Two Presidential Mindsets, which do you prefer?

The presidential office is powerful, but not all powerful.  There are always twists and turns, and roadblocks set by the opposing party, two legislative houses that need to agree, etc., and so there are many changes, adaptations, and modifications that happen to a president’s agenda before it’s made real.

Specifics are important.  An economic plan with specific details will tell us a lot about a candidate’s true values, priorities, and preferences.  That’s why candidates seldom, if ever, speak specifics.  All we hear are patriotic platitudes: “If you vote for me, I will create jobs.  I will put America back to work.  I will build America’s future.  Vote for me, because I believe in a strong America!”

Because of this, all incumbents have it easier and harder in an election year—they have a track-record.  The specifics of their governing policies are there, for all to see, either to praise or to condemn—there is no middle-ground.

But then, the problem with looking too hard at the specifics is that the minute details often serve only to confuse and obscure the big picture, the general trend and its consequential direction.  We lose sight of the forest for the trees.  We lose sight of the big picture.  Ever try putting a 5000-piece jigsaw puzzle together without the big picture in front of you?  It is very difficult indeed, if not next to impossible.

Thus, when voting for a candidate, incumbent or not, it helps first to completely ignore their platitudes—after all, what candidate doesn’t love America and isn’t in favor of a strong and prosperous U.S. of A?   As to specifics, well we know that the non-incumbent candidate will divulge as little as possible, for fear of saying/exposing too much.  We also know that a particular spin will be given to the specifics of the policies already implemented by the incumbent, positive or negative, depending on who’s doing the spinning.

So what should we focus on?  Perhaps we should focus on the mindset.  Take our two presidential candidates this election year—Obama, the incumbent, and Romney, the presidential hopeful.  If we look at the mindset that each represents with respect to the economy for example, what do we see?

Here’s what I see.

The Obama mindset is lower-income and middle-class oriented.  The Obama mindset asks, what is best for the typical, hard-working, middleclass American for whom money is tight, jobs are scares, and for whom worries about their children’s education, healthcare, and income security are daily mounting.

The Romney mindset is wealthy and powerful business broker oriented.  The Romney mindset asks, what is best for the wealthy investor, the banker, the company CEO, and top management, to insure their ongoing prosperity and their empowerment to stay on top of things while riding the waves of economic volatility.

The Romney mindset has a “business is business” attitude.  Government is to protect the business interest, especially big business.  There are winners and there are losers.  No pain, no gain.  Meanwhile there will always be the haves and the have-nots.  That’s just the way it is.  So, free-up businesses to invest what they will, how they will—with little regulation and even less accountability—and all will turn out for the good in the long run.

The Obama mindset has a “business is about people” attitude.  Government is to protect the common man from the threat of monopolies; against, for example, the small and wealthy elite that is gaining in economic power and control at the expense of everyone else.  There must be economic justice, equality of opportunity, protection against a few wealthy powerful elites from getting too big, too powerful, and too controlling over resources that should be available to all in a fair and equitable manner.  There must therefore always be accountability and the necessary regulation to go with it.

Which mindset do you prefer to have in the head of your next president?