I am curious that with the way the country is being geared towards the 1% with tax breaks, reforms, and policies, could an average working citizen ever get elected to a top position? I would imagine it is possible for someone who makes a good living to be well educated on the policies of our country, and be able to actually be a good candidate, yet it almost always seems as though the people running our country are the rich. Clearly the middle and lower class would have the votes. Is this possible? Could a regular guy ever run and win the presidency?

I'd say the probability is about 1%.

I think that you may have some normal people at lower levels of government, yes. However, for the highest offices in the land, probably not...because it's hard for a normal person to a) drop everything, b) secure the means to tour around the country, and c) be able to pay for all the people that have to work for him/her. Like it or not, this country was founded by rich people, and the precedent has almost always been to elect said rich people to lead.

Also...many of the best leaders tend to be rich, because the skills that allow them to be great leaders in government have aided them in the private sector, too. Though I am no fan of corporatism or the kind of cronyism that people on both sides of the political spectrum engage in, most people of means became so largely on their own merit...and that merit was due to things like intelligence, leadership, poise and mettle, skills which translate into an excellent politician.

On a side note, "Poison Metal" would be a great band name.

Really? Do you have anything to back that up or are you just listening to the Occupy ******s? A little research might disabuse you of that premise. Here's a few tidbits to get you started:

• in 2000, 29 percent of American households paid no federal income taxes; today, 44 percent pay none
• A generation ago, about 30 percent of Americans lived in a household where at least one member was drawing federal benefits — now 48 percent do.
• Georgetown economist Stephen Rose shows that when middle-class tax cuts, very low inflation, declining real-dollar prices in sectors such as food and electronics, and most of all rising government benefits are taken into account, most middle-class Americans are slightly better off than a decade ago. Nearly all are substantially better off than their parents.

Shall I go on? There's lots more.

This kinda reminds me of a quote by British Labour leader Aneurin Bevan: "The whole art of Conservative politics in the 20th century is being deployed to enable wealth to persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power."

To answer your question. Yes. It's possible.

Obama was making less than 250k/year before he got into politics, so yes, its clearly possible to be outside of the top 1% and make it to the whitehouse if a series of unlikely events line up in your favour.

Do you think this might have more to do with the rising income inequality than expansion of these programs? Have the income tax requirements been loosened substantially since 2000?

The first two bullets don't help your talking points.

People move up and down the wealth ladder all the time. Most 1%ers used to be 99%ers. Its not an accident that most wealthy people are older than 40, they have had the time to get their money earning ducks in a row.

POTUS' and senators who grew up poor, and were poor in their 20s are numerous.

According to rockwell once you are a politician you are the 1%

It depends how you define the 99%. As someone who was in the 99% on election day or as someone who was in the 99% from their birth/adulthood/after education or whatever.

If you take the second definition a lot of presidents came from the 99%. If you take the second option it's not really possible because most presidents are going to be in the 1% from the steps they take to get there.

Obama was in the 99% most of his life but he's in the 1% probably from book sales alone.

In order to get elected to office you have to be apretty impressive dude. Smart, determined, ambitious, likeable. The same traits that will usually lead to you not being part of the faceless masses.

Not really possible because people tend to vote based on gimmicks and memes.

These memes are Pounded into our heads through expensive ads that a 99% probably couldn't afford.

"yes we can"

Just look at our Presidents since WW2. Only a few of them grew up wealthy.

Barack Obama-
George W. Bush- wealthy
Bill Clinton-
George H. W. Bush- wealthy
Ronald Reagan-
Jimmy Carter-
Gerald Ford-
Richard Nixon-
Lyndon Johnson-
John Kennedy- wealthy
Harry Truman-
Franklin Roosevelt- wealthy


The rest grew up no better than working class and often in troubled homes (abusive or absent fathers, alcoholic parents, etc.)

fyp.

b

I don't want a "regular guy" running ****.

A bad FYP Bernie. Review Dynasty's post (quoted below), most of these presidents were not raised in affluent families, and as you get to those holding lower offices, like state legislator or even as high as congressman I am sure the percentage of those who grew up affluent is even lower.

Most are 99%ers who made it.

Its a Horatio Alger / American Dream story (eyes start to mist up)

I guess what I would like to see is someone in office who has my best interest in mind, and not concerned with lining the pockets of himself and his friends. Granted this is a long shot, I would vote for the average person before I voted for a wealthy person simply because we have the same goals.

Lol... a poor person has a lot more incentive to "line his pockets" then the independantly wealthy.

If you well known, notorious Progressive talent...
Ghost-writing books for you...
You must already be in the 1% or 0.1%...
It's not just money, but power and influence.

It doesnt matter who wins they will always be a puppet for the 1%.

Reminds me of this little piece of history:

Source.

If it is not possible then are we really a democracy? Are we more a country that is fed "candidates" that we may or may not want to elect, but those are what we have to decide between so we have no "choice?

He's been a 1%er from the moment they made him president of the Harvard Law Review. Whether it was because of affirmative action or not, the powers that be made him a 1%er early on.