Tag Archives: Mitt Romney

The Enthusiasm Gap

Some liberals are really pulling out all of the stops to try and motivate their base. Why, you ask? It seems after nearly 4 years of President Obama in office, people aren’t as, well, hopeful as they used to be.

One might even say there’s an enthusiasm gap.

Peter Roff at U.S. News & World Report writes:

“Republican-leaning voting blocs are more enthusiastic to vote this November,” the folks at Resurgent Republic said Thursday, “which could be the deciding factor in a turnout election. As we head into the final campaign stretch, President Obama faces the unwelcoming reality that he must close the voter enthusiasm gap and improve his performance among key voting subgroups if he is to be successful in his bid for reelection.”

To be fair, groups with innocuous sounding names on both sides are claiming their data says the other side lacks enthusiasm and their voters might not turn out. This happens every cycle.

But, it is fairly obvious to even somewhat disinterested observers that this time around, President Obama’s supporters aren’t as enthused as they were in 2008.

I’ve noticed with interest a bunch of attempts to shore up the party faithful from liberal leaning groups. Not being their target audience, I don’t find them very appealing. Nor can I see how even people who want President Obama to have a second term would either.

The first is “90 Days 90 Reasons.” A webpage created 90 days out that will have a daily reason to support President Obama. It’s an unintentionally hilarious advent calendar for limousine/pop-culture liberals.

The founders described why the founded their website this way:

In late July, they looked around and saw that many of Obama’s voters and donors from 2008 needed to be reminded of all he has accomplished, and all he will do if given another term.

I guess even some on the liberal side of the spectrum can admit that some of the fanboys are down in the doldrums. Which is why they’ve tapped a “wide range of cultural figures” — like fictional facebook founder and famed policy analyst Jesse Eisenberg to provide riveting reasons to support President Obama.

Here’s Jesse’s:

“If it were up to me” he writes, “I’d never leave my apartment.” But he supports President Obama because “he’s seen how the world lives” and feels “more comfortable being represented by someone who’s seen it.”

I guess Jesse doesn’t have many Mormon friends, for if he did, he’d know they go on missions to foreign countries, like France. That’s where Mitt Romney went, and where he learned French. Other candidates for President don’t speak any foreign languages.

If you’re looking for brilliant reasons to support another term for President Obama from luminaries like Ben Gibbard from Death Cab for Cutie and Jim James from My Morning Jacket, be sure to bookmark this page.

The second example is a theatrical rendition of “One day more” from Les Mis, but rewritten to support “One Term More!” I am sure Victor Hugo appreciates his work being butchered by some random Broadway actors.

Nonetheless, I don’t think that many discouraged voters are going to be inspired once again by a bunch of smug, angry liberal actors.

You can just see the hate.

If turning a play — Les Mis of all plays — into a political video is thought to inspire enthusiasm among people other than theatre regulars, it’s a sign that these actors are stupid or liberals really in trouble.

Oh so Angry

Aside from the angry faces and subtle war/revolution references in picking “One day more” — this video is offensive.

Here are some lyrics and their imagery:

“With laws that let ’em stand their ground, Republicans are locked & loaded” is sung with an image of Trayvon Martin.

“Incivility’s a virtue,” — something they might have wanted to reflect on before using a Trayvon Martin image — is paired with a picture of a loon from the Westboro Baptist Church, a non-partisan “church” comprised of nutjobs.

The funniest verse in the song, at least to me, is this one:

Soon Election Day will dawn,
We were meant to hold this seat!
At the ballot box of freedom,
Unemployment’s in retreat!
Now the battle lines are drawn,
And Detroit’s back on its feet!
Will you take your place with me!

Detroit — with an unemployment rate of 17.7% is doing great, just ask anyone there  … if you can find someone there.

Unemployment’s in retreat? This must be some new — glacially slow — form of retreat I don’t know about.

This election will be close. The enthusiasm of voters matters — ask any pollster about the difference between registered voters and likely voters. I doubt these liberal efforts to enthuse voters will move the needle any, only serious events can do that it this point. 

Monday Links

HS baseball 2

Today’s post brought to you in part by:

Kellogg's Coupon Newsletter

Click the link to sign up for money saving coupons!

Boudreaux: Take the Ex-Im Bank private

Recovery In Action: Nearly $300 Billion Student Debt In Default

3 Reasons to End Obamacare Before it Begins!

WSJ: Governor 13.3%

RegBlog: Rule of Law Prevails in Sackett v. EPA

WSJ: High Court Help for Rand Paul

Carpe Diem: Markets in Everything: Professional Line-Standing (This is prevalent on Capitol Hill for hearings, too. Sen. McCaskill once proposed banning the practice.)

