Romney just cost himself the election

[iluvatar5150]

It's more than a bit hypocritical for him to look down on people who don't pay income tax when he only pays 13%.

-Dan.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Yes he did tell the truth. And his comment about not worrying about that particular 47% spoke to how they would vote, not that he wouldn't care or do anything in their behalf if elected.

That was not the only thing he said. He also said that those people were irresponsible and looking for government handouts, which is incredibly insulting, false, and indicative of someone who has no idea what's actually going on.

-Dan.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

Millions will vote for Obama regardless of how bad things get in this country. Even if they went from having a two hundred K job and a nice house in 2008 to being homeless by 2012, they would still vote for him simply because it is him.

Hope for Change!

 

[TeddyReceptus]

VIDEO of Mitt Romney 47% Gaffe: What was he trying to say?


That man is out of touch. Half of the people in this country are evidently leeches, feel like they are victims entitled to handouts. This includes a lot of people that would normally vote for him.


This man is not fit to be president of the USA. He is fit only to be in the boardroom, serving the interests of his pocketbook.

Well, it is always good to see that these folks like Mitt really don't have the ability to "change their spots".

Mitt is giving up on nearly 50% of the country as unwinnable for him. That's rational, but not for the reasons he says. He's got to give up on half the country because the GOP has made him re-invent himself to be 180 degrees off of the moderate he actually was as a politico, and it has demanded all its candidates adhere to so-far-right ideologies that it has to wave bye-bye to 50% of the American people.

Mitt is quite wrong when he thinks that it's only 5-10% of the people in the middle he has to sway. He actually has to sway a majority of the people and telling us that easily 47% of the American people are off limits to him.

The funniest thing about this video clip is it's a classic case of "the poor workman blames his tools".

Mitt has to work with the American voters and he's now blaming 47% (nearly half) of the American population for likely not voting for him because they are lazy and just want government perks!

So when Mitt loses (which hopefully this will help him do) he'll have an "out".

So much of life has been "taken care of" for Mitt. People changed the rules for him in business ("retroactive retirement"?) and they changed the rules for him in politics (residency requirements for being Gov of Mass had to be monkeyed around for his special case), he got to sit out Vietnam in France making Mormons (I hear it wasn't a great place to be for an American at the time, but at least he didn't lose legs and arms on a mortar). Mr. Bain gave him the reigns of Bain Capital (granted no doubt he was good at his job and Mr. Bain saw that as a potential so it's not all bad, but how many of us were given a company to run?)

Yeah, Mitt won't be able to have anyone "fix" it for him all the time. Unfortunately 47% of Americans just won't do what widdle Mitty wants them to do! Those baaaaaad people! They must be lazy and they'd never listen to Mitty!

This is turning into one of the greatest political seasons since, oh the Reagan years!

 

[Illuminaughty]

How did he do this? How do tax cuts add to the debt when they're not an expenditure and do not cost anything?

Revenues are used to pay expenditures. Cut taxes and less money comes in.

Then, as I said, you did not answer the question

I said:

"I seriously don't think the wealthy have a problem getting their voice heard or their interests looked after in Washington."

You asked for examples. I gave them.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

It's more than a bit hypocritical for him to look down on people who don't pay income tax when he only pays 13%.

-Dan.

Well, Dan, I can see you might be one of the "bad" people who won't vote for Mitt for no good reason, eh? Clearly you and I should pay a higher percentage of our income in taxes than Mitt does because we aren't as "good" as Mitt.

Remember the Golden Rule of the Right: $$$$ is how you tell how good you are.

 

[Sistrin]

I have to ask my conservative friends a question. How many of you would agree that the 47% of Americans who don't pay income tax don't care about their lives and lack personal responsibility? Would you defend Romney here?

He didn't say they don't care about their lives, he said he wouldn't be able to convince them to take personal responsibility and care for their lives. In context his use of the word "care" here means take charge of their lives and free themselves from dependency on government.

And he is also absolutely correct in stating those who pay no federal income taxes don't concern themselves with messages of tax cuts.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

This is turning into one of the greatest political seasons since, oh the Reagan years!

Oooooooo don't we wish! Lots of nice red on this one! (Got you didn't I?)

President Elect - 1984

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

And he is also absolutely correct in stating those who pay no federal income taxes don't concern themselves with messages of tax cuts.

Everyone should be some federal income tax. It doesn't have to be 35%, but they should pay something, not zero.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

It's way too soon to come to that conclusion.

But time is ticking! How many more Romney-isms will we have to see? We've only got about 6 weeks or so left. He's already:

1. Shown he can't be trusted to talk to our allies without insulting them (UK)
2. Shown he can't be trusted to act like a real leader and made political hay off of a tragedy that was still unfolding (as to understanding timelines and what happened)
3. Shown he won't level with the American people (he obviously is a bit scared to let you see how much money he has or where it goes---tax files)
4. Shown he doesn't much trust America (why else would you offshore your money in tax havens?)
5. Shown a ridiculously wide variety of stances on just about every issue (hence he isn't even to be trusted by his own "values voters"!)

