logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> What Mitt Romney Thinks of Americans, Are You Part of the 47 Percent?
nighttimer
post Sep 18 2012, 02:24 AM
Post #1


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



Mother Jones magazine has a tape of Mitt Romney speaking to a room full of donors and he makes it pretty clear what he thinks about a good sized chunk of the American population:

QUOTE
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."


Questions for debate:

1. Will Romney's remarks impact the campaign in a positive or negative way or have no effect at all?

2. Should Romney apologize for his remarks? Explain what he meant? Totally ignore the remarks and focus on the campaign?

Bonus question: Are you part of the 47 percent Romney isn't worried about or the 53 percent he is?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
9 Pages V  « < 7 8 9  
Start new topic
Replies (160 - 170)
Aquilla
post Oct 18 2012, 05:02 AM
Post #161


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,148
Member No.: 421
Joined: February-3-03

From: Missouri
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



We must have entered the "green phase" of the Obama Campaign since nothing but re-cycled attacks. sleeping.gif

Guess they've hit the bottom of the barrel early. It's what happens when your guy starts having to confront his own record in office and answer for it. That's why he got creamed in the first debate. Now all this Libya stuff is hitting the fan and the great one doesn't want to talk about that whole mess either. dry.gif

So now it's back to bullying and Bain and no doubt the dog at some point... ermm.gif Unless there's something there to hide. Anyone seen Bo lately? He in good health?


Aquilla
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LoneWisdom
post Oct 18 2012, 05:29 AM
Post #162


*****
Century Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 118
Member No.: 8,384
Joined: February-10-08

From: Georgia
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(nighttimer)
My neighbor is an Iraq war veteran who regularly travels to the V.A. hospital in Dayton for treatment of the cancer he developed while he was in the Army. This is a guy who served his country. He's nobody's damn "victim" and for somr elitist, plutocrat, country-club Republican idiot to suggest otherwise demonstrates Romney's unfitness for the office of the presidency.
QUOTE
A candidate for the White House who is contemptuous of nearly half the country IS a real issue. Mitt's campaign motto is "Believe In America." He should change it to "Believe In Half of America. The Rest Can Drop Dead."
Examples of building a self-serving false narrative. I'm not sure what the point is here, if it isn't to interpolate your beliefs into Romney's comments. I'm fairly certain that we can't honestly say what someone else believes, or what they were trying to say. Congress gets to edit their comments on the floor before it goes into the public record. College kids thought it was unfair for the President to not have the use of his teleprompter during the debates. blink.gif Candidates spend a lot of time on the road talking, without the ability to review or correct their words. This video came out several months after the event, so it was warehoused in order to develop this narrative right before the election, and it just so happens the discussion was cut off, magically.

QUOTE(vsrenard)
To me, this is clearly not on the same level as Obama stating there are 60 states, which any school kid should know is not correct.
Just as any thinking adult should know there's something wrong with the 47% number, especially with this narrative built around it. If the left gets to make his words all encompassing, he should be able to correct numbers and add conjunctive 'and's so it reads more like he's talking about the irresponsible. Those in the room probably knew who they were talking about, but that doesn't fit this false narrative. Quick to forgive one number but not the other. Impromptu statistical references in front of a live audiences sometimes result in misstatements. I'm certain that most at this high-stakes dinner were able to get past statistical errors.

There are many other 'lumpings' on this thread to exaggerate the narrative.

QUOTE(slim)
I am curious what magical words you think Mr. Romney uttered during the unfilmed portion of the speech that would have explained what he meant in a flattering way? And if he said something so magical then, why hasn't he repeated it today to explain the issue instead of just saying he was wrong? He wouldn't even say that until polling indicated the message was hurting his campaign.
How about correcting the 47% number, and clarifying he's talking about irresponsible people taking advantage of the system? I don't expect Romney to flatter the irresponsible. As to your last point, like I said, diplomacy, letting it go, not looking weak by being forced to apologize on demand.
QUOTE
If he were truly remorseful or actually felt his words came out wrong, he wouldn't have needed polling to persuade him to disavow the words. I believe he said exactly what he meant. He just didn't plan on anyone outside his wealthy base to ever hear the words.
It seems to be the purview of some that requires remorse when they feel offended.

