Not good for Romney

13567…23

Comments

  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,880
    Honestly I don't get the big deal, it seems like he is talking about campaign strategy and that he knows he has no shot at 47% of the people. I would think Obama would have a fairly similar conversation.

    Then again, I'm not out there always looking for the next soundbite. Because if you vote based on soundbites you get a soundbite president.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,327
    cincybearcat wrote:
    Honestly I don't get the big deal, it seems like he is talking about campaign strategy and that he knows he has no shot at 47% of the people. I would think Obama would have a fairly similar conversation.

    Then again, I'm not out there always looking for the next soundbite. Because if you vote based on soundbites you get a soundbite president.
    I was thinking the same thing. This is Obama's campaign strategy except he's trying to convince 99% of us that we are in the 47%.

    Next story.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • FattyFatCat
    FattyFatCat Posts: 171
    Whats the big deal.

    He said it because its true.

    And its no worse than Obama saying people "cling to their religion and guns."


    Keep up the good work Mitt. 8-)
  • Cliffy6745
    Cliffy6745 Posts: 34,036
    cincybearcat wrote:
    Honestly I don't get the big deal, it seems like he is talking about campaign strategy and that he knows he has no shot at 47% of the people. I would think Obama would have a fairly similar conversation.

    Then again, I'm not out there always looking for the next soundbite. Because if you vote based on soundbites you get a soundbite president.

    I agree to an extent, he is certainly talking about campaign strategy, but to me, in doing so, he shows a huge amount of contempt for almost half the country. Basically calls them moochers, regardless of their situation. The elderly, the sick, the students, etc. Regardless of their situation, he thinks all people who take governement assistance are not taking responsibility for themselves, and that is absurd. I came across this reader email on the dish and thought it was pretty on point...

    That Romney quote about people in the 47 percent not taking responsibility for their lives made me so angry I almost cried. I'm in that 47 percent. My household hasn't paid income taxes in ten years - not since my husband became seriously disabled and could no longer work. How dare Romney tell me I'm not taking responsibility. I've been nothing but responsible - responsible for raising three children and caring for my husband for five years until he died, through some very tough times. I worked part-time through much of this, but SSDI and private disability insurance made it possible for my family to survive financially. My two sons received federal loans for college. One is now a public school teacher, and a darn good one - a worthwhile investment, I'd say. The other is still in college. My third child is disabled and continues to receive SSDI, and I'm still responsible for her. I work full-time, pay payroll taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes. But I work for a not-for-profit and don't receive the kind of salary people of my abilities earn in investment banking.

    The stuff that happened to me - a spouse who died prematurely, a child with a genetically-based disability - these things can happen to anyone. Anyone.
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    lolz....love it...dismiss and move on...

    I'd be willing to bet Rmoney is part of the 47%....

    anyhoo....

    There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.

    Romney went on: "[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."


    those f-n old people who are sucking the teat of society....get off your lazy ass grandma....get back in the workforce, so what if you're 86 years old...
  • Cliffy6745
    Cliffy6745 Posts: 34,036
    FattyFatCat wrote:
    Whats the big deal.

    He said it because its true.

    And its no worse than Obama saying people "cling to their religion and guns."


    Keep up the good work Mitt. 8-)

    Except it's not true that 47% of the country do not take personal responsbility. Minor detail.

    Agreed, it's not too much different but I'd say claiming that 47% of the country are moochers is worse than saying a portion of the population vote based on very conservative social issues.
  • Cliffy6745
    Cliffy6745 Posts: 34,036
    It's also amusing that as the AEI points out, spending on government benefits have increased the most under Republican presidents.
  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,263
    Prince Of Dorkness wrote:
    bootlegger10 wrote:
    Why is Gary, Indiana a dump after so many decades? Could it have anything to do with Democratic politicians they elect every year?


    Uh... honey?

    Indiana is a Red State. They voted for George W Bush. TWICE. And Romney is leading there now.

    They also voted for Bob Dole, George Bush the First (in both 1988 and 1992), Ronald Reagan both times, Nixon... fuck, they voted for Gerald FORD for crying out loud.

    So... well... actually... Gary Indiana is a dump because they voted for Republicans.

    http://www.270towin.com/states/Indiana

    :fp:

    Do you not understand that there are local governments, state governments, and federal government? Northwest Indiana is a democratic section of Indiana. Votes democrat every year. They have had the same democratic congressman for at least 20 years. Nw Indiana has the Chicago style corruption in its politics. There have been so many corrupt politicians (just about all dems) over the years that the area does not improve.You have to remember that local governments like mayors, town boards, and school boards are responsible for a lot of money and where it goes.
  • Cliffy6745
    Cliffy6745 Posts: 34,036
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/opini ... joqSXqvlig
  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,263
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    It's also amusing that as the AEI points out, spending on government benefits have increased the most under Republican presidents.

