Bankers Abandoned Obama -- But the Rest of the Rich Held Surprisingly Strong

New Republic ^ | November 14, 2012 | Nate Cohn

[C19fan]

In 2008, long before stress tests and Dodd-Frank, then-Senator Barack Obama excelled in the rich enclaves where much of New York’s financial class lives. Obama made staggering gains among one-percenters in the wealthiest areas of western Connecticut, where as many as one-quarter of adult males work in the financial sector. In New Canaan, where Brian Williams owns a home and the median income exceeds $175,000, Obama lost by just 6 points after Kerry lost by 22 points four years earlier. Nearby Greenwich, where you can find Mel Gibson, Regis, and Madoff's kids, voted for Obama by 8 points.

.....................................................

The national exit poll showed Obama winning 52 percent of voters making more than $200,000 per year, compared to Kerry’s 36 percent four years earlier. Obama’s advances among affluent voters underpinned his victories in Virginia and Colorado, where strong showings in the Denver and Washington suburbs allowed Obama to win these traditionally Republican states.

[C19fan]

If for all the grief the GOP receives for being the "party of the rich" is losing $200 K households then **k them. I am 100% in favor of giving it to these Blue State Limousine Liberals good and hard. Cap deductions, bring back the AMT, and/or raise tax rates on the "rich". The GOP should be about protecting middle class families.

[Buckeye McFrog]

And the bankers are about to pay a price.

Bam needs a scapegoat, and fast. And they are the scapegoats sent over from Central Casting. He is about to take a fake Cherokee sledgehammer to them.

[Longbow1969]

If for all the grief the GOP receives for being the "party of the rich" is losing $200 K households then **k them. I am 100% in favor of giving it to these Blue State Limousine Liberals good and hard. Cap deductions, bring back the AMT, and/or raise tax rates on the "rich". The GOP should be about protecting middle class families.

I am actually changing my opinion on this and find myself agreeing with you. It is hard enough to protect the producers at the top end. It is near impossible if they won't help us help them. So, screw em' - for now. They are voting Democrat, so why are we protecting them again? It is always tough to defend the business and producer class against demagogues, near impossible if the people we are standing up for are stabbing us in the back. Let the tax rates rise on the wealthy until they come crawling back to conservatives begging for help.

[wideawake]

The GOP should be about protecting middle class families.

You do not protect middle class families by attacking their employers.

This is Economics 101.

And it isn't just bankers who are not on the President's side here. It is most "hard" business owners.

The millionaires referred to here are generally people in the entertainment, consulting and legal fields - people who typically benefit from enhanced regulation or who depend on government-enforced monopolies.

[wideawake]

It is hard enough to protect the producers at the top end.

There is a difference between being wealthy and being a "producer."

What do trial attorneys produce? What does the average trial attorney make? From whom do they make it?

[TChris]

What do trial attorneys produce?

Everyone hates attorneys until they need one. Then they just hate everyone else's attorneys.

[kosciusko51]

And the bankers are about to pay a price. Bam needs a scapegoat ...

"Bankers" are a dog-whistle for the Left, and means the same as "Neo-cons". So we know who is going to be made the scapegoat again... Shades of 1938...

[C19fan]

What employers? Contractors, lobbyists, and influence peddlers on NoVa? Hedge fund managers in CT? I never worked for any of them.

[wideawake]

Are you really arguing that unless you have personally worked for someone, they cannot be an employer?

[familyop]

Most of the wealthy folks of both political parties receive their incomes from government (including local government) and/or government-linked business (services, etc.). Most political speech is sponsored. That’s why most political speech is increasingly crazy from both sides and disgusting to reasonable, truly conservative Americans.

[wideawake]

Everyone hates attorneys until they need one.

Correct.

Sadly, often the reason why someone needs one is because some other person's trial attorney has ginned up a lawsuit against him.

[familyop]

Most middle class families are also reliant on government debt/revenues for their incomes. The un-fallen half will be moving in with “47%” shortly, as the monstrous (but soon shrinking, see “austerity measures”) pile of debt is gobbled up by the bigger fish. In other words, the remainder of the middle is about to be laid off and taking “haircuts” (as bond investors will), too.

[CitizenUSA]

The government taxes income, not wealth. What better way to keep the riffraff down?

[throwback]

Reminds me to go back and reread the “Forgotten Man” again. The economy continued to tank under FDR, but he was still reelected. I don’t know why I thought it would be any different this time. If we’re lucky, we only face about 20 years of no growth. Of course the final medicine of a world war wasn’t optimal either.

[VegasCowboy]

The government taxes income, not wealth.

This is the crux of the issue. The "rich" we need to protect are those who are negatively impacted by higher marginal rates. In other words, those who operate a small business and pay taxes on the related income, those who actively invest, or those who produce and earn a salary for their efforts. The "rich" who have large trust funds and have accumulated vast amounts of wealth are likely insulated from tax increases as they have armies of accountants and lawyers putting money in trusts and other vehicles to avoid taxation. So again, the producers get screwed and are asked to pay more to subsidize those who don't produce (the wealthy and the poor).

I hope this post isn't construed as class warfare. I'd prefer eveyone paid as little in taxes as possible. But the voting habits of trust funders and the mega rich don't indicate to me that the producers continue to support Obama. I don't know anyone who operates a business (and I know lots of them) that support him or his policies.