Add up the wealth of the last eight presidents, from Richard Nixon to Barack Obama. Then double that number. Now you’re in Romney territory.
He would be among the richest presidents in American history if elected — probably in the top four.
The former Massachusetts governor has disclosed only the broad outlines of his wealth, putting it somewhere from $190 million to $250 million. That easily could make him 50 times richer than Obama, who falls in the still-impressive-to-most-of-us range of $2.2 million to $7.5 million.
“I think it’s almost hard to conceptualize what $250 million means,” said Shamus Khan, a Columbia University sociologist who studies the wealthy. “People say Romney made $50,000 a day while not working last year. What do you do with all that money? I can’t even imagine spending it. Well, maybe …”
This speaks to Romney's electability against Barack Obama this November. The economy is hurting badly and in all likelihood, will continue to be hurting by the time of the general election. Historically, this bodes well for Republicans. People vote their pocketbooks. "It's the economy, stupid," right? The Republicans should win this unless they actively try to lose it by nominating someone who is unelectable, someone who would completely cede this advantage to Obama, and Mitt Romney is that someone.
Why? Because the economic hard times only work against Obama if his opponent doesn't seem exactly like the kind of guy that is responsible for the average voter's economic woes, the "fat cat," Wall Street, golden parachute, executive kind of guy who actually likes firing people, and stupidly even says so out loud on the campaign trail. Romney didn't even earn all that wealth by hard work and innovation. He saved his big bank, Bain and Co. with a $10 million taxpayer bailout when he couldn't turn a profit by his own merits as a businessman.
Obama is ready to turn the economic hard times around on Republicans if they give him an opportunity to. Mitt Romney would be that opportunity. Someone who made millions consulting for Freddie Mac during the housing bubble (cough, cough Newt Gingrich) would be that opportunity. Someone who was a Senator during the Bush years and voted for all the deficit-busting budgets that have led us down this path would be that opportunity. But most of all, Mitt Romney would be that opportunity.
And on a side note, a mild-mannered country doctor and military veteran who has always voted against and opposed bailouts for big Wall Street banks, who actually predicted the economic crisis before it even happened, and who has offered a real, non-partisan, remedy to solve the problems spawned by the crisis would NOT be that opportunity.
If Republicans really mean it when they say that the most important thing is defeating Obama this November, even with a candidate who isn't perfect, then they absolutely must reject the candidacy of Mitt Romney as a major liability to that end and embrace the one candidate who wouldn't cede the biggest advantage they have going into the general election, and that candidate is Ron Paul.
Editor in Chief, THL
Articles | Author's Page