Maybe, just maybe the accusations are valid and have nothing to do with jeolousy. Those who are accused of arrogance will often respond that their accusers are just "jeolous" (which if you think about is an incredibly arrogant statement that everyone else is wrong but I'm right).
And “patrician” can mean just that — classy.
Patrician can also mean snobbish. If someone avoids others because he believes he is better than them, then it should be viewed as arrogance. If Romney views himself in the same manner that you do, he would be arrogant.
He doesn’t go knock back beers with the boys, or swap dirty stories. In some people’s minds, that enough to condemn him.
I've been on both sides of that divide. When someone didn't want to take part in drinking or telling dirty stories, he was seen as "too religious" or "churchy" or "square" but not arrogant. It was seen as a rejection of our actions, not us, personally. To be perceived as arrogance, it would have to have an air of superiority, a lack of personal humility, an aloofness, not just a "no, I don't do that stuff."
If anyone has been arrogant during this campaign (other than Obama) it's people like Tom Ridge:
Former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, speaking to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, said the race would have been different in his state, which has 21 electoral votes, if McCain had chosen him as running mate instead of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
"I think we'd be foolish not to admit it publicly," he said...
Mitt Romney would never say anything that arrogant or classless in a million years. Yet, he is attacked and Tom Ridge ignored. Hmmm.