The Donald Endorses Romney

In a hastily arranged 4 minute "event" in Las Vegas, Trump threw is considerable prestige and support behind Mitt Romney. So if you think about it, we have one billionaire endorsing one millionaire and both of them are full of nothing but hot air. Does anyone really care what Donald Trump thinks?

 

It is very obvious that you care. Why else would you post this?

 

Romney didn't seem all that thrilled about receiving the Badger's support. I imagine it was much the same feeling you get when the cat brings in a recently murdered mole and drops it at your feet. You feel you ought to be grateful for the intent but...

And as you say it's just one opportunistic wealth-centric fat cat who started life on a big pile of daddy's money but thinks he did it all himself endorsing another.

 

LOL! Thanks for that visual.

View attachment 369

And the cat even has mittens.

 

To get under your skin.

 

So you cared!
Personally, it effects me not one whit. My decision is based on how they have handled the events of the past.

 

Kinda like when Hugo Chavez & Ghaddafi endorsed BO?

 

Romney COULD do worse. He could have an endorsement from multi-billionaire Oprah Winfrey!

 

I don't know much about Oprah, but I think she actually made her money from scratch rather than starting off on third base.

 

Donald Trump only cares about Donald Trump and this endorsement is only a way for him to get back on TV for a few days. The man can not live without the media or with building something and putting his name on it. Like it really matters.

 

Aren't billionaires out of touch with the "common man" simply by being billionaires? That's what the liberals keep telling me.

 

There is a study that would indicate that the richer you become the less empathy for and interest in the less well off (or the less successful in RW parlance) you have. I don't know if this is true or not. I do think that it is reasonable to think that someone like Oprah who has been there and struggled through that would remember those days and behave accordingly as opposed to someone who has never known life without wealth and for whom piles of money have always been there. Of course there are exceptions. Both Roosevelts had money although by today's standards they would have occupied the financial lower level of the elite. So did the Kennedys although certainly Joseph P's use of his bucks for political purposes makes for some interesting and cautionary reading.

 

Oh, I'm pretty sure if Oprah suddenly endorsed Romney, someone would say, "We have one billionaire endorsing one millionaire and both of them are full of nothing but hot air." I mean, come on, once you hit your first billion don't you become out of touch with reality?

 

So are you saying that Romney is out of touch with reality?

 

Just how rich do you think Romney is?

 

He's a multi-millionaire, probably around $200 - $300 million, started out rich, inherited wealth and has never known a day of financial insecurity in his life and clearly doesn't get what millions of others not so "successful" have to deal with in their lives or how others now "successful" got to be that way. What IS your cutoff point for being out of touch?

 

My remark about billionaires being "out of touch" was sarcastic in case you didn't catch it. Being a billionaire doesn't necessarily make you "out of touch" at all as you've stated in the case of Oprah Winfrey. It's how you let the wealth affect your life, regardless of how you received your money. There can be wealthy people who were born poor who become the most miserly, antisocial people you'd ever want to meet. On the other hand, wealthy people born into wealth can be some of the most philanthropic, humanitarian people you'd ever want to meet.

I think it's disingenuous for someone to state that wealth makes a person "out of touch". It's simply not true. If that were the case, John Kerry, John Edwards, Al Gore, the Clintons, etc. could be labeled "out of touch". I don't agree with their politics, but simply because they're wealthy doesn't make them "out of touch".

I detect a bit of jealousy when I hear, "... started out rich, inherited wealth and has never known a day of financial insecurity in his life". I wish we could all start out that way and I don't begrudge his wealth.

Please explain how Romney "doesn't get what millions of others not so "successful" have to deal with in their lives or how others now "successful" got to be that way".

 

Jealousy? No. Guilt maybe. lol

I can't really single out Romney in this respect. Broadly speaking it applies to almost everyone in the Republican faction and to many of those in the Democratic one. This seems to outline the Romney plan for our future as well as anything.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/fiscalpolicy/p/Mitt_Romney.htm

Distilled it's the same pandering to corporate power and the super rich at the expense of the middle class and the poor that has become Republican orthodoxy over the past 20 or 30 years. I have little doubt in Republican world my parents and others in my family would have had a much harder time going from nothing to where they are now. They feel the same way which is why even with a degree of hard won success under their belts they distain the Republican circus and are grateful for the help they received from the public sector on their way up and are happy to give back so that others can have the same opportunities.

 

I'm going to assume that your parents probably rose from poverty to their current status beginning in the late 1960's or early 1970's or so. Let's take a look at the parties in powers since 1968:

1968 - 1976 (Republican) = 9 years
1977 - 1980 (Democrat) = 4 years
1981 - 1992 (Republican) = 12 years
1993 - 2000 (Democrat) = 8 years
2000 - 2008 (Republican) = 8 years
2009 - Present (Democrat) = 3 years

TOTAL: 29 years - Republican, 15 years Democrat

Even if the time frame were, say from 1981 to present, the total is 20 years Republican and 11 years Democrat. Either way, Republicans have been in power twice as long as Democrats. You say your parents have gone from "nothing to where they are now" which I assume you mean that they have obtained a modicum of wealth. Are you telling me that they obtained nothing under the years of Republican leadership and ONLY obtained help from the public sector (e.g., welfare, food stamps, housing, etc.) under Democratic leadership? If so, I find that extremely difficult to believe. I tend to believe that your parents were hard-working and the fruit of their labors has paid off. I doubt it had little to do with Republican or Democratic leadership in this country.

You say that under a Republican world your parents would have had a harder time achieving what they have. Well, it WAS a Republican world for most of that time. In fact, twice as long as it was a Democrat world. You seem to be painting Republicans as cold-hearted misers, but I can't blame you since the media shouts this all the time. The fact is that conservatives give more to charity than liberals so if anyone can be painted as "cold-hearted" it would be the Democrats.

 

The first and most obvious problem with what you are saying is that Republicans of the 60s 70s and into the 80s were little like the Republicans now. They hadn't yet gone over the edge. There are few Republican politcos from those times who would be acceptable to today's Republican faction, and also the Republicans had not yet totally absorbed with the Democrats under the umbrella of corporate control.

You are about a decade off on your timing, but not bad. Thankfully, we had and have a support system that kept folks like my parents fed and employed and provided moral support and hands on training while they got on their feet. But when they were ready to venture out on their own the risks were theirs. Luckily the socio-economic atmosphere as well as government assistance particularly in education and small business development not to mention infrastructure that helped a lot both in terms of starting and growing a business and starting and growing a family. What my parents also realize that not everyone is a business owner or an entrepreneur, much less a successful one, and that those who are employed (or not) rather than self-employed are also part of society and deserve to be supported rather than downsized and deprived of employment and exploited because some corporation has decided to make its stuff overseas and then bring it back here at sweatshop prices to undercut the local folks.