The Boston Globe ran a story on the banking industry backing Romney, preferring the candidate who supports only limited regulation of banks over Obama. This comes as no surprise, but it is something to keep in mind when Republicans raise their dubious argument blaming the financial crash on Clinton (for deregulating banks) as a diversion to try to keep the blame off of Bush and Republican economic policies.
If conservatives think that deregulation of banks by Clinton was bad, shouldn’t they support Obama over Romney? How come they almost always oppose deregulation, except when done by Bill Clinton?
(And yes, there are arguments from the left that the regulation supported by Obama is too little, but he still favors far more reforms than Romney. Despite his centrist economic views, Obama will not lose a meaningful number of votes for being too moderate.)