Who am I closest to? Johnson or Stein.
- A vote for Johnson or Stein is probably the best signal we can make against cronyism and the status quo. I see little indication that these candidates have been bought.
- Obama has been horrible on this front compared to what most of his voters seemed to think he was going to do. He simply hasn't been tough at all on cutting cronyism. A major disappointment. See critiques about Obama and Goldman Sachs, Wall Street, the auto bailout, and a list of Obama's bundlers.
- That said, Romney may be worse. Not only has he raked in money from the megabanks and a handful of hugely wealthy donors, but he seems very comfortable with the interchange of money between the public and private sector among the super wealthy.
"I'm a big believer in getting money where the money is, and the money's in Washington."
"We received over $410 billion from the federal government for the Olympic games. That is a huge increase over anything ever done before, and we did that by going after every agency of government."
There is very little reason to believe that Romney would cut down on the corrupting influence of money in politics. In fact, I haven't seen anything where he earnestly says that he wants to, and his business experience has led him to the conclusion (as shown in the video) that special carve outs from Washington are a good thing.
Also, I forgot to include this in the last post, but it fits here well enough. Romney's chief economics advisor is Wall-Street shill Glenn Hubbard, perhaps most widely known for sneering "give it your best shot" in the film Inside Job.
In short, while I believe that Obama and Romney truly care about small businesses and entrepreneurs, I'm not convinced that either of them care more about small businesses than they care about the funding they get from big businesses and Wall Street.