Does it mean "in an improper time (makes his image) as extremly greedy and in a fine day as filshy rich"?
And what does "Spock-like mind" mean?
Here's the problem: the one time in his cautious, careful, risk-averse candidacy that Romney gambled, he lost. Putting Paul Ryan on the ticket has been a disaster. Ryan's budget ideas -- voucherizing Medicare, privatizing Social Security, gutting education and giving tax breaks to the rich -- are toxic. The Romney-Ryan budget plan has cemented Romney's image as Gordon Gekko on a bad day; Thurston Howell III on a good one.
Romney's aides are right when they tell the press a debate is a series of moments, and they are wise to try to craft some moments. But they are fools for telling The New York Times: "(Romney's) strategy includes luring the president into appearing smug or evasive about his responsibility for the economy."
First, let me assure you our president reads The New York Times and has almost certainly deployed his Spock-like mind on avoiding smugness or evasion. Any strategy that relies on your opponent to err is a hope, not a strategy.
Debate advice: Obama, light a cig; Romney, throw deep - CNN.com
Please be aware that I'm neither a native English speaker nor a teacher.
To help you sort these two cultural references out, it means he appear as a very rich, very greedy person who doesn't care about anything other than increasing his own wealth and who doesn't care who is hurt in the process on his bad days, and that he appears as a very rich person who is not harmful but who is overall rather clueless on his good days.
I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.