Jane Meyer of the New Yorker published an article about Obama's disdain for wealthy donors. I'm saying, before I read it, "well, duh". We want someone fighting for the middle class, right? Right?
Not so much...
The statement that glaringly stood out to me was this:
By the time that Obama ran for President, in 2008, his relations with the financial industry had grown warmer, and he attracted more donations from Wall Street leaders than John McCain, his Republican opponent, did. Yet this good feeling did not last, despite the government’s bailout of the banking sector. Many financial titans felt that the President’s attitude toward the “one per cent” was insufficiently admiring, even hostile.
The article goes into detail about the bourgeosie temper tantrum donors have been having since they realized President Obama was president of an entire country and not a bellhop for the oligarchy. Boofreakinhoo. They linger on the good old days when Clinton practiced "donor maintenance", which basically means schmoozing to the wealthy, telling them what they want to hear, and appeasing their egos.
In contrast, Obama feels no need to cater to his wealthy donors, which SHOULD be a good thing, but only in this America is this a liability. I would think that the average voter would rest better at night knowing that their duly elected President isn't sitting in the Oval Office trying to figure out how to return huge favors to wealthy interests. However, Meyer actually thinks that this could cost him the election.
Well, I say we don't let it. Let's let the President know that we like the fact that he isn't easily impressed with wealth and status, that he doesn't think the American dream is reserved for the privileged, and that he's looking out for us all.