I'm not saying Obama is squeaky clean. He's done his share of bonehead things, but Mitt still has to prove himself potentially presidential and major gaffes over and over don't help much.

Actually Obama should just sit quietly by and be president while Mitt runs around and messes himself repeatedly.

Maybe MITT is saving an "October Surprise" for himself! LOL!

 

[Redac]

I'm more curious to see what effect if any this will have on independent and centrist voters.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

He's already:
"..."
1. Shown he can't be trusted to talk to our allies without insulting them "..."
2. Shown he can't be trusted to act like a real leader "..."
3. Shown he won't level with the American people "..."
4. Shown he doesn't much trust America "..."
5. Shown a ridiculously wide variety of stances on just about every issue "..."

Yep, that sounds Exactly like Obama.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Everyone should be some federal income tax. It doesn't have to be 35%, but they should pay something, not zero.

I'd ask if it is actually worth it to point out the errors in the oversimplified point that the Right likes to make on this, but I'm willing to do a Don Xijote and tilt at this windmill one more time.

From the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (LINK)

1. The 51 percent and 46 percent figures are anomalies that reflect the unique circumstances of the past few years, when the economic downturn greatly swelled the number of Americans with low incomes. The figures for 2009 are particularly anomalous; in that year, temporary tax cuts that the 2009 Recovery Act created — including the “Making Work Pay” tax credit and an exclusion from tax of the first $2,400 in unemployment benefits — were in effect and removed millions of Americans from the federal income tax rolls. Both of these temporary tax measures have since expired.
   
   In 2007, before the economy turned down, 40 percent of households did not owe federal income tax. This figure more closely reflects the percentage that do not owe income tax in normal economic times
2. These figures cover only the federal income tax and ignore the substantial amounts of other federal taxes — especially the payroll tax — that many of these households pay. As a result, these figures greatly overstate the share of households that do not pay federal taxes. Tax Policy Center data show that only about 17 percent of households did not pay any federal income tax or payroll tax in 2009
3. Most of the people who pay neither federal income tax nor payroll taxes are low-income people who are elderly, unable to work due to a serious disability, or students, most of whom subsequently become taxpayers.
4. Moreover, low-income households as a group do, in fact, pay federal taxes. Congressional Budget Office data show that the poorest fifth of households paid an average of 4.0 percent of their incomes in federal taxes in 2007
5. When all federal, state, and local taxes are taken into account, the bottom fifth of households pays about 16 percent of their incomes in taxes, on average. The second-poorest fifth pays about 21 percent

(Hopefully #5 stands out because it is as much or more than Mitt pays in income tax. Maybe Mitt is trying to tell us even he wouldn't vote for Mitt! )

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Yep, that sounds Exactly like Obama.

NOTE: IF YOU WANT TO ALTER MY QUOTES BY ELIMINATING ASPECTS OF THEM, PLEASE DO THE HONEST AND DECENT THING AND ADD ELLIPSES WHERE THE DELETION OCCURRED.

This is proper form when altering someone's quote.

Remember it.


Thnx

 

[Touma]

The place where this meeting took place? Notorious sex party house. Not that his night was a big orgy...but none the less, holding a rally at a place known for its debauchery is a bit messed up


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/09/and_theres_more_3.php?m=1

 

[Touma]

Dp

 

[Sistrin]

No shouting required.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

NOTE: IF YOU WANT TO ALTER MY QUOTES BY ELIMINATING ASPECTS OF THEM, PLEASE DO THE HONEST AND DECENT THING AND ADD ELLIPSES WHERE THE DELETION OCCURRED.

This is proper form when altering someone's quote.

Remember it.


Thnx

OK, done. I don't think it will be terribly difficult discerning the changes with our without () but I did it anyways.

 

[1000Flames]

Seems to me like he just told the truth. Granted, we aren't accustomed to hearing the truth like that but i don't see truth telling as a disqualifier

I'm part of the 47%, and I receive no handouts whatsoever from the government. Therefore, he's not telling the truth. Well, that was easy.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

No shouting required.

I simply didn't want him to think this was either acceptable or would be allowed to continue.

I was not shouting. That is simply a larger font and in red. I wanted to ensure he got the point (since clearly he doesn't know simple rules like how to delete portions of others quotations without the usual "..." that is added in. I am hoping that I keep him from doing something actually quite bad with someone's quotes. He didn't really alter mine that dramatically but if he is going to play these sorts of games he needs to be quite careful. I am doing him a favor if you will.)