Roemeristas
Back when Buddy Roemer was an insurgent outsider candidate for Louisiana governor, running against the corrupt establishment, his supporters were called “Roemeristas” (this was 1987, and the term “Sandinistas” was in the air; though Roemer was a Republican, the idea was that he was a revolutionary). Roemer is at two percent in the national polls, […]
Back when Buddy Roemer was an insurgent outsider candidate for Louisiana governor, running against the corrupt establishment, his supporters were called “Roemeristas” (this was 1987, and the term “Sandinistas” was in the air; though Roemer was a Republican, the idea was that he was a revolutionary). Roemer is at two percent in the national polls, but I’m wondering if his sympathy for the anti-Wall Street protesters (and please remember, Roemer is a Harvard-educated banker as well as a retired Republican politician) might strike a chord with at least some GOP primary voters. Reading the libertarian Megan McArdle tonight, I detected a fairly Roemerista sensibility re: the Occupy Wall Streeters. Excerpt:
I think it’s hard to read through this list of woes without feeling both sympathy, and a healthy dose of fear. Take all the pot shots you want at people who thought that a $100,000 BFA was supposed to guarantee them a great job–beneath the occasionally grating entitlement is the visceral terror of someone in a bad place who doesn’t know what to do. Having found myself in the same place ten years ago, I can’t bring myself to sneer. No matter how inflated your expectations may have been, it is no joke to have your confidence that you can support yourself ripped away, and replaced with the horrifying realization that you don’t really understand what the rules are. Yes, even if you have a nose ring.
What am I talking about? If you haven’t seen it yet, read my short interview with Buddy Roemer today, in which he explains why he, a 67-year-old white Southern Republican banker, sympathizes with the protesters. It’s especially interesting to read Roemer saying that back in the day, he heard the same kind of objections to the civil rights protesters — that is, that they and their cause didn’t have to be taken seriously because they weren’t the right sort of person. The comparison only goes so far, obviously, but I think he’s got a point. Alexander Burns at Politico writes:
Roemer’s endorsement of Occupy Wall Street is a bolder populist move than Pawlenty or Palin — or Barack Obama — ever made. If Roemer had a Ross Perot-sized fortune at his disposal, he might find disaffected voters in both parties who are intrigued by what he has to say.
The cable networks ought to let Roemer into the debates. Give him a platform. Let’s hear him out.
