ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

The Drink Mitt Had To Take

Updated on August 18, 2012

At Least In Public

Mitt Romney's decision to select Wisconsin Represntative Paul Ryan, loyal Randian and privitization advocate, as his running mate was a choice that while seeming to be a risk, may have been a required one.

Much like John McCain in 2008, Romney found himself lacking the trust of the GOP's "base". In his case, it was likely more the plutrocratic wing that has swallowed the tea that the Kochs, ALEC, etc have fed a segment of the masses through their media mouthpieces like Beck and Limbaugh. To chose someone who's adopted the same ecomonic philsophy of cutting taxes on the "%1" by cutting services to the "%99" is a way to reach out to them. He also may see a need to show the corporate leaders that are bankrolling his and other GOP campaigns that he is with them.

This would seem to be unnecessary though, as all through the campaign, Romney has shown himself to be a man from, of, by and for the "%1". The selection of Ryan only seems to solidify this.

It is good to see that this bone that Romney threw to the rabid dogs of the Tea Party has also provided a lot of meat for the voices of the "%99". I have read many articles pointing out how this shows how much the GOP relies on the "%1" and how far the party has shfited to the side of the plutrocrats.

This makes the response an easy one. Frame the election as a contrast between the people and the powerful. The party of the CEO versus the party of the people.

Of course, one thing I've observed with many right-wing movements is their ability to convince people to vote against their economic interests.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Temi Benjamin profile image

      Temi Benjamin 5 years ago from Europe.

      I smiled the whole time reading this because I share similar views. It was nice and very straight-to-the-point.

    • Johnkadu123 profile image

      Johnkadu123 5 years ago from Toronto, Canada

      I am in absolute amazement at how many people choose to vote for a party that is diametrically opposed to their interests. In the USA there is a rather controversial explanation for this but I will not go into it now. I just wanted to say that I feel that just like in everything else, Mitt Romney is testing the water. If there is no opposition he will go with it but if there is a backlash he will change his mind. Some call it flexibility while others consider it to be a case of flip flopping.

    • Jillian Barclay profile image

      Jillian Barclay 5 years ago from California, USA

      Romney's choice of Paul Ryan was inevitable, of course. If people vote for this less than dynamic duo, they probably deserve to lose their Medicare, Social Security, etc.

      Sometimes I, too, wonder how voters can be so stupid--- no nicer way to put it---