Why the Occupy Wall Street platform of "We are the 99%" is not relevant to the U.S. presidential race.

Yes, there is a growing separation between the have and have nots.  A disparity that is relevant to legislative and regulatory reforms.  That is not the U.S. presidential race.

The U.S. presidential race is about leadership, experience, and education.  Historically, Americans have elected a person in the 1% so to limit the 1% category to wealth is counterproductive.  The 1% category also applies to the leadership, experience and education of our presidential candidates.  There a correlation between leadership, experience, and education to wealth.  Statistically, the more education a person has the greater likelihood that he or she will earn a higher salary - not a certainty, but definitely a greater likelihood.  Thus, the 1% wealth disparity targeted by Occupy Wall Street has the potential to muddy the waters.

The U.S. president is often referred to as the CEO of America.  This reference point for voters is critical to understanding the 2012 presidential race.  The presidential race is overwhelmingly about the economy.  Americans understand that the world is dangerous, it is a background issue, because like the European Union's impetus of tying European markets together to prevent war, globalization has had the same or similar effect.  There is little to no land to be fought over for expansion and injuring countries is rarely isolated to that injured party.  The difference between the European Union and the global market is that the European Union was explicit with its intentions whereas globalization has produced a beneficial unintended consequence.  The WTO is more about fair trade than preventing war.

As such, war is a less interesting subject than the economy.  The economy affects more individuals directly.  The same cannot be said for war, although the war machine encompassing military contractors does lurk in the shadows.  Since the economy is about business and businesses have leaders, the CEO image is in the forefront of a voter's mind.  Generally, CEOs cannot become CEOs if they lack leadership, experience and education so becoming a CEO implies qualifications.  Of the Fortune 50, 100, 500, or 1000 lists - the CEOs are roughly 90% or more male and of that majority, there is a classic image of what a CEO looks like - Mitt Romney.  Not only is this a classic image for CEOs, but also news reporters - national and local.

This classic image resides in the American psyche and when in the voter booth under pressure to make a decision, a voter will use this classic image whether it is a conscious or unconscious choice.  The older or more experienced the voter, the greater likelihood that this classic image will be entrenched.  The younger generation has the same archetype - Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), Mark Pincus (Zynga), Jack Dorsey (Twitter), but with lesser leadership experience due to their age.  President Obama was elected on a "Change" platform capitalizing on the hyperism of social media.  The flash mob mentality of social media users was managed perfectly because it was enough to overcome his minor deviation from the classic image - namely his race.  President Obama 2.0 has yet to be tested and social media users are fickle, herd bound, and flight oriented.

In the end, American voters do not want a "We are the 99%" U.S. president.  American voters want exceptionalism because the U.S. president is a reflection of America and its citizens - even if that is the greatest deception of all.