The Washington Post

Friday question answered

Who’s benefiting from the Bain attacks? Yahright takes the cynical approach: “Obama is benefiting because the Bain game plays to his strength, a campaign of a sleight-of-hand shell game. He covers his bloated, cynical record with the largest of contorted, twisted shells while the media horde focuses on the Chicago shells that manipulate the transparent shells over the Bain record. Bain backfire? Hah, that assumes honest media brokers.”

SmallisBeautiful argues likewise, writing, in part:

However, in the longer term, the attack will hurt Romney, which is why the Obama campaign is sticking to it. The same way names get tarnished with baseless accusations repeated often enough in the press, Romney will get associated in the public mind with predatory business practices, even though such an association is unfair and inaccurate, for the simple fact that it will be repeated by the MSM for months on end until the election in November.

The Obama campaign is trying to do the same thing with the whole issue of runaway spending: throwing out an entirely misleading and cynically inaccurate claim that Obama has presided over a record of fiscal responsibility, with little increase of spending.

Some others contend that the president is making Mitt Romney less likable. Ccodexjust1, for example, asserts: “The more that is said and written about Bain Capital, the more Mitt Romney looks like the guy who laid off your dad or your brother.”

Many others subscribe to the view Romney is the beneficiary. DonKeyhoti writes, in part: “If America has its collective head screwed on straight it will come to realize that firms such as Bain provide much needed capital to private businesses. So Romney should win the argument. Romney’s challenge, however, is to explain in the simplest terms possible what part venture capitalism plays in the overall process . . . .”

The Statistquo contends: “Politically, the Romney campaign is benefitting. But the the electorate, via Bain, is getting a long overdue education on capitalism 101, and, therefore, is the ultimate winner. Even Democrats are singing the praises of private equity and venture capitalists. Conversely, Obama is the big loser, given his apparent failure to have ‘passed’ capitalism 101, during his days at Harvard, and beyond.”

On who benefits the most, I think Jonathan19 has the most insightful take: “The country. Having a discussion about how the economy works is past overdue. The rhetoric on both sides is annoying, but gradually the light is coming through as responsible Democrats recognize they can’t support Obama’s attacks without undermining their own local economies. Obama’s never had to attract a business to a city or state; he’s clueless. Romney just needs to focus on the fact that in the real world, some investments don’t work out. He also needs to explain how his hundreds of millions of dollars in investments continue to finance companies that employ people.”

Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Post, offering reported opinion from a conservative perspective.


Success! Check your inbox for details. You might also like:

Please enter a valid email address

See all newsletters

Show Comments
Most Read


Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Your Three. Videos curated for you.
Play Videos
How to make Sean Brock's 'Heritage' cornbread
New limbs for Pakistani soldiers
The signature dish of Charleston, S.C.
Play Videos
Why seasonal allergies make you miserable
John Lewis, 'Marv the Barb' and the politics of barber shops
What you need to know about filming the police
Play Videos
The Post taste tests Pizza Hut's new hot dog pizza
5 tips for using your thermostat
Michael Bolton's cinematic serenade to Detroit
Play Videos
Full disclosure: 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1 ghoul
Pandas, from birth to milk to mom
The signature drink of New Orleans