Thanks to Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry, Bain Capital is all over the news this week, prompting an upset MItt Romney to accuse his rivals of turning to “the bitter politics of envy” in order to halt his momentum. But is it possible the latest round of attacks will actually work to Romney’s advantage in the general election?
Some pundits have thrown out the idea that because the Bain story is coming up sooner than expected, it will be that tougher for Democrats to go on the offensive later as per their original plan.
“[If] Romney wins the nomination, this early fuss might have inoculated him against the Scrooge gambit,” TIME columnist Joe Klein wrote.”The public may feel Bain is same old, same old by October.”
Don’t buy it, Democrats say. Even while they acknowledge that they planned to roll out the Bain angle later for a reason, they find it pretty hard to contain their grins overall.
“I would have preferred to wait, yes, to keep the bottle of whup-ass fresher,” one Obama campaign strategist told TPM. “At the same time — and this is important to note — having the Republicans eat their own actually makes the Bain story more potent than we ever could because it instantly validates it as a line of attack and falls on independent ears as a matter of legitimate debate, not as a partisan line of attack.”
And when the real Bain attack comes, it will be anything but old news to the voters it needs to reach. After all, it’s hardcore Republicans who are paying the closest attention to the GOP campaign and its Bain moment right now, and they’re not voting for President Obama anytime soon.
“This isn’t a primary attack in the first place — it’s why we haven’t put any resources behind Romney as a corporate buyout specialist at this stage — it’s a general election issue for independent and swing voters in places like Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Indiana,” a senior Democratic strategist told TPM. “We were shocked that his rivals went there but nonetheless pleased because now the charges about his status as a corporate raider enjoy the lustre of bipartisan ship.”
As the above quote hints, it’s worth noting that the Gingrich and Perry war on Bain is a far cry from what the actual general election attacks will look like. The current fight is being waged almost entirely via public statements from two resource-strapped politicians, neither of whom has a particularly impressive supply of surrogates willing to amplify their message. And while Democrats have fanned the flames from the sidelines somewhat with press events and web videos, they’ve yet to spend a single dollar on anti-Bain TV ads themselves.
That won’t be the case as the calendar ticks towards November. Once Democrats decide its time to make their ultimate Bain push, they’ll have the resources to flood the zone with TV spots, direct mail (likely referencing Bain layoffs in targeted swing states), and a small army of Democratic lawmakers and operatives reinforcing the story 24/7 on cable news. Think 2004, when the entire GOP apparatus (including, awkwardly, Mitt Romney) worked in unison to drive home the John Kerry “flip flopper” meme.
In addition, it’s not at all clear how long the current Bain blowup will last. Already there are signs that Romney’s foes might put the “corporate raider” genie back into the bottle as quickly as it emerged. Even Newt Gingrich conceded on Wednesday he may be giving ammunition to the other side.
“Obama just makes it impossible to talk rationally in that area because he is so deeply into class warfare that automatically you get an echo effect,” Gingrich told a South Carolina voter concerned that Newt’s attacks were legitimizing diatribes against free enterprise, according to Politico. “I agree with you entirely.”
If Gingrich tones things down and Romney wraps up the race by the end of the month, the Bain story could go back into stasis, still plenty fresh for the general. And when it does emerge, the Republican field’s Bain tantrum — even if it was just a week long — will provide a feature film’s worth of footage to use against Romney.
“Newt loves to attend film premieres,” Democratic consultant Matt Ortega told TPM. “Democrats are going to make him a star this fall.”
Brian Beutler contributed to this post.
Benjy Sarlin
Benjy Sarlin is a reporter for Talking Points Memo and co-writes the campaign blog, TPM2012. He previously reported for The Daily Beast/Newsweek as their Washington Correspondent and covered local politics for the New York Sun.
The politics of envy would be in effect if the Republicans actually had anyone but their own interests at heart. If they were pushing more economic opportunity or growth in wages or fair taxation, I might be willing to listen. But Romney and all his little Rebaggers are only interested in destroying the middle class and practicing scorched earth economic policies.