QUOTE(nighttimer)
Everyone here knows how to read.
I believe I alluded to that point. dry.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nighttimer
post Oct 18 2012, 04:39 PM
Post #163


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



QUOTE(Aquilla @ Oct 18 2012, 01:02 AM) *
We must have entered the "green phase" of the Obama Campaign since nothing but re-cycled attacks. sleeping.gif

Guess they've hit the bottom of the barrel early. It's what happens when your guy starts having to confront his own record in office and answer for it. That's why he got creamed in the first debate. Now all this Libya stuff is hitting the fan and the great one doesn't want to talk about that whole mess either. dry.gif

So now it's back to bullying and Bain and no doubt the dog at some point... ermm.gif Unless there's something there to hide. Anyone seen Bo lately? He in good health?


Aquilla



Seems like Obama talked about Libya the other night at the debate. Maybe you missed it? It was in all the news. It was Mittens who tried to attack the president on Libya and instead ran head first into a brick wall by getting his facts wrong. It was also Mittens who got creamed in the second debate. But he does have his binders full of women, to entertain himself at least when he wasn't trying to act like a boss treating Obama like an unruly employee.

Speaking of bullying, Mittens knows something about that. Besides when he led a gang of punks to hold down and cut the hair of a high school classmate who offended him, Mittens also wants the bosses backing him to make clear to their employees who they should vote for:

QUOTE
On June 6, Romney led a conference call with support from the über-conservative National Federation of Independent Business and -- to cut to the chase -- urged the bosses on the call to persuade their employees to vote for him in the upcoming election.

"I hope you make it very clear to your employees what you believe is in the best interest of your enterprise and therefore their job and their future in the upcoming elections," said Romney in a recording obtained by In These Times. "Nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I think that will figure into their election decision, their voting decision and of course doing that with your family and your kids as well."


Tagg Romney (Tagg? blink.gif ) must have learned the lessons of being a bully from his daddy. At Tuesday's debate, Tagg (Tagg? blink.gif) wanted to take a swing at the president.

Classy bunch, these Romneys. rolleyes.gif

Damn. What a missed opportunity to see the punk son of the Republican challenger trying to physically assault the President of the United States during a live debate on national television before an audience of millions. After watching the Secret Service pounding Tagg (Tagg? blink.gif ) into apple sauce, the election would pretty much be a study in forgone conclusions. All of Daddy's millions in the Cayman Islands wouldn't be enough from keeping Tagg (Tagg? blink.gif ) from a nice long stay in a federal prison where he could meet interesting other guys that would love to bully him.

Oh well. There's always Monday's debate. How much you wanna bet there will be a guy in a dark suit wearing sunglasses with an earpiece keeping a very close eye on Tagg.

(Tagg? blink.gif )

This post has been edited by nighttimer: Oct 18 2012, 07:31 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paladin Elspeth
post Oct 18 2012, 11:33 PM
Post #164


*********
I want the 10th Doctor for President!

Sponsor
August 1, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,987
Member No.: 721
Joined: May-10-03

From: Between 2 Great Lakes
Gender: Female
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(nighttimer @ Oct 18 2012, 12:39 PM) *
QUOTE(Aquilla @ Oct 18 2012, 01:02 AM) *
We must have entered the "green phase" of the Obama Campaign since nothing but re-cycled attacks. sleeping.gif

Guess they've hit the bottom of the barrel early. It's what happens when your guy starts having to confront his own record in office and answer for it. That's why he got creamed in the first debate. Now all this Libya stuff is hitting the fan and the great one doesn't want to talk about that whole mess either. dry.gif

So now it's back to bullying and Bain and no doubt the dog at some point... ermm.gif Unless there's something there to hide. Anyone seen Bo lately? He in good health?


Aquilla



Seems like Obama talked about Libya the other night at the debate. Maybe you missed it? It was in all the news. It was Mittens who tried to attack the president on Libya and instead ran head first into a brick wall by getting his facts wrong. It was also Mittens who got creamed in the second debate. But he does have his binders full of women, to entertain himself at least when he wasn't trying to act like a boss treating Obama like an unruly employee.

Speaking of bullying, Mittens knows something about that. Besides when he led a gang of punks to hold down and cut the hair of a high school classmate who offended him, Mittens also wants the bosses backing him to make clear to their employees who they should vote for:

QUOTE
On June 6, Romney led a conference call with support from the über-conservative National Federation of Independent Business and -- to cut to the chase -- urged the bosses on the call to persuade their employees to vote for him in the upcoming election.

