Walker is also actually a dumb person.)

But whatever, comparing treatment of Granholm to Palin is silly. Palin's intelligence deficit only became an issue when she element on the VP ticket. So duh, that's why the criticism of her went national.

[rugbywife]

Aug 23, 2015 14:59:26 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

No. I expect people to be rich if they want to run for POTUS. That shit ain't cheap.

This was my thinking. They aren't going to be lacking for money. But they might also not be completely out of touch with what life is like for average citizens. Or, AT THE VERY LEAST, have good PR people who can make them SOUND in touch.

His issue wasn't that he was too rich, it was that he DGAF about the poor, because if they only did x, y, z, they wouldn't be poor - it's so EASY!!!

[gpw]

Aug 23, 2015 17:09:22 GMT -5 nursecramer said:

Aug 23, 2015 15:03:39 GMT -5 jillboston said:

Uh.. Jennifer Granholm is not dumb. Not by a mile. from her wiki page


In 1980, at the age of 21 years, she became a naturalized U.S. citizen,[9] worked for John Anderson's independent run for President of the United States, and enrolled at the University of California, Berkeley. She graduated from UC Berkeley in 1984 Phi Beta Kappa with a B.A. in Political Science and French. Granholm then earned a Juris Doctor degree at Harvard Law School, also with honors. At Harvard Law, Granholm served as Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, the leading progressive law journal in the United States.



She clerked for Judge Damon Keith, a Senior Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. In 1990 she became an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan. In 1994 she was appointed to the Wayne County Corporation Counsel.

Michigan was in a terrible place economically when she was elected governor, with a huge rate of unemployment-- partially due to the auto industry, but many other manufacturing industries as well. Her predecessor, Engler had made a mess of Michigan's finances, but during her tenure, she managed to create a ton of programs, including free tuition for unemployed laborers, incentives to bring in film the industry, alternative and renewable energy businesses, and programs to keep recent grads from moving out of state.

One of her programs allowed me to go back to school after the auto industry laid me off.  It was a really good deal.