NP - What Occupy Did to 2012, What It Will Do to 2013

[rich]

most people polled said deficit reduction wasn't one of their major
concerns. Jobs and others were. I'm not saying OWS didnt raise some
sort of awareness but so much of what people were feeling they were
feeling so personally (their wages, retirement funds, etc.) that even
without OWS around their votes wouldn't be any different from the
election results.

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 3:10 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
> Occupy successfully changed the predominant conversation from deficit
> reduction to income  and opportunity inequality. THAT's what Pierce is
> talking about, and Romney's 47% secret recording played into occupy
> perfectly.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 12:55 PM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think tha'ts a stretch. u didnt need a weatherman...etc etc. I think
>> many people were plain insulted by the Romney clap trap--they didnt
>> need a movement to tell them not to vote for him. it's also a
>> statement that hardly could be proved anyway.
>> what about the african american, latino, immigrant, lgbt and women
>> vote--highly influential in this election not all of them predicated
>> on class per se, no?
>>
>> rich
>>
>> . But its effect on the election
>> > just passed could not be more profound, and it should not be ignored —
>> > though it likely will be — by the rest of the people trying to make
>> > sense of
>> > What It All Means. Occupy changed the national dialogue. Willard
>> > Romney's
>> > surreptitiously taped comments about "the 47 percent" would not have had
>> > the
>> > resonance they did had the Occupy movement not gotten the country
>> > talking
>> > about the 99 percent and the one percent. It created a new rhetorical
>> > paradigm that simply would not have been there had it not been
>> > originally
>> > shouted at the correct buildings. And it was that new paradigm that
>> > triumphed Tuesday night.
>
>