The "bitter politics of envy" and "class warfare" result from the same concept of diffusing the resulting economics of tax policies that originated nearly 30 years ago under Reagan. Reagan sold many starry eyed young people that with lower taxation they would all have more when they "became" millionaires or better. We now realize the results of that wishful and trickle down economic supply side theory that was going to make it all better for all. Didn't happen. Now with jobs shipped overseas and the destruction of regulation free capitalism there are fewer and fewer jobs for educated people to fight over. Of course there still are many Walmart and McDonald jobs available as people have less disposable incomes to buy the "better stuff". What is the Occupy Movements all about? It is basically about fairness and that the opportunity promised to educated young and middle age people was destroyed by a corruptible and greedy financial industry. They created the problem and now many, especially on the right, want the rest of the people to "pay" for the results. Less revenues means we get to slim down the social safety net. Yes, there is class war fare and they started it and basically then won. We have to deal with it by not letting the GOP win this next presidential race.
accusing opponents of being envious sounds like an act of desperation. that may be good enough for GOP primary voters, but won't cut any mustard in the general election. Romney clearly wants these questions to go away. dream on.
What I really love is knowing that, in spite of all the right wing zealots' panic and fear mongering, and in spite of all the Fox News lies and insults, Obama is gonna get reelected anyway. I hope that this means that, on Election Night 2012, conservatives and wingers will collectively freak out and wet their pants simultaneously.
kunda311 I've said this before: the low-info Republicans are waving their freak flag of "ONE AND DONE!" and sending around Facebook jpegs of moving vans in front of the White House, etc. The entire narrative to be derived from seeing a "Republican debate" on TV, every week for about two years, is: "Who will replace Obama?" As if it were a given.Therefore, if President Obama is, as is generally expected, re-elected, "wet pants" does not begin to approach what you will see next. You must appreciate that there is simply no room in their version of reality for that to happen. It is a given that everyone outside their bubble must think like they do, for they are not really IN a bubble... and Rush and Sarah and Beck and company told them they were the "Real" Americans.
Think of the teabagger lady in the legendary news clip, weeping, "Ah want mah cuntry back!" Know when these people started gettingcrazy? After Obama did this or that? Nope. After he got INAUGURATED.
Which happened because more people voted for him than they did the other guy. And these teabaggers' reactions indicate that there was simply no room in their field of consciousness for an African-American ever to occupy the White House. Because if there had been the slightest possibility that this could in their minds, THEY WOULD HAVE GONE OUT AND VOTED IN 2008
Like they did in 2010. Clearly, they didn't.
There's nothing wrong with reducing staff to streamline a company and make it make profitable. The real problem is that this isn't what Romney did. What he did was hollow out companies to the point that they were no longer viable (but looked good on paper because profits were temporarily higher). Then before these hollow shells of companies could implode, he foisted them off on buyers as if they were stable enterprises.
His metier was to find suckers and sell them junk. Now he's looking to do the same only this time the suckers he has in his sights are the American public.
When the Democrats roll out the big guns, I have a suggestion for them. The kind of capitalism Romney and others like him practice has been called "vulture" capitalism but maybe they should consider using the term "parasitic" capitalism.
A parasite is an organism that feeds off it's host but also needs it's host to stay alive for it's continued existence. Romney's form of capitalism accumulated great wealth that was made possible by it's attachment to a system that is stable and wealthy and provides the necessary security, legal and physical infrastructure that it can use to it's benefit. It couldn't have done what it did, for instance, in a poor, third-world country.
Unfortunately for us (the host), parasitic capitalism is compelled only to feed on the host, not to do anything to increase the health of the host. It's only interested in it's own gains, not the good of the whole organism. Of course, if the host dies so does the parasite but parasites still have no imperative other than to feed despite the possible death of the host. Thus parasitic capitalism has no interest other than to protect it's money from taxes by any means possible despite damage to the system, drive wages and costs to the lowest level despite the damage to the country, or move jobs and assets off shore to protective havens despite disruption to communities because, well, that's what parasites do. They look out for themselves even if it kills the host.
It may sound too much like an enema for a political ad but it's long past the time for the U.S. to flush the parasites out of it's system. We can start with running Romney out of town.
