Tweet
Mitt Romney is firmly viewed as the candidate of the rich and not the middle class according to a new Washington Post/ABC News poll. A remarkable 65 percent think Romney would do the most to advance the economic interests of the wealthiest Americans. In comparison, less than a quarter of voters think President Obama would do the most to help enrich those already very wealthy.
Across every income bracket, education level, and partisan group Romney is overwhelmingly seen as the candidate that will do the most to benefit the rich. Interestingly, the group that most strongly believes Romney would do the most to advance the economic interests of wealthy Americans is the wealthiest Americans. An incredible 82 percent of people making over $100,000 a year think Romney would help them the most, compared to just 8 percent who think Obama would do more for them.
Being viewed as the candidate who would do the most to help the rich won’t necessarily be a problem for Romney if he were, in general, seen as the candidate best able to advance the economic interest of all Americans, including the rich; but that is not the case. The poll found that Americans narrowly think President Obama would do more to advance the economic interest of people like themselves. 46 percent think Obama would do more to help them and their families economically, while 43 percent think Romney would do more for them. The margin was slightly more favorable for Obama on the question of who would do more to economically help the middle class. On that question, 51 percent chose Obama and 42 percent chose Romney.
Romney is seen as a very rich man whose policies would financial benefit rich people like him but not the middle class. That is not a good image in a time of economic hardship and a big target for the Obama campaign to exploit.
18 Comments
And Obama is a soon-to-be very rich man whose policies would financial benefit rich people but not the middle class. See Bill Clinton’s $80 Million Payday, or Why Politicians Don’t Care That Much About Reelection.
and Obama thought he had the rich all locked up. He’ll have to work even harder for the 1%ers.
Is not the more stunning headline that less than 50% of americans think Obama or Romney will do anything to help them.
what this poll shows and what we all know is that not much difference between O and R.
Rich is defined as making 100k is that a joke
“…A remarkable 65 percent think Romney would do the most to advance the economic interests of the wealthiest Americans. In comparison, less than a quarter of voters think President Obama would do the most to help enrich those already very wealthy…”
Conclusion: it’s better to be a whore for the rich, than rich.
Yes, mswinkle, of the “information” gleaned from the poll, the primary headline should read, “Majority of Americans do not think either of the current candidates for President will take the steps necessary to improve economic conditions in such a way as to benefit the majority of human beings living in the USA.”
But, then, we wouldn’t have a horse race, would we?
And … it might give rise to many people deciding upon considering OTHER possibilities … which would simply never do … the sky would fall, the oceans rise …
DW
One thing about being in the 99%….there’s one helluva lot of us out there. Now, a lot of people don’t realize that. But as they and their friends and relatives get “taken” by the 1%, slowly but surely these people, many of them republicans, are waking up and smelling the destruction.
Don’t get me wrong….this is still a lesser of two evils election. And, being in Texas, a guaranteed “red” state, my vote for Green party WILL be counted as a “no confidence” vote against BOTH parties.
That’s good since in TX it will not matter who gets your vote anyway betwn the Big 2.
I’ve got a great slogan for MITT ROMNEY = Fascism with a Smile. Its more honest then Compassionate Conservatism.
Indeed. Ya’ know I gave the “French Revolution” a “look see”. The French, those people know how to orchestrate a revolution. But, damn, you really can’t find guillotines anymore.
Obama obviously is also for the rich by the rich.
In 2000 Nader got more votes from people who made $100K or slightly more than from any other income group.
Re: “Conclusion: it’s better to be a whore for the rich, than rich.”
Best of all to be a rich whore.
Bring back Catherine the Great!!!
Great news for team obama and the obamabots. This ‘ill be one of those periods where you can fool some of the people some of the time.
LOL seems we are on the same page. Makes you wonder if Jon has a pony in the race, or like the rest of MSM can only think of one way to interpret the data.
2 parties, 1 master
The criminal elite
Bill Clinton gives hope to all of the trailer park trash that someday, if they lie effectively, betray the 99%, and sell out to the oligarchs that they too can become wealthy.
Is that even possible? Will he have to publicly kiss Jamie Dimon’s ass for real, instead of metaphorically?