NakedDC: Need a job? Get related to a Congressman! | Sandra Fluke has never heard of this cheap birth control you speak of.

OTB: Vetting A Running Mate In A Post-Palin World

RFT: Pink Slime: You Know You Want It — Here’s Where to Get It! | Springfield, IL Asks Feds to Shut Down Larry Rice’s Veteran’s Day Shelter

Atlantic Wire: What You Need to Know About This Week’s Epic Supreme Court Hearings | The Major Difference Between Santorum and Romney | Santorum Swears at Reporter over His Romney as ‘Worst Republican’ Line (It’s his Col. Jessup moment)

FamousDC/CC Brackets: I’ve dropped to third

Deadspin: The NBA.com Boxscore Has The Silliest (And Best) Explanation For Why Tim Duncan Didn’t Play Tonight (DND-OLD) | Here’s The Dancing Baylor Fan Heard ’Round The World

AdvertisingAge: NFL Sidelines Reebok for Nike, Touting Switch as ‘Image Evolution’Mascots Are Brands’ Best Social-Media Accessories

Wonkette: A Children’s Treasury of Scenes From the Coming Race War

DC: Paul Ryan admits he would ‘have to consider’ a VP nod

HotAir: Blue Virginia?  | NY Times credits Bush, Cheney with US energy surge (wait, what?)

WSJ: Kvetch A Sketch | What Would Mitt Romney Look Like on an Etch A Sketch?

Caplan: Why I Am Not an Austrian Economist

Orlando Sentinel: Police: Zimmerman says Trayvon decked him with one blow then began hammering his head

Coulter: Send Lizzie Borden to Washington

But Rick Santorum voted against cutting funding for the NEA every time a vote was taken both as a representative and a senator — in 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1997 and 1998.

Herman Cain hates bunnies (h/t Kenn)

FastCo: Unlimited Vacation Doesn’t Create Slackers–It Ensures Productivity

HuffPo: Lieutenant Governors Say Succession Role Is Unifying Bond

Reason: Paul Krugman: ‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws Increase Incarceration by Reducing It

i09: How will we get around in the post-apocalypse?

Time for Mitt to End Santorum’s Campaign

Running for President in 2016

Those of you who follow my blog regularly know that I rarely write about candidates, but rather, mostly about issues.

Romney has stayed above the fray for most of it, largely ignoring and not even engaging Santorum or Gingrich. But yes, I think the time is right for Mitt Romney to absolutely obliterate Rick Santorum’s candidacy.

Here’s why:

Santorum is no longer running for the 2012 nomination. He’s lost it and he knows he cannot win. Rick Santorum is now trying to dirty up Romney as much as humanly possible so that Obama wins, and he can run (and presumably win) in 2016. He even recently suggested that we might be better off with Obama than Romney.

Alas, Santorum cannot win the Presidency, now or ever. A few reasons:

  • Santorum is aloof.

He lost to this guy:

How did Rick Santorum lose to a Bert look-a-like? At a time when the economy ceased the growth spurt during Bush’s second term, Santorum spent the 2006 campaign trail supporting a very unpopular war. The voters cared more about jobs. That lack of political acumen enabled an extremely boring guy who had run for nearly every office in the state. He didn’t just lose, he lost 59 to 41. He got his ass kicked.

Similarly, this time around, Rick’s focus on the culture war (contraception, abortion) while issues I agree are important, just go to show that he spends his time focusing on issues that few voters rank as most important. In short, he’s doing it again — it’s his style. Anyone who watched the 20+ odd debates knows that Rick Santorum wasted a lot of time on issues that aren’t jobs. The Terry Schiavo fiasco is one of the many odd Santorum causes we’ll just leave alone here.

It’s the economy, stupid. Romney gets that. Santorum doesn’t. This explains why Santorum isn’t running for President as a sitting Senator.

  • He doesn’t connect with independents and democrats.

The only people voting for Rick Santorum because they support him are Republicans. Santorum is losing by 10 points to Obama in independents, and even this seems like an underestimated figure. If by some fluke, Santorum won the nomination, he would get probably 98% of the Republican vote, but this is because most Republicans line up behind the nominee, even if their guy lost. Santorum’s most ardent supporters are very Conservative Republicans. Some have pledged to me to not vote in the general if their guy isn’t there, and one even pledged to me to vote for Obama if Santorum did not win.