Johnbo i'm imagining a political cartoon showing a giant blood-engorged tick with romney's smugly smiling face.
Leech...is a better metaphor ...ticks are small ...This is a big income inequality Leech problem..Causing much of what has taken the USA and the World into an economic morass.
There is still $700 Trillion in toxic debt out in the World market.. paulsen, bush/cheney let the US and some foreign banks write off, dollar for dollar, debt ! Debt forgiveness happens in the world of the bain capitals as they did with the $10 million that FDIC gave to Bain in debt forgiveness in the 1990s!
Johnbo I think we need more science, in this case ecology, in these discussions. Well done Johnbo.
I'm seeing the election coming down to this. 1% vs 99%. How can we lose? The deems are the 99%! Yay!
Marion Frances Count on the Dems (not deems) to failure for the jaws of success!
The democrats won't have to do anything to Romney he won't do to himself first. He is not only embarrassing himself. He is embarrassing the Tea Party. Remember when they used to detest crony capitalism. Now they embrace it because Rush and Sean says it's OK. Not just OK but the American way. Old school republicans like myself used to enjoy debating with the Tea Party members in my community. Now whats the point? They don't stand for anything. Just more gas bags needing to spout whats politically popular today. Losers trying to stay relevant. When did we decide Mitt Romney the Mormon Prince of vulture capitalism /crony capitalism, a cancer on the American Dream needed to be show cased in the White House. How many voting age children are going to vote for a candidate who was a major contributor to their parents losing their job, house, pension, health care, self respect, and faith in America. How many parents will vote for a candidate who is a ranking member of the crew who stole their childrens future? After what I have scene this debate season. The democrats would be safe bets for reelection if they went on vacation. They don't need to attack anybody. Attacking Romney would just make him look more important than he is. Why would the democrats give legitimacy to the flimflam man by attacking him?
fordneri Never underestimate the power of stupid people voting in large groups.
Wow, I'm a 26 year old man and the 30 minute Bain video made me cry. The story resonated with me because it is exactly what my Mom went through in her job recently. Lo and behold, who is a shareholder in her former employer? None other than Bain Capital. I've pretty much instantly turned from indifference about Romney as president to sheer contempt for the guy. Call it "destructive creativity" or whatever you want, but something just doesn't fly when you are making millions of dollars from businesses that go bankrupt. If Bain was truly looking out for those business's bottom lines in the long haul, Bain would NOT be selling its shares in the short to medium term like it has a habit of doing. Okay, I'm ranting now.
Chris Berry Dems need to make the name Voctor Posner relevant again. The King of corporate Raiders in the 80's
"Obama just makes it impossible to talk rationally," says Newt.
My President has powers I didn't know he had. Go Obama! Confuse their minds!
Joke Line giving stupid analysis? How shocking.
The fact that Romney is a job-killer who likes to fire people is not going to "get old". It's simply not a charge that CAN be "inoculated against" and anybody with a bit of sense can see that.
Mitt was just trying to create a comfortable living for Pete's sake. He was shooting for a billion but he is so humble he settled for $250 million. What more can you ask of a person?
Bain = Bane
Essentially, Romney's defense is that while he helped destroy a bunch of small businesses, he replaced them with huge retailers like Staples. Good job, Mitt!
hrebendorf Get rid of good paying jobs, sell off capital and replace these with min wage jobs and then cut minimum wage.
hrebendorf Excellent point, his biggest job creation "success" was a bunch of crappy retail jobs. His companies also took lots of state and local subsidies: http://middleclasspoliticaleconomist.blogspot.com/...
Here's the Newt Super Pac infomercial on Romney. It's pretty brutal. http://www.webcasts.com/kingofbain/
yardbird1964 Obama really needs to hire Newt as "Consultant Historian"
On the healthcare mandate, CouponCare a.k.a Right Wing Social Engineering and Vulture Capitalism he will be a huge asset for Obama reelection campaign. He will be worth 1.6 million.
