How Mitt Romney lost the unlosable election

William Bennett writes that President Obama won the 2012 election by winning 93% of the African-American vote and 71% of Latino votes, while Mitt Romney won white voters 59% to 39%, according to exit polls. If the GOP believe they lost the election because of race, they are destined to repeat the same mistakes over and over again. The key to their loss is that Obama won 60% to 38% among those who make less than $50,000 a year and among 18- to 29-year-olds he won 60% to 37%.

Capitalism is failing these two sectors of the population: low income earners and the youth. Poverty rates are highest among Black and Hispanic voters but young voters are also becoming disaffected, with almost half recent college graduates unemployed or under-employed. The seriousness of the situation is illustrated by the following statistic:

According to a Pew Research poll taken last year, 49% of Americans age 18-29 have a positive view of socialism while just 46% have a positive view of capitalism.

Mitt Romney might have sold his message to the middle-class and small business owners but he alienated the very people who suffered most from the economic downturn. He failed to define his campaign as a war against poverty and unemployment. Instead of looking the disaffected in the eye and telling them what he could do to get them a job, he spent his time preaching to the choir.

via Republicans lost the culture war –

9 Replies to “How Mitt Romney lost the unlosable election”

  1. Colin
    What is it with the US and its insistence on declaring war on its problems. Is it that to fix a problem you have to be aggressive and attack it , until it puts its hand up and says I quit. Sadly despite squwillions of tax payer dollars , the track record of all the other things that war has been declared on don’t look like throwing in the towel any time soon.
    If you want to appeal to the disadvantaged then you have to have a plan that they can understand and is not a bunch of weasel words.

    1. Capitalism has succeeded where socialism failed. Look at the rise in living standards since the Industrial Revolution. The problem is that we have been sliding back towards centrally-planned big government over the last few decades.

  2. Once again the obvious is the first thing to be forgotten. It is undeniable that the capitalist system has provided for the best standard of living the world has ever seen. What is also quite obvious but danced around endlessly is that the people who REALLY run the world want to destroy the economic system (and by proxy the United States) to enable the final slide into the “One World Order”. Witness the [media] in the US. Bought and paid for. Consider that every single law and regulation passed by congress for the last century has been expressly designed to destroy America the country and the ideology. Poverty and joblessness are just two symptoms of the true disease underlying: That the system that appears to be failing is only reflecting the actions of the people who are controlling everything in the background. Maybe these (and all other huge issues currently festering) could START to be addressed if and when people stand up and take the country back from those who desire total world domination. What some would label a “Conspiracy Theory” is unfortunately the truth.

  3. Socialism can be described as the sharing of misery and concentration of power into the hands of incompetent and corrupt people. The young are early manipulated with their Google search view of everything and their fear of 10 metre rises in sea levels.

  4. It is clear to me that unbridled capitalism is not a pretty thing. Unbridled capitalism creates abusive monopolies, abusively subjugates workers, leads to unconscionable pollution and tyranny. Capitalism is a great engine for prosperity because it constantly seeks to maximize utility of the available resources. But capitalism can be hugely shortsighted. We need an independent government to take the long view and bridle capitalism with anti-monopoly (anti-trust) laws, fair labor laws and environmental laws among others. A government fully beholden to Capitalistic interests will never do these things.

    1. I agree but disagree on your methods. We need strong regulation to ensure efficient markets and to prevent interest groups from undermining the workings of the capitalist system. I include in that group: fractional reserve banks, monopolists, labor groups and environmental groups. As a fair broker government needs to represent all interests and not just those of the most vocal or the wealthiest.

      A Swiss-style system of public referendums would ensure this.

Comments are closed.