This is contrary to the typical Republican model, which to win, expects near perfect voter loyalty among Republicans, and a candidate that can attract Democrats and Independents. Rick Santorum can attract neither. (This theory is based on the fact that Republicans typically trail Democrats in party affiliation in the states that matter.)

The only independent votes Santorum has gotten are mainly from people who are trying to prolong the race. Many more well-meaning conservatives support him, and will begrudgingly vote for Romney in the fall. Those who don’t are fringe Republicans. But, people who pledge to vote for Obama because Santorum didn’t get the nod aren’t really Republicans, they’re crazy people.

Tripling the child tax credit in lieu of real tax reform that provides less not more deductions? Government tax preferences for manufacturers (and not distributors or service providers?) These are two very big examples that Santorum doesn’t get the big picture. His policy shop is stuck in the 1980’s. Rick Santorum is not going to win much support from the side of the business community that supports fundamental and fair tax reform. Though, he will get the support from rent-seeking protectionists that want the big hand of government to prop up their business, and Santorum seems happy to oblige.

  • Santorum is as much of an “etch-a-sketch” as Mitt Romney.

Like Ron Paul supporters who can’t accept the fact that Ron Paul loves earmarks (he just doesn’t vote for them), Santorum supporters never can acknowledge that their guy shifts positions too.

Examples:

  1. He voted for No Child Left Behind, but now thinks it’s a bad idea
  2. In 1996, Santorum voted against a national “Right to Work” law, but now supports such a law
  3. Rick Santorum voted against NAFTA, but now would rather get 5 new FTA’s done
  4. Rick Santorum claimed in the debates that he doesn’t want to start a “trade war”, but according to the Club for Growth: “As a member of the Senate Steel Caucus , Santorum voted for and co-sponsored a bill to slap tariffs on imported steel in 1999.” He also voted for tariffs on honey, and a massive 27.5% tariff on all Chinese made goods if China didn’t adjust their currency.
  5. Rick Santorum wrote a book, and when pressed on what it contained, he blamed his wife. He later actually responded when questioned about a portion of the book: “I don’t know — that’s a new quote for me.”
  6. In 1995, Santorum told Philadelphia Magazine that: “[I] was basically pro-choice all my life until I ran for congress… But it had never been something I thought about” — but now he is pro-life! (I think he was probably just lying back then to make himself look like less of a culture warrior, which is just as bad.)

There are many more, but we’ll stick with those for now. The point is that Rick Santorum’s compass is not one that doesn’t waver. Like Mitt Romney, he did things differently when he represented but one State. Now that he’s running for President, his views have changed. There’s nothing wrong with that. Santorum supporters need to come to peace with this or risk looking like many in the Ron Paul camp who can’t accept the truth. Their guy isn’t perfect. No candidate is perfect.

  • Santorum is bad at arguing, lacks logic

Do you have that friend who votes the same way as you do, but has completely and horribly wrong reasons for supporting your side? Wish they would just vote and try not to convince others that he/she is right for those wrong reasons? We all do. In today’s race, that guy is Rick Santorum. Ann Coulter put it this way:

“Even when I agree with Rick Santorum, listening to him argue the point almost makes me change my mind.”

That’s true. I look at Rick’s website and see a bunch of policies — many of them I support — but when I hear the guy out there, I almost want to disagree with him, and thus, myself. Which might explain why people who can’t vote for him in the general aren’t going to vote at all, or vote for Obama.

Which is not to say that, all these criticisms of Santorum I have make me think Romney is the greatest candidate or most consistent of them all. It’s just that he’s the only electable one. Ron Paul is by far the most principled of the candidates, but he has baggage and bad policies he supports, and he’s far from electable. He would, however, get more Democrats and independents than Santorum.

Rick Santorum won’t be President next year. Now he’s now trying to make Mitt Romney as unelectable as he can, in hopes that he can run the country in 2017. (The President takes office in January).

But that won’t happen. Rick Santorum will never be President. And his efforts to dirty up Romney in hopes of an Obama victory are despicable, which is why Mitt Romney must stop being above the fray and absolutely destroy his candidacy for now and 2016. He is not somebody we should push for to argue for our side.

Go get him, Mitt.

YAY FREEDOM

Oh, the logic of Illinois voters. A girl actually said this to Mitt Romney in Illinois yesterday. Distractions on the whole contraceptive debate aside, this is the other side of the coin when it comes to misunderstanding the debate: Birth control is never “free.” Neither is other coverage.