    The republicans have sucked at governing the country too. But in order to win elections you have to keep handing out cash. That is what Romney so poorly stated. He wants to change the direction of the country and the dependency on government (which clearly can't last forever), but he knows that a large amount of voters won't like that. Not 47% but a large amount.
  • Cliffy6745
    Cliffy6745 Posts: 34,036
    bootlegger10 wrote:
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    It's also amusing that as the AEI points out, spending on government benefits have increased the most under Republican presidents.

    The republicans have sucked at governing the country too. But in order to win elections you have to keep handing out cash. That is what Romney so poorly stated. He wants to change the direction of the country and the dependency on government (which clearly can't last forever), but he knows that a large amount of voters won't like that. Not 47% but a large amount.

    And I understand that argument to an extent. I certainly think there are efficiencies that need to made to unemployment and welfare, but to classify 47% of the country as not being self responsible is pretty sickening..
  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,263
    Prince Of Dorkness wrote:
    Oh... and the current governor of Indiana is Mitch Daniels.

    A Republican.

    Honestly... do you not have a Google Machine?

    Maybe you should use the google machine to find out about local governments.
  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,263
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    bootlegger10 wrote:
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    It's also amusing that as the AEI points out, spending on government benefits have increased the most under Republican presidents.

    The republicans have sucked at governing the country too. But in order to win elections you have to keep handing out cash. That is what Romney so poorly stated. He wants to change the direction of the country and the dependency on government (which clearly can't last forever), but he knows that a large amount of voters won't like that. Not 47% but a large amount.

    And I understand that argument to an extent. I certainly think there are efficiencies that need to made to unemployment and welfare, but to classify 47% of the country as not being self responsible is pretty sickening..

    I agree that his comments significantly overstated the %.
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,327
    Prince Of Dorkness wrote:
    bootlegger10 wrote:
    Why is Gary, Indiana a dump after so many decades? Could it have anything to do with Democratic politicians they elect every year?


    Uh... honey?

    Indiana is a Red State. They voted for George W Bush. TWICE. And Romney is leading there now.

    They also voted for Bob Dole, George Bush the First (in both 1988 and 1992), Ronald Reagan both times, Nixon... fuck, they voted for Gerald FORD for crying out loud.

    So... well... actually... Gary Indiana is a dump because they voted for Republicans.

    http://www.270towin.com/states/Indiana

    :fp:
    The last time Gary, Indiana voted for a Republican was in 1939. :ugeek:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mayors_of_Gary,_Indiana

    Gary's demise was it's reliance on one industry, the steel industry to support the growth. The steel industry went kaput in the 60's, the affluent citizens moved out, and crime skyrocketed. It has remained a shit hole, beyond repair ever since.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    i will reiterate:

    1. romney encompasses the worst attributes of a politician: liar, ignorant, stupid, greedy and above all no integrity ... the fact people would still vote for this guy shows just how deeply partisan the country is

    2. republicans and people in general should be embarrassed that he is the supposed best the party could come up with as a candidate - it really shows how much influence the 1% have over everything

    3. this latest thing is further proof that romney is a throw away candidate and that the establishment are happy with obama ... they will continue to let him hang himself and i suspect that if the polls show any growth for romney - we will get the latest thing to sink him ... and that ultimately, right before november - they will have something that should put the final nail in his coffin ...
  • EdsonNascimento
    EdsonNascimento Posts: 5,531
    Not sure if someone else said this already b/c I only skimmed, but this is another example (as I have seen others say) that folks that have their mind made up, have it made up. Which is exactly what he was saying.

    You're either being obtuse or stupid if you don't think what he meant was - when campaigning, I can't worry about the 47% that already have their mind made up against me. It doesn't refer to folks that don't pay taxes or whatever. That's the common % (or thereabouts) on BOTHS sides that have their minds made up. So, I guess he could have said, I don't have to worry about 94% of the electorate (which is basically true). Except he does have to motivate HIS 47% to get out and vote (and the tiny minority that are TRULY undecided and not the majority of us who like to pretend). Because, that's where this election will most likely lie. Whose voters are most motivated and how the TRUE independents vote. If you don't like honesty, well, not sure what to tell you.

    But, if you're trying to interpret this as whatever his plans are he doesn't CARE about 47% of the population, you're either being willfully ignorant or are stupid.

