I heard about this on the radio this morning, then found it on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_evS-T-c35M&feature=player_embedded
For those who can't get youtube, here is the summary:
Romney is attacked for being a "greedy" "corporate raider." For taking over companies and liquidating/downsizing them, firing employees. Former employees are interviewed, saying Romney isn't on the side of the little guy or the small business.
What strikes me as remarkable is not the content of the ad, but the fact that it comes from a GOP candidate. The ad is pure, unadulterated "class warfare," at least according to the definition of that phrase that is employed on the right.
Is "class warfare" OK when it comes from the right but not OK when it comes from the left?
- wolf
[Note: I have no audio so can't see for myself.]
I suppose you could say it's class warfare. I do think it fair to point out that in typical, or straight up unadulterated, class warfare you're pitting one 'class' against another 'class'. E.g., 99% v 1%.
Romney isn't a class per se. But to the extent this tries to portray Romney as a member of the despised uber rich banker- type, yeah it's playing on stereotypes developed and employed in typical class warfare.
But I think it also has another element particularly important in this cycle: Romney doesn't create jobs, he destroys them. While I would agree that at Bain Capital his priority wouldn't have been the "little guy", a euphemism for workers, to say he destroyed jobs is absurd. The companies acquired by Bain Capital would by necessity be those headed towards bankruptcy. Accordingly, in the absence of Bain Cap, or they're success in turning around, all jobs would have been lost. So, Bain Cap helped save jobs, and by putting these failing firms back into profitability helped them grow to eventually increase jobs.
And yes, I absolutely agree this is an odd and counter-productive (from the Repub party POV) line of attack one should not expect of Repubs. Will it back fire on Newt? I think it will to some extent, but the question is what extent?
-------------------
Aside from this ideological or partisan type stuff, I think the another important bit to be gleaned form this is either/ both that 1) Newt is a Kamikaze azzhole and/or 2) that the field is getting desperate and they're looking at their 'thermopylae'. Many analysts are saying if Romney wins in NH the race is all but over, particularly given the runners-up are bunched together. I.e., Romney, who is already leading in SC, will roll into that primary with the anti-Romney split among several candidates making a victory for him all but assured. It's desperation time.
I sometimes wonder if Newt is aiming for VP. Maybe he's going 'nuclear' to help someone else (Santorum) in hopes of the VP slot?
Edit: Forgot to mention another bit which further adds to irony of all this - Newt is able to do this because he just got $5 million for his PAC from a casino Billionaire.
Fern
Facebook
Twitter