Yet, many  media outlets either cover up the fact they understand this, or they simply do not get it. For example: TPM described the question as “One woman asked him about contracpetion access.” Are you kidding me? Her quote was ridiculous and that is how you write it up?

Somebody pays for it — Always. Whether it’s condoms at public schools or requiring health insurance plans to cover the pill, it gets paid for by somebody. In the case of the latter, it gets paid for everybody else’s insurance. How hard is that to understand?

A reporter emailed noted economist Steven Landsburg about the Sandra Fluke debate. Here’s an excerpt:

As you might suspect, I disagree with your assertion that “All she said, in effect, was that she and others want contraception and they don’t want to pay for it.”

You should read Landsburg’s response, it is really good but it is too long to post here.

This is one of the more misunderstood or not known facets of how health insurance works. Before the Affordable Care Act, States did most of the regulating of insurance plans. Sure, the feds had a role in regulating it to a degree, especially regarding Medicare, but mostly it was by States. (This is still true, but the federal role has and will likely continue to increase.)

Here’s how new mandates often happen at the State level:

A group of people would petition State legislators, and say: “We’re sick and tired that our evil insurers won’t cover [insert disease or procedure.]”

Let’s say it’s something obscure like Tay Sachs.

“We want you to mandate that all insurance plans in our state have to cover Tay Sachs.”

The legislator agrees and writes a feel-good bill. Nobody wants to oppose the Tay Sachs law because it would make them look “bad.” It becomes law. Bad law.

While this is a very sad disease, it’s a very similar argument as the contraceptive debate. Should I be required to pay higher premiums to cover Tay Sachs in other people when I’ll never need the coverage? No, I shouldn’t.

Should I be required to pay more to cover other peoples’ elective procedures that I would never want? I shouldn’t, but the law sometimes requires that I do.

(Note: This is a different argument than my premiums paying for a procedure that some stranger and I mutually want, which is an important distinction.)

State legislators, of course, are happy to please these constituents and constituents like them over and over. In some states the amount of mandated coverage is absurd.  Thousands of mandates later, people think they’re getting this stuff for “free.” They’re wrong. It is definitely paid for, by everyone. It should be paid for by those who are willing to pay for it.

A better solution would be to allow people to pick the insurance that’s best for them, without mandating coverage of obscure illnesses or personal choices like contraception, or mandating anything at all. That’s what a free-marketer would think is the best approach, but sadly, health insurance is hardly a free market.

Absent that, letting people shop for insurance across State lines (which is what Republicans proposed as an alternative to the Affordable Care Act) would be acceptable.

So, to that girl in central-Illinois, I say yeah “Yay freedom” because you wanting “free birth control” takes the free out of freedom.

 

Tuesday Links

On the road away from Wye

CBS: A rare look at the Fukushima Daiichi no-go zone

Some perspective about radiation 

Guardian: Why we love living next to a nuclear power plant (refreshing to see non-NIMBYs)

NYTimes: What Your Bracket Says About You

IBD: Online, liberals far less tolerant than normal people (study)

Gizmodo: How to die extremely quickly and easily

Gizmodo: AIM Is (Unofficially) Dead

Romenesko: TONY GROSSI LEAVES PLAIN DEALER AFTER BEING TAKEN OFF BROWNS BEAT

WSJ: When Mom Goes Viral

American: States aren’t red or blue forever

Updated Forecast: The Battle for the U.S. Senate

Battlefield 3 Close Quarters

Fox8Cleveland: Prosecutor Candidate Triozzi ‘Fine’ After Taking Punch

ESPN: Which NCAA names are coolest? #JORDAIRJETT

Wapo: U.S. exports to China boom, despite trade tensions

WSJ: Little sense in rare earth trade dispute (see next as to why)

Bloomberg: Rare Earths Fall as Toyota Develops Alternatives: Commodities

You doing anything on 3/27? Romney supporter? Come hang out at this fundraiser

Reason: Next Time Write a Letter to the Editor

Follow Me on Tumblr (don’t worry, all the good stuff stays right here.)

Check out the new design of the bomble.com landing page

Meanwhile, in SLU’s Pius Library..

National Journal: BlackBerry’s D.C. Reign Ending, Survey Finds

IVPress: A GED for College?