    Yes, he could have said it better. But, have a conversation with your friend and parse every syllabel you say, and I bet by the end, I could make you out as a racist, homo/hetero-phobic, child hating, old person hating, middle aged hating, misogynist you are(n't).
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • whygohome
    whygohome Posts: 2,305
    EdsonNascimento wrote:

    You're either being obtuse or stupid if you don't think what he meant was

    But, if you're trying to interpret this as whatever his plans are he doesn't CARE about 47% of the population, you're either being willfully ignorant or are stupid.

    I guess a lot of us are too stupid, my lord. Please accept our apologies.
    EdsonNascimento wrote:
    But, have a conversation with your friend and parse every syllabel you say, and I bet by the end, I could make you out as a racist, homo/hetero-phobic, child hating, old person hating, middle aged hating, misogynist you are(n't).

    Doubt it. This was a rather obtuse and stupid attempt at an analogy.
  • EdsonNascimento
    EdsonNascimento Posts: 5,531
    whygohome wrote:
    EdsonNascimento wrote:

    You're either being obtuse or stupid if you don't think what he meant was

    But, if you're trying to interpret this as whatever his plans are he doesn't CARE about 47% of the population, you're either being willfully ignorant or are stupid.

    I guess a lot of us are too stupid, my lord. Please accept our apologies.
    EdsonNascimento wrote:
    But, have a conversation with your friend and parse every syllabel you say, and I bet by the end, I could make you out as a racist, homo/hetero-phobic, child hating, old person hating, middle aged hating, misogynist you are(n't).

    Doubt it. This was a rather obtuse and stupid attempt at an analogy.

    Apology accepted. Though I tend to believe, it's being obtuse to fit reality to your beliefs.

    On the latter part, I challenge you. Catch yourself next time you make a joke, say anything about ANYBODY, etc.

    And, I could have worded that better. I should have added OR to that last part. Sorry about that. It would be pretty hard to fit ALL that into one conversation.
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    EdsonNascimento wrote:
    Not sure if someone else said this already b/c I only skimmed, but this is another example (as I have seen others say) that folks that have their mind made up, have it made up. Which is exactly what he was saying.

    You're either being obtuse or stupid if you don't think what he meant was - when campaigning, I can't worry about the 47% that already have their mind made up against me. It doesn't refer to folks that don't pay taxes or whatever. That's the common % (or thereabouts) on BOTHS sides that have their minds made up. So, I guess he could have said, I don't have to worry about 94% of the electorate (which is basically true). Except he does have to motivate HIS 47% to get out and vote (and the tiny minority that are TRULY undecided and not the majority of us who like to pretend). Because, that's where this election will most likely lie. Whose voters are most motivated and how the TRUE independents vote. If you don't like honesty, well, not sure what to tell you.

    But, if you're trying to interpret this as whatever his plans are he doesn't CARE about 47% of the population, you're either being willfully ignorant or are stupid.

    Yes, he could have said it better. But, have a conversation with your friend and parse every syllabel you say, and I bet by the end, I could make you out as a racist, homo/hetero-phobic, child hating, old person hating, middle aged hating, misogynist you are(n't).

    you see...you're talking in a bubble when talking on this forum...yes, many here have made up their minds...however, and I hope you know this, not everyone who votes is privy to this forum...

    there are some folks in this country who are actually undecided....I don't think he's helping himself with them....do you...?
  • whygohome
    whygohome Posts: 2,305
    EdsonNascimento wrote:
    whygohome wrote:
    EdsonNascimento wrote:

    You're either being obtuse or stupid if you don't think what he meant was

    But, if you're trying to interpret this as whatever his plans are he doesn't CARE about 47% of the population, you're either being willfully ignorant or are stupid.

    I guess a lot of us are too stupid, my lord. Please accept our apologies.
    EdsonNascimento wrote:
    But, have a conversation with your friend and parse every syllabel you say, and I bet by the end, I could make you out as a racist, homo/hetero-phobic, child hating, old person hating, middle aged hating, misogynist you are(n't).

    Doubt it. This was a rather obtuse and stupid attempt at an analogy.

    Apology accepted. Though I tend to believe, it's being obtuse to fit reality to your beliefs.

    On the latter part, I challenge you. Catch yourself next time you make a joke, say anything about ANYBODY, etc.

    And, I could have worded that better. I should have added OR to that last part. Sorry about that. It would be pretty hard to fit ALL that into one conversation.

    Are you saying that you are never guilty of this? What makes you so smart and so special? How did you earn this right to be so damn patronizing?

    Check the ego, my friend.

Categories