Skip to comments.Former Wall Street Obama Backers Switch to Romney (Big wigs and power brokers for Romney)
Posted on 08/24/2011 4:40:59 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
A large group of 2008 Barack Obama supporters are now banking on Mitt Romney for the upcoming presidential election.
Thats according to a report from Fox News that says a shift in Wall Street support could mean as much as a $150,000 boost for Romneys campaign.
I think Romney could at least split Wall Street with Obama, which is something McCain really didnt do, said Charlie Gasparino, a reporter for Fox Business News. None of the expected bank presidents showed up to a recent fundraiser for President Obama, he added.
They’ll control whoever ends up in the White House. It’s a tidy system.
Outta the frying pan and into the fire. It’s a debatable subject as to which would be worse, Obama or Romney. I will never have to choose between the two.
150,000 is this from the onion, LOL,
I’m no Romney supporter but it’s a pretty safe bet that the man knows more about macroeconomics than the neighborhood organizer does.
What I don’t understand is why Wall Street ever supported Obama to begin with.
I wouldn’t read too much into it, other than Wall Street’s opinion on Obama’s re-election chances. It is all about business.
The Dems could screw over Wall Street every which way, including Wednesday, and business would still give the Dems most of the bulk of campaign contributions if Wall street thought they’d get re-elected, because business has to still work with the feds.
Unless, of course, there is a nominee who captures the White House in 2012...and who built their victory by using the army known as the citizens of the United States as opposed to lobbyists, special interests, unions, and big business. That kind of President is very hard to control.
Of course, she's not yet declared her candidacy, has she?
Rush talks frequently about the myth that wall street is a conservative bastion.
If you can’t figure out who is the least of the EVIL’
Romney has promised Wall Street that he’ll get Cap & Trade passed if elected.
Well, this is progress.
Romney could well be the Bob Dole of 2012. If you want 4 more years of Obama, you want Romney to be his opponent in the general election. Your second choice is probably "W" (Rick W Perry) because you can run against George W. Bush and his policies again.
IMO, Obama vs. Romney = Obama victory, and Obama vs. Perry is too close to call right now. Obama vs. any other truly conservative Republican is a loss for Obama.
This is the election when conservatives need to stop holding their noses and get a real conservative on the ticket. If the Ruling class Republicans thwart that, the country is lost until we either clean up the Republican party or replace it with a truly conservative, constitutional party.
Not this time around. Romney is dead meat. The Usurping Marxist Onada should be dead meat, too. But he may yet pull a rabbit out of the hat. The Constitution means nothing to him and him; and his commie buddies will attempt to get away with massive voter fraud—again.
The One may even be plotting to create chaos in the US so Onada can request a UN army come here to “keep order”. Now where do you think they would find that army? I’m sure Onada’s commie buddy Putin would be glad to oblige.
--Johnny Caspar, Miller's Crossing
They aren't really crooks. They're honest, ethical businessmen that were driven to a life of crime. The devil made them do it. If we'd just leave them alone, they would conduct their business ethically and fairly!
Beating Obama is all about getting the indie and Reagan Democrat vote. Neither of them think in terms or conservative or liberal, they vote on “feelings.” Lets face it, anyone that is capable of voting for Reagan in 80/84 but then voting for Obama in 08 is not voting on well thought out principle.
Its going to be all about the economy and a sellable image. Despite constant media bashing Reagan was eventually able to show an image to the public that was very likeable and confidence inspiring, so much so that even union dems dumped Carter for the anti union Reagan. And they did it twice, even after Reagan fired all those PATCO workers. We are going to need someone who can do the same in order to beat Obama. Who is it going to be?
Romney and macroeconomics? Romneycare is stark proof that even if Romney understands macroeconomics it does not influence what he does.
With Marxists you have to look view what they have done or do over the long haul. Because most people would reject Marxism outright if they understood the only thing it bring them is a gray—or worse—world of everyone suffering equally. That is, except for the Marxist ruling elite.
As for the long term—I’m talking many decades—probably at least as soon after WWII ended. International and US Marxists got together clandestinely somewhere. They studied how they could ultimately subvert America. It would requiring coopting (one way or the other): 1. Supreme Court. They were successful, but then lost it under Bush II. However, they continue to retain control of many state judiciaries. 2. Media. They were successful. Alas, the rise of the internet has largely blunted that advantage. 3. Education. They were successful. 4. Religious leadership. They were successful. Business leadership. They were most successful with the Wall Street crowd. I give you Corzine and Bloomberg as examples. Their government policies are Marxist. Corporations have for the most part resisted the Marxist siren call. But even there we see the Marxist social justice ploy creeping into corporate decisions. GE is a case in point. We have Pepsi and some hotel chains marketing IAW people’s sexual orientation. And let’s not forgot Chrysler and GM.
To make any sense of how there is a Usurping Marxist occupying the WH, requires understanding how we got here. Too many of us watched the train coming and did nothing—including me. Traditional and Constitutional Americans simply became inured to losing one little battle after another. We kept thinking the silliness would come to a head and adults would ultimately prevail. The silliness did come to a head and the juveniles—albeit dangerous Marxists—prevailed. Voila, Onada and his angry commie regime.
Anyone who buys into “Marxism” is just another rube. The power and money at the top doesn’t care about Marxism. The powers that be are no more Marxists than the Gambino family. Anyone they recruit into their game by selling ideology is simply another kind of sucker. Their goal is the same as any organized crime syndicate—to fix the fight.
I think you are right. Well: It saves me a trip to the polls.
I guess the silver lining is that is a whole lot of cash that won’t be going into Obama’s re-election coffers. (it also frees him to run an anti-Wall Street campaign though)
Romney, Obama, Perry...fill in the blank. Doesn’t matter who, they will be controlled. It’s that simple.
Your logic makes sense only if the possibiity they were Marxists in the first place is ignored. Marxists are very adept at pretending they are anything but Marxists. Marxist elites have no problem getting rich. They just want to be sure they’re the only ones being enriched.
Moreover, history is replete with business getting into bed with totalitarian regimes. For example Germany and Italy in the 1930s. They hope it will prevent their ox from being gored.
add one more “Me” to that little graphic. The really spooky guy should be posing right behind the divine o.