Lifehacker: What to do with old smart phones

Gawker: Here Are All the Controversial Doonesbury Abortion Strips Your Local Paper’s Not Running

This new Foo Fighters video parodies Falling Down, which is a great movie

Landsburg: Aftermath

CafeHayek: Not the Messiah

Sally Struthers. That is all. (h/t Metz)

Lance Brown: The Energy Policy Debate We Should Have

ARLNow: Major Closures Planned on Route 50

Reason: The case against rent control

RESPONSES TO YESTERDAY’S BRACKET POLL

And, in honor of my trivia team (My Little Kony) winning last night at Lounge 201, I give you:

Super Tuesday Links

Metro car

Atlantic: Is Josh Mandel the Next Marco Rubio?

 Mandel, who is Jewish, has the air of a precocious, recently bar mitzvahed student, or perhaps a studious, slightly cocky frat boy. (As an undergraduate at Ohio State, Mandel was a member of Alpha Epsilon Pi, the Jewish fraternity; he went on to earn a law degree from Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland.) And while he is undeniably skilled at rattling off his familiar lines, he quickly turns evasive or just blank on unfamiliar ground.

I disagree with Molly Ball’s description of Josh here. For full disclosure, I know Josh. He is a great person and will make a great U.S. Senator from Ohio. I’ve never known him to be cocky or evasive. And who would blame anyone for being “blank” on unfamiliar ground? Smart people don’t make dumb statements about topics on which they are not experts. It’s an interesting article, but you can tell Molly doesn’t like Mandel, and it shows. I’m confident that Mandel will make his case to the voters in November, and they’ll choose him over Sherrod Brown.

One commenter, presumably a Democrat (who identifies as a Marine, the branch of service of Josh Mandel) hits the nail on the head:

I’m of a different political persuasion than Mr. Mandel, but good grief Molly Ball, this article is dripping with disdain, down to the Mandel’s waitress with ” bad skin and dyed-black hair.”

Why drag poor Amanda into your hit piece???

Report to Mr. Fallows’ office immediately…

WaPo: Obama shifts location of G-8 summit from hometown of Chicago to his Camp David retreat (whoever thought putting the G-8 in any place other than Camp David is stupid and should be fired. Come on, really?)

Reason: Arlington County Housing Division Hosts “Housing 4 Hipsters” Happy Hour to Help Hipsters Find Housing Assistance (the same brilliant minds that brought you free bike helmets)

ARLNOW: Housing 4 Hipsters

ARLNOW: Bicycle Derby to Take Over Crystal City Parking Garage (Too bad the derby is not like roller derby)

Reason: Maryland Handgun Permit Restrictions Found Unconstitutional by Federal Judge

Why do people hate billboards? (esp. in DC)

Reason: It’s Like Totally Different When a Liberal Blowhard Guy Calls a Conservative Woman a Twat!

RFT: Anheuser-Busch Test Markets Margarita-Flavored Beer

Ivers: Maldives

InTrade: Romney’s chances of winning Ohio

Cleveland.com: Cleveland Browns linebacker Scott Fujita says he’s ‘paid out a lot of money for big plays,’ but never to hurt a player: report

MR: Does inequality lead to a financial crisis?

Quitting as a Rush Limbaugh sponsor has really helped Carbonite

io9: The 1935 plan to use rocket airplanes to deliver US mail

KMW: You’re Fat and You Know It: Why Government Anti-Obesity Efforts Fail

The only ways the Cubs will ever win the series (they could make one about the Browns’ Superbowl hopes)

Get your business online

NDC: That’s okay. Rick Santorum ran out of money in 2006, too.

Marcy Kaptur’s hit on Dennis Kucinich

NR: In California, Whom Will They Blame?

Seems my poll workers have a sense of humor

HOW I VOTED: I voted for Mitt Romney. I voted at about 9:45 and I was voter #5. In Virginia, only two names were on the ballot — Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. Santorum and Gingrich were too disorganized to make the ballot. I like a lot of what Ron Paul has to say (except on most of his foreign policy views and the Gold standard) but I couldn’t vote for him.

Wonkette back-alley trash operative “Jim S.”

MR: Democracy, wealth, and local stimulus spending

DC IS NOT A STATE

How do I get one of these?

STLBiz: SLU delays law school move until 2013

Cleveland.com: Cleveland faces complaint over stadium repair contract

WSJ: Reagan Was A Sure Loser Too

Wired: Uncle Sam: If It Ends in .Com, It’s .Seizable

Watched this last night on Netflix. Great movie.