Except isn't what the dems are going to accuse Romney of doing was already done by Obama with the auo industry? How many dealerships were closed when he gave the auto companies to his buddies in the unions?
mykpfsu Uhh, no. Try again.
officernastimykpfsu please don't feed the trolls
mykpfsu
That's the nonsense defense that Romney's already attempted to make.
The reality, though, is that if Obama had done to the auto industry what Romney did at Bain, he'd have looted GM and Chrysler of their assets to enhance his own personal wealth, then discarded the gutted shells of the companies to bankruptcy.
mykpfsu What Obama did to GM was split it into two companies -- a profitable automaker and an empty shell of bad debts and unnecessary assets. The former company is alive today only because of Obama, employing people, manufacturing cars, and doing better and better. The latter company dissolved under bankruptcy screwing over not the workers but the banks and creditors who were owed money by GM. Oh, and he did it for the public interest not for his own profits. The comparison between GM and Bane makes Obama look like a f*ing saint.
I think Bain will continue to be an issue as long as workers are doing badly in the economy. Given the slow speed of the jobs recovery, that will certainly last through the election.
As the GOP hopefuls (or not so hopefuls) have gone after Romney, I have found myself wondering why they call him a venture capitalist. He was NOT a venture capitalist, he was an arbitrager. There is a big difference. A venture capitalist comes into a business with an infusion of cash in exchange for a seat at the table in making business decisions. This person works to make the business model work, not to dismantle it. Now, an arbitrager looks for businesses that are in trouble, serious trouble, and are usually undervalued in the marketplace. They then come in with money to buy out the company because its parts are worth more than the sum of its whole, they get a bargain and the original owners are out. The arbitrager then breaks up the company, sells off its parts, and like a locust moves on. That is what MItt Romney did, so of course he "liked firing people", it made him money! Like the Richard Gere character in "Pretty Woman" who was an arbitrager.
I find it sadly ironic that Mitt Romney does not understand the principles of free enterprise or capitalism. What he did was create oligopolies by getting failing businesses out of the marketplace instead of making them competitive (except in a few cases). He did not encourage entry into new markets by these businesses or create new models that might have allowed them to compete against bigger operations effectively. What few businesses he did save are now in financial trouble themselves, so he was not a very good venture capitalist there either. He made money by destroying things, not by creating them, and at this time in history, this is not the kind of leader we need.
http://www.weeeevoteamerica2012.org
http://www.devonnollforpresident2012.org
Please follow my video campaign on YouTube under Devon Noll. I have just posted a video on a new tax code. Thanks.
devon.noll
I think the more appropriate description would be "Cannibal Capitalist".
devon.noll I couldn't agree more. Contrast Bain Capital with Berkshire Hathaway. When people hear Warren Buffett's interested in buying a company, that's taken as a vote of confidence. I'm sure when employees heard that Bain was going to buy them, everyone started wetting their pants.
Anyone read what's happened to Harry and David? This is NOT something to be proud of, and it's eerily similar to what Mitt "accomplished" while running the shop at Bain:
devon.noll Same thing as a 'corporate raider'?
Pirates of capitalism whose think is you win by destroying others are turning the economy into Somalia West. Win/Win actions just do not appease their boundless greed.
devon.noll
Romney's Republican primary opponents aren't calling him a venture capitalist. They're calling him a vulture capitalist. Which is exactly what he is.
Can't wait for the ad of Mitt Romney in a tank mowing down small corporate offices. Live by the "Massachusetts moderate" meme, die by the "Massachusetts moderate" meme
Dana Blankenhorn I want to see the Dem version of the Romney "bumps in the road" ad, where the bumps stand up and explain how Bain cost them their jobs so Romney could profit. They can end with Romney expressing sheer happiness at the idea of firing someone. (And I know that quote is out of context since he was referring to insurance companies, but his sheer joy at the idea of firing someone was not out of context.)
MaybeDana Blankenhorn I agree with that last statement you've made. The content of Romney's comment has been removed a bit from the context in which it was offered. However, the emotional content was clearly genuine. When he got to that line he delivered with an easy and glee that noticeably different than the lines that came before or after it.