"I hope you make it very clear to your employees what you believe is in the best interest of your enterprise and therefore their job and their future in the upcoming elections," said Romney in a recording obtained by In These Times. "Nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I think that will figure into their election decision, their voting decision and of course doing that with your family and your kids as well."


Tagg Romney (Tagg? blink.gif ) must have learned the lessons of being a bully from his daddy. At Tuesday's debate, Tagg (Tagg? blink.gif) wanted to take a swing at the president.

Classy bunch, these Romneys. rolleyes.gif

Damn. What a missed opportunity to see the punk son of the Republican challenger trying to physically assault the President of the United States during a live debate on national television before an audience of millions. After watching the Secret Service pounding Tagg (Tagg? blink.gif ) into apple sauce, the election would pretty much be a study in forgone conclusions. All of Daddy's millions in the Cayman Islands wouldn't be enough from keeping Tagg (Tagg? blink.gif ) from a nice long stay in a federal prison where he could meet interesting other guys that would love to bully him.

Oh well. There's always Monday's debate. How much you wanna bet there will be a guy in a dark suit wearing sunglasses with an earpiece keeping a very close eye on Tagg.

(Tagg? blink.gif )

I searched for a headline that identified Romney's son in the "intervention" the family used to tell Romney to be himself at the debates, rather than what his consultants were telling him to do, but I couldn't find it:

Tagg, You're "IT" to Coach Dad in Debates

"Tagg" is short for his middle name "Taggert." I had to look it up. (EDIT: It's actually spelled "Taggart.")

Sorry for the interruption. Please proceed. cool.gif

This post has been edited by Paladin Elspeth: Oct 19 2012, 03:41 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nighttimer
post Nov 27 2012, 07:26 PM
Post #165


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



This must be what they mean by "poetic justice." w00t.gif
QUOTE
It seemed only fair to Mitt Romney to wait on this one. His share of the popular vote, which stuck around 49 percent on election night, continued to fall as votes came in. Last week Greg Sargent rang the alarm, warning/gloating that Romney might sink below 47.5 percent of the vote. Yesterday, Aaron Blake announced Romney's arrival at 47.4 percent, and started rounding down. I gave the guy more time. But now, via David Wasserman's invaluable chart, we can make it official: Romney is down to 47.43 percent of the vote, making it impossible to round up. He is the 47 percent.


Sometimes these jokes just tell themselves. laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dingo
post Nov 27 2012, 11:21 PM
Post #166


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 5,065
Member No.: 225
Joined: November-3-02

From: Monterey Bay, Calif.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Private



Are you part of the 47 percent Romney isn't worried about or the 53 percent he is?
I like Romney am part of the nearly 100% dependent on, addicted to the corporate system we all live under, although I've had some experience of living outside the box, unlike Romney. "Welfare" is basically a political term referring to public benefits the other fellow gets. For instance my guess is around 80% of the expenditures on the military industrial complex are basically a benefits package. The corporate system provides pretty well if you are not caught in their crosshairs. But it's quite wasteful and destructive from the perspective of Mother Earth, who is starting to kick back. Curiously, judging from reports they have issued, the military gets this better than the civilian population.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 30 2012, 02:03 PM
Post #167


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Dingo @ Nov 27 2012, 06:21 PM) *
Are you part of the 47 percent Romney isn't worried about or the 53 percent he is?
I like Romney am part of the nearly 100% dependent on, addicted to the corporate system we all live under, although I've had some experience of living outside the box, unlike Romney. "Welfare" is basically a political term referring to public benefits the other fellow gets. For instance my guess is around 80% of the expenditures on the military industrial complex are basically a benefits package. The corporate system provides pretty well if you are not caught in their crosshairs. But it's quite wasteful and destructive from the perspective of Mother Earth, who is starting to kick back. Curiously, judging from reports they have issued, the military gets this better than the civilian population.

100s of thousand of people work in the defense industry - good American jobs that are not exported. as the Dem cuts take hold we will se the big layoffs continue.

And the other Democrat TAXES that will hit the middle class are coming. anyone who believed the LIE that just raising the top tax rate would solve all out problems is in for a rude awakening - the proposed increase in capital gains and dividends taxes will hit some few wealthy individuals PLUS anyone in the middle class who has a 401K or Pension plan....

and I find this amusing since this is exactly what Obama said was a Romney lie in the last debate.....

