Who do the banksters want as President?

[PismoPam]

http://walkingwithron.blogspot.com/2012/01/so-you-want-to-be-president.html

[ryanmkeisling]

Barack Obama. When have banks ever gotten 12 Trillion dollars in 0% interest loans? Bailouts? In all of history? He is their man, and people thought Bush was bad...

[acptulsa]

They don't care, as long as it isn't Ron Paul. The rest of the field will let them get away with robbery and murder. Ron Paul is the only one who won't.

[tbone717]

They don't care, as long as it isn't Ron Paul. The rest of the field will let them get away with robbery and murder. Ron Paul is the only one who won't.

This

[PismoPam]

http://walkingwithron.blogspot.com/2012/01/bankster-contributions.html

Top contributors to Obama, McCain and Romney:
Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley

[impaleddead]

They'll take anyone but Paul but they WANT Obama in for a second term. Second terms are when the REAL fun starts.

[OrbitzXT]

Obamney would be just fine with them.

[PatriotOne]

Mitt Romney's top contributors:

Goldman Sachs $367,200
Credit Suisse Group $203,750
Morgan Stanley $199,800
HIG Capital $186,500
Barclays $157,750

[ryanmkeisling]

They'll take anyone but Paul but they WANT Obama in for a second term. Second terms are when the REAL fun starts.
...and they know that these other GOP candidates are unelectable up against Obama. Ron Paul is their real threat and Obama knows this as well, hence his belated attempt to snuggle up to RP's talking points.

[eduardo89]

Anyone but Paul.

[AdamT]

Anyone but Paul.

[eduardo89]

Anyone but Paul.

Copycat

[brushfire]

Follow the money

[acptulsa]

Copycat

Takes one to know one. :p

[sailingaway]

Preferably Romney or Huntsman, but all the others are 'flexible enough' they would probably do, I suspect. Except Ron.

[bbartlog]

Their only strong preference is 'not Paul'. Romney versus Obama is a Kodos&Kang setup for them; they'd be happy with either, maybe a little happier with Romney just because he's really from their world.

[SlowSki]

Well I work for a community bank and they definitely want Obama out... though I figure most of them will be voting for Gingrich or Romney.

[Dave39168]

Anyone But Paul

[JasonC]

Easy answer.... anyone but Ron Paul

[acptulsa]

Well I work for a community bank and they definitely want Obama out... though I figure most of them will be voting for Gingrich or Romney.

I don't believe the OP was referring to small community banks or credit unions when they asked about what the 'banksters' want. At least I hope not. It's really not that difficult a distinction to realize that these entrepreneurs aren't the same group as the Goldman Sachs robber barons.

[iamse7en]

Anyone but Paul would suffice, but they prefer Obama. And they will get him if Mitt wins.

[Icymudpuppy]

Well I work for a community bank and they definitely want Obama out... though I figure most of them will be voting for Gingrich or Romney.

Community banks =/= Wall Street Banksters.

[heavenlyboy34]

Anyone but Paul.
This^^

[tttppp]

Barack Obama. When have banks ever gotten 12 Trillion dollars in 0% interest loans? Bailouts? In all of history? He is their man, and people thought Bush was bad...

I agree. Don't forget about the excessive regulations Obama has placed on the banking industry which benefits the big banks and screws the little banks.

[JoshS]

I'd like to pose a question.

What happens when someone who has vested interest in the next president (say Goldmann Sachs) realizes they benefit from a split-vote to keep Romney ahead, and they donate to all other campaigns to keep them going? At least keep them going until the process is irrelevant. I have an idea that this is actually already happening, or else why would Huntsman still be in the race, or Perry?

from another thread

[Lafayette]

ABP!

[jolynna]

Mitt Romney's top contributors:

Goldman Sachs $367,200
Credit Suisse Group $203,750
Morgan Stanley $199,800
HIG Capital $186,500
Barclays $157,750

Romney has publically called Bernanke and the Bankers who avoided the collapse they deserved, saviors. He said the TARPS were necessary. He was FOR re-appointing Bernanke. His history is one of doing what it takes to make a buck, no matter who gets hurt.

Just like Obama was bought in 2008 and marketed (Obama's ad agency won Marketer of the Year Award for creating his winning campaign image). Romney is the Bankster's 2012 alternative. He's backup in case Obama loses.

With Europe tanking and the certainty of contagion spreading, the banks do not want to have to be bothered with a candidate who will even put up a token fuss (like the tea-party candidates would have to do...although they'd eventually cave) over more bailouts. They, for sure, don't want a president who is going to push for closer investigation into their ummmm...books. I'd say it is a good bet that Jon Corzine is just the tip of the financial iceburg.

imo

[affa]

i haven't read this thread. but there are 27 posts so far, and my guess is most of them got the answer right: anyone but Paul.