There have been moments when I've lost faith in Obama, but in reality, the president can only do so much. Congress is where laws are made and bills are passed. In the begining, I don't think Obama understood just how much the Republicans disliked him and his policies. He thought that if he kept putting out the olive branch, that he could persuade a few Republicans to work with him. I too, think he gave in too much, but no one would have expected the strentgh of the Republican Party to have their members vote in lockstep on everything. Looking back, it is quite amazing to see the things he was able to accomplish, under these conditions. Has there been any time in history where a political party attempted to destroy the economy, simply to blame it on the current president and push im out of office? The Republican Party has thrown the American people under the bus. Mitt Romney has no intention of helping anyone but himself. Imagine what will happen to the thousands of people who have aquired health care because of the new law when they suddenly lose the insurance and have an illness.. You think Romney cares? Romney has indicated that he would let the housing market " bottom out", which would devastate millions of people. Maybe Obama hasn't been all you wanted him to be, but I'd pick him any day over Romney, or any other of these Republicans.
""in reality, the president can only do so much."
Especially a President who phones it in. I need not remind you what GWBush was able to do with a negative mandate. Given a choice between energy and brains...,
mdcrawfish
Remember, though. GW Bush had Democrats to go up against. They're not known for unity. Republican unity, apparently, would embarrass Mao. Tim mdcrawfish
Tim What do you mean by phone it in? Obama has put a lot of effort into working with Republicans. He's had meetings and one on one's, yet they hold a press conference and trash Obama. Bush was lucky to have Dems that were in Republican states and would vote against Democrats.
Timmdcrawfish Bush was able to go to war because the country wanted it. He passed his tax cuts using reconciliation (which would not work for health care reform because many of the health care issues are not allowed under reconciliation. If you look at what Obama has actually accomplished in light of 100% Repub obstructionism, it's pretty amazing. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/o...
mdcrawfish Bully for you! Someone finally sees the light. It is important for everyone to remember that the prez DOES NOT LEGISLATE. And in view of all the rampant assaults and insults about his birth and many other things from day one of his presidency, I believe a lesser man would have crumbled long before now. A Romney admin. would be just as ugly for the lower classes and maybe worse than Bush 2. Romney is a corporate marauder plain and simple. He knows how to make money alright but none for us. We have needed a shake up in the health field for ever. True this is not as good as it could be. I did not expect the final product in the first round. SS and medicare did not happen all at once either. It is a process. You have to start somewhere. If one of those clowns on the other side gets to the WH god have mercy upon us all.
sunshinegirl157mdcrawfish So true. I don't envy President Obama his job, but I sure would like to have more of his temperament.
sunshinegirl157mdcrawfish Every President before Obama would create a legislative proposal and put it before the Congress. Obama decided that anything he proposed would be attacked, so he decided not to propose anything. He waited to see what Congress would come up with. By that time, Obama had lost control of the terms of debate.
The other problem Obama faced was the voices inside his own administration that were anti-progressive are the ones he listened to. It is hard to be a strong proponent of progressive measures when you aren't sure yourself that you believe in them.
mdcrawfish I think it was excellent strategy to save the Dem fighting for the election year. The Repubs lost ground because of their aggression. They provided stands on issue and sound bites that will help the Dems in 2012. Obama kept his powder dry and his mouth shut--very, very smart.
Let the pundits and insiders smile and rub their hands about Republican candidates bringing this up first, the real story isn't the fact that Gingrich or Perry decided to raise this issue, it's the fact that they really do believe it.
I really think the Job Cremator tag is perfect for Romney. For a year now we've been hearing Boenher et al. drone on about the answer being making life more comfortable for the "Job Creators." At the same time I'm hearing more and more frequently honest right wingers going on the air saying these people should absolutely NOT be referrred to as job creators because they act first to create profit, and hiring more people is just a necessary by-product, which business owners and managers are trying like hell NOT to do at every moment.
I have a suggest for a theme song:
There's a king on a throne with his eyes torn outThere's a blind man looking for a shadow of doubt There's a rich man sleeping on a golden bed There's a skeleton choking on a crust of bread King of Bain
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like