Last week, I wrote that the Democrats needed to take back family and student loans from the Republicans. And Michelle did that last night.
Michelle Obama's speech was nearly perfect. Interesting, gripping, full of new personal stories, relatable. As she talked about dumpster diving for furniture, I thought, "I did that, too. I still have a few of those pieces." When she talked about growing up in a small home in Chicago, I thought, "Gee, five of us lived in a two bedroom Cape Cod." When she talked about student loan debt, I thought, "Yeah, yeah, yeah."
That's what she needed to do. Ann Romney could talk about tuna fish and pasta, but that was her only young and poor story. Michelle had more.
I have some concerns about this election narrative that only people who have financially struggled can run for office. That takes Sasha and Malia out of the picture, right? The Kennedys are plenty rich. The Clintons are making millions from Bill's speaking fees. Just seems like this narrative has the potential to bite someone in the ass soon. On the other hand, it's clearly working right now.
Michelle really pissed off a certain section of my twitterfeed by using the mom word over and over again. She didn't mention her Ivy league education, her law career, and all the policy work that she does without pay right now. When she said "Mom in Chief," I could hear gagging sounds coming from my iPad.
But Michelle was very, very smart to frame herself as a mom first and foremost. While Ann Romney's job was to humanize Mitt, Michelle's job was to sneak votes away from moderate Republicans and Independents. She wasn't trying to appeal to my Twitterfeed. Others at the convention are talking to them. She needed to go for my sister and my mom, who self-identify as "moms."
For the Democrats to win in November, they have to open the tent to everyone, including people who define themselves through their relationship with family members rather than by their career.
Also, critics of the mom speech seem to forget that Michelle wasn't there to tout her resume or her professional accomplishments. She's not running for office. Her husband is. Now you might not like that Michelle isn't running for office, but that's the way it is. Nominate a chick next time. Please.
Finally, Michelle did what Ann couldn't. She talked about her own student loan debt. She didn't have to say too much about it, just that she and Obama had it when they finished college. A subtle jab to the Romneys who had none.
Sacrifice is a huge part of the American narrative. We sacrifice ourselves for our country and for our family. We go to work with MS to earn enough money to send our kids to school. We fight in wars and lose our legs. We give up high paying salaries to fight for the poor. We put ourselves last and take care of everybody else first. Americans love martyrs. And Michelle gave it to us last night in that perfect dress with her perfect arms.
Apt. 11d 
“She talked about her own student loan debt. She didn’t have to say too much about it, just that she and Obama had it when they finished college. A subtle jab to the Romneys who had none.”
The Obamas had really terrible personal finance habits, even when they were making six figures.
“A close examination of their finances shows that the Obamas were living off lines of credit along with other income for several years until 2005, when Obama’s book royalties came through and Michelle received her 260% pay raise at the University of Chicago. This was also the year Obama started serving in the U.S. Senate.”
“In April 1999, they purchased a Chicago condo and obtained a mortgage for $159,250. In May 1999, they took out a line of credit for $20,750. Then, in 2002, they refinanced the condo with a $210,000 mortgage, which means they took out about $50,000 in equity. Finally, in 2004, they took out another line of credit for $100,000 on top of the mortgage.
“Tax returns for 2004 reveal $14,395 in mortgage deductions. If we assume an effective interest rate of 6%, then they owed about $240,000 on a home they purchased for about $159,250.
“This means they spent perhaps $80,000 beyond their income from 1999 to 2004.
“The Obamas’ adjusted gross income averaged $257,000 from 2000 to 2004. This is above the threshold of $250,000 which Obama initially used as the definition of being “rich” for taxation purposes during last year’s election campaign.”
“The Obama family apparently had little or no savings during this period since there was virtually no taxable interest shown on their tax returns.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/president-obama-troubling-mantra-debt-trust-article-1.408119#ixzz0FLMXeUT6&B
The Obamas are a couple who can only manage to break even when they’re making at least half a million a year. Well, lucky for them that ex-presidenting is lucrative.
LikeLike
I have to admit that I watched Covert Affairs instead. But in my defense, I knew it was a big game-changer episode. 🙂
“Now you might not like that Michelle isn’t running for office, but that’s the way it is. Nominate a chick, next time. Please. ”
Funny you should say this because I was out for dinner with my girlfriends, and one of them insisted she was going to write in Hillary and bemoaned the lack of women on the Democratic bench. My margarita-addled mind tried to think of someone who would be good to groom, but I couldn’t.
LikeLike
“Now you might not like that Michelle isn’t running for office, but that’s the way it is. Nominate a chick, next time. Please. “
Hey, I tried last time. I pulled the lever for Hillary, but everyone who had previously wanted to nominate a chick, suddenly was saying that Barack would be the first “female president,” just like Bill Clinton was the first “black president.” I never really understood what that meant.
The Obamas had really terrible personal finance habits, even when they were making six figures.
There’s an inherent problem with celebrity biography of any sort, because we know how it ends (“He became a famous celebrity!”), but implicit in every biography is the idea that if you just do what Mr. Obama (or Mr. Romney or whoever) did, you too can be a famous celebrity. But for every Lee Iaccoca, there’s a hundred guys who did pretty much the same thing, but never got to run Chrysler.
The Obamas took a huge financial risk that probably doesn’t make any sense economically. He also probably could not have become President (or Senator) without doing so. As advocates of campaign finance reform (or which I am only lukewarm) will tell you, that’s part of the problem. Advocates of more lenient bankruptcy laws will tell you that you should get to take these sorts of risks, and get a clean slate if Jack Ryan isn’t go through a messy divorce just as you are running against him, so drops out for uber-candidate Alan Keyes. (Actually, Janna Ryan does look suspiciously like Jeri Ryan . . . Alan Keyes for VP?)
My boss’s spouse is currently running for Congress, and I believe is an underdog (although there is little Congressional level polling). They are probably less wealthy now than the Obamas were before 2005. It was not a decision made with the intent of maximizing long-term financial gain. Although it probably has that potential.
LikeLike
“The Obamas took a huge financial risk that probably doesn’t make any sense economically. He also probably could not have become President (or Senator) without doing so.”
This is the issue I see for some about student loan debt, as well. Debt that doesn’t, logically, make sense in having a reasonable return on the risk. Also like dropping out of Harvard to start a company in your hometown backwater. For some folks, that risk can be shouldered because they have safety nets (Gates had a stable middle class family behind him that would find a way to get him that college degree as well as the ability to complete the degree). Were the Obama’s taking risk they couldn’t shoulder? My guess is not, with two Harvard law degrees (and,even without the combination with diversity cred) behind them, they were ultimately employable no matter what.
We used lines of credits around purchasing our houses. In each case, they were reasonable risk because they were a cash flow management strategy. Of course, the strategy could have failed if a major financial crash (once in hundred year floods, . . . .), but they were reasonable risks to take given our overall financial situation.
LikeLike
PS: Didn’t watch the speech but I love the dress. I believe my d had a dress similar to that when she was five (I have a portrait of her in the dress).
LikeLike
“I have some concerns about this election narrative that only people who have financially struggled can run for office. ”
Kind of like the perception about super-elite universities, that one needs to have a financial/emotional hardship story. I can see the justification for college (which is about how they can develop your potential) but am not enamored for a job (like president) where qualifications, plans, and ideas seem more important.
Of course, background does influence ones ability to see other people’s point of view.
LikeLike
I also have concerns about the narrative that because you were a successful businessman you are also “ineligible” for office. When did being successful become a handicap? I see it all over the country in state elections all the way up to the Presidency.
LikeLike