[jolynna]

It is NOT a coincidence that the media has treated Romney with kid gloves. The WORST they say about him is hinting that Romney isn't nutty enough to suit what they imply is the "extreme" evangelical element because he's a "moderate". By moderate they are trying to say, he's like them only more fiscally conservative so just in case "some" are mad at Obama because of the economy...well...here is the "safe" choice. He isn't like a tea party guy that wants to cut anything really. And he isn't Obama...who so many keep saying we CAN'T have 4 more years of.

People might be sheep, but I think that EVERYONE is uneasy and sensing something bad might be coming. "Safe" might sound good when you are uneasy and uncertain.

It is my opinion that corporate and financial interests are making sure THEY have control, just in case the masses get upset over the upcoming taxes (for rich and not so rich...the "rich" part being touted now is just to lull...there are not nearly enough REALLY rich to make much of a dent to the problem) and downwardly spiraling living conditions. I'm not sure at this point there is a way out of what is coming without some pain. It is just a matter of when...how long the can can be kicked down the road.

Getting the "right" guy in office is how corporate and financial interests intend to survive. And they've got all of their media lackeys working to make sure they get what they must have.

In my opinion.

[jolynna]

i haven't read this thread. but there are 27 posts so far, and my guess is most of them got the answer right: anyone but Paul.


I disagree.

I think they want Romney or Obama. And are just as passionate for their candidates as we are for Paul.

Look how EVERYONE that has dared to rise in the polls higher than Romney has been trashed. But never a peep, not a peep implying there is ANYTHING not good about Romney. The WORST they've said is that he isn't "conservative" enough to suit the GOP (who they pretty much imply is all nuttier than a fruitcake). Look at ALL they have on Santorum that they are not pulling out yet because he is drawing votes away from ALL who they don't want. Look at the pure hatred that has been spewed against Newt for showing what the media didn't have the b**** to say. They practically foam at the mouth at any bad-mouthing of their "boys". Everything, down to saving the worst dirt on Santorum & pretending Santorum could be legitimate, is designed manipulation.

I sort of agree that everyone in the race except Ron Paul & Mitt have situations that make them unelectable. But, Romney, because he is in the financial institution's pockets & has shown that he will LIE about anything and take ANY position and be RUTHLESS as well as without compassion for the people he stepped on for profit, to me, is more dangerous than the more radical right. The radical right, at least, has convictions, even if I disagree with them & won't vote for them.


Since corporations became "people" and even more money could openly pour into elections, I think things have changed for the worse.

--My opinion.

[beardedlinen]

The banksters want anyone but Paul.

[Carson]

Anyone but Paul.

[thoughtomator]

The bankers will take anyone but Paul, they own them all.

[Libertea Party]

Almost finished reading this written in 2010:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51DtKaSjnfL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg

The gist seems to be: They loved Obama because his "green initiatives" like cap & trade, Solydra type stuff and more debt to underwrite made him attractive on his own merits. Mostly any initiative by government means corporate help and direction anyway.

But the anti-Wall Street rhetoric is hurting some of their pride. Also there's a few things that do hurt their bottom line without solving any issues that are just used by Obama and Democrats as something to point at to show their base they're doing something.

My guess is they'd be happier with a corporatist Republican like Mitt Romney that would talk about free markets in theory but be happy to provide a "safety net" for them when they roll dice and it doesn't pan out. And the military-industrial complex is more embedded in the GOP. Plus he'd be more available for social calls since he's not really even pandering to the religious right much. The CEO of Goldman Sachs wouldn't have to bump into Gary Bauer, John Hagee, or Tony Perkins types after a night of cocktails at the White House. I think every GOPer (except our guy of course) would also dabble in Obama like "initiatives" that would require "partnerships" with big business and certainly lots of "loans" underwritten by the American sucker taxpayer.

I'd say the banksters would prefer in this order:

1) Romney (Obama spending + bigger Military-Industrial Complex spending)
2) Obama (Incumbency is nice and Obama throws rockin' parties with cooler celebrities)
3) Gingrich (still have his number from his Speaker and Freddie/consulting days..might run into Gary Bauer occasionally though)
4) Santorum (only b/c bumping into Gary Bauer plastered at events would be uncomfortable not b/c Rick is any less corporate-welfarist)
5) Rick Perry (Being dumb and clueless has its advantages for a bankster but they saw what happened with G.W. Bush)

[nosoup4u82]

Obama has been great for the Banker mafia and they know he is under their control if he stays for a second term. Romney would be a great back-up for the banking elite given his credentials and they definitely fear Ron Paul.

[TER]

The ones they donated the most to.

Namely, Obama and Romney. The big government 'centrists' with uncanny flip flopping skills.

[Anti Federalist]

They don't care, as long as it isn't Ron Paul. The rest of the field will let them get away with robbery and murder. Ron Paul is the only one who won't.

That.

Anybody but Paul as far as the powers that be are concerned.