JIM MORAN: NO FAN OF “PROFANITY”

DCist: Bloodthirsty Aliens, Cannibalism, Ants Nesting in Brains: Elementary School Teacher Fired for Assigning Seriously F’ed Up Math Homework

Dollar Shave Club has funny ads (h/t metz)

SUPER TUESDAY DATA FROM GOOGLE

Huffpo: Warren Buffett Company: Please Cut Our Taxes

WSJ: State-Owned Oil Companies vs. the Free Market

He does love saying “Congratulations” and who let the dogs out? (Secret Browns fan, perhaps?)

Bracketology: A History of Power Conference Bias

Pictures of people scanning QR codes

Lulzsec taking down by feds

WASHU apparently hates cats (animal testing is fine by me)

Introducing Google Play for developers (Android Developers Blog)

Introducing Google Play for consumers (Official Google Blog)

WaPo: EXIT POLLS: Economy is top issue again, and voters want business experience more than government

Thoughts on Romney and Private Equity

I was reading the reactions to the debates last night in New Hampshire, and came across this video from Andrew Sullivan’s blog.

It opens:

“Capitalism made America great. Free markets. Innovation. Hard work. The building blocks of the American dream. But in the wrong hands, some of those dreams can turn to nightmares. Wall Street’s corporate raiders made billions of dollars. [News announcer: “Private equity leaders getting rich at the expense of American workers.”] Their greed was only matched by their willingness to do anything to make millions in profits. Nothing was spared, nothing mattered but greed. This film is about one such raider and his firm. Mitt Romney became CEO of Bain Capital the day the company was formed — his mission — to reap massive rewards for himself and his investors. [Bearded man: “Mitt Romney, them guys, they don’t care who I am.”] [Old lady: “He’s for small business is [sic] no he isn’t. He’s not.” (Other lady: “You’re gonna be on a get list, you know that.”)]”

The Daily Beast reports a PAC supporting Newt Gingrich is airing this documentary. This is an production you would suspect would come from Occupy Wall Street (if they ran ads) or the unions. It’s despicable that people claiming to be Republicans are running this ad.

Here’s why:

  1. If Capitalism made America great, then why disparage private equity? Free markets are free markets. Money earned through hard work one way is no different than money earned through hard work another way.
  2. Private Equity is the very definition of innovation. Do the authors of this hit piece believe that VC’s and private equity firms don’t have a role in innovation? If so, they are wrong. These firms have a key role in our economy and funded ventures like Facebook, Google, and other recent big market makers.
  3. Private Equity doesn’t come as a result of hard work? Oh, you must be trying to get people to think about Wall Street and the whole “Blue Star airlines” scheme. If private equity firms continued to sap out productive actors in the market, like the movie suggests, then free markets would respond and make the price unaffordable to robber barons. (Government regulators would respond in instances of fraud, like they did in Wall Street.)
  4. In the wrong hands? Welcome to class warfare, brought to you by Newt Gingrich’s supporters and in the debates, Newt himself. I don’t fault them for using this tactic, but it works. It is also dirty and wrong. This is an area that I agree with Santorum on — America does not have classes.
  5. “At the expense of American workers.” Nobody is forced to do any job these days. Jobs are voluntary exchanges with corporations. If they offer too little, nobody is obligated to work for them. This is class warfare and economic bigotry.
  6. “Made billions of dollars” vs. “made millions in profits.” Well, which is it? This is an intentional blurring of the line. Sure, over time, big firms make billions in of dollars, but are they profits? After expenses, usually not. Sometimes, yes. Profits, (if the authors truly believe in capitalism) need to be paid to investors, sometimes in the millions of dollars. There are only about 400 billionaires in the United States. Do the math.
  7. Their greed was only matched by their willingness to do anything to make millions in profits.” Um, yeah, that’s how capitalism works. If they don’t “do anything” to make those profits, than investors go elsewhere with their money to find profits.
  8. Mitt Romney, them guys, they don’t care who I am.” Why should they? Private Equity firms have thousands of employees within the companies they own, do you think the CEO gets to know all of them? Why not care for yourself? Remember that trading labor for salary is a voluntary exchange — maybe you should care for yourself a little bit more, rather than being a narcissist trying to sell socialist economic labor union tripe on television. If these companies were so bad to work for, people wouldn’t work there.
  9. “He’s for small business is [sic] no he isn’t. He’s not.” Respectfully, ma’am, when private equity buys your company, you’re not a small business anymore. Deal with it.

So, those are my thoughts on this disgusting advertisement.