QUOTE
WASHINGTON — With both parties positioning for difficult negotiations to avert a fiscal crisis as Congress returns for its lame-duck session, Democrats are latching on to an idea floated by Mitt Romney to raise taxes on the rich through a hard cap on income tax deductions.
The proposal by Mr. Romney, the Republican presidential nominee, was envisioned to help pay for an across-the-board income tax cut, a move ridiculed by President Obama as window dressing to a “sketchy deal.” But many Democrats now see it as an important element of a potential deficit reduction agreement — and one they can claim to be bipartisan.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/us/polit...deductions.html


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dingo
post Nov 30 2012, 02:27 PM
Post #168


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 5,065
Member No.: 225
Joined: November-3-02

From: Monterey Bay, Calif.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Private



QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 30 2012, 06:03 AM) *
100s of thousand of people work in the defense industry - good American jobs that are not exported.

Nice to nice to know that military money doesn't go to foreigners. wacko.gif And I appreciate your wisdom in pointing out that government expeditures don't create jobs unless they go to the military. You've got a whole party behind your alternative reality dude. thumbsup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 30 2012, 02:41 PM
Post #169


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Dingo @ Nov 30 2012, 09:27 AM) *
QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 30 2012, 06:03 AM) *
100s of thousand of people work in the defense industry - good American jobs that are not exported.

Nice to nice to know that military money doesn't go to foreigners. wacko.gif And I appreciate your wisdom in pointing out that government expeditures don't create jobs unless they go to the military. You've got a whole party behind your alternative reality dude. thumbsup.gif

you really dont get it do you. Lots of good jobs in a vital industry that last year had 65 BILLION $ in exports but to you its all expendable as 'benifits" to some mythical "complex" blink.gif

And ya know the world is just soooo safe and calm these days isn't it???

I have no problem keeping defense spending level and reaping the savings as we end the war but big cuts are opposed by every expert including Panetta
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/20...om-Entitlements

what I see happening is Democrats refusing to admit the campaign lies and refusing to deal with the real fiscal issues - entitlements.

I even head dopey Durbin say in Congress the other day that current SS spending does not add 10 cents to the deficit - Duh blink.gif
QUOTE
“Social Security does not add one penny to our debt, not a penny,” Sen. Dick Durbin, of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, insisted Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

During Monday’s briefing at the White House, press secretary Jay Carney repeated the theme: “We should address the drivers of the deficit, and Social Security is not currently a driver of the deficit — that’s an economic fact.”

Well, saying it’s a fact doesn’t make it so.

Durbin, Carney and others making that claim should take a look at the president’s own budget to see what’s really going on. On page 465 of the budget’s “Analytical Perspectives,” they’ll find a chart showing Social Security ran a deficit of $48 billion in 2011. This year, Social ­Security will come up $50.7 billion short. In 2015, as more baby boomers retire, the gap between cash in and cash out is expected to reach $86.6 billion.
http://www.chillicothegazette.com/article/...7CFrontpage%7Cp


I guess after a while with so many lies some people just start believing the bull poop. Its like the Reid ststement that Democrats have already made "cuts" by counting spending that was not going to ever be made for the war as a "cut" - cry.gif

idiots

Bottom line is we have Trillions of $$ in shortfall and "taxing" the rich gets us government funding for about 8 days - if anyone in the middle class thinks that are not going to get hit they are dreaming...because its already happening.

This post has been edited by Ted: Nov 30 2012, 02:49 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dingo
post Nov 30 2012, 03:25 PM
Post #170


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 5,065
Member No.: 225
Joined: November-3-02

From: Monterey Bay, Calif.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Private



Generally Ted you are clueless on about 90% of what you say but I will agree with you on one thing. Without making a value judgement, Social Security contributes to the deficit. Any government expenditure does no matter what terminology they hide it under. But then there is the question of stimulus. The argument for stimulus from deficit spending is that it multiplies growth which will eventually allow the deficit to be payed off in corresponding tax growth. That certainly proved true under Roosevelt. Whether it is true now with peak everything and a fast degrading environment is a question that is up for grabs. We should be seeking no growth sustainability in my view and if part of that is partial or full default on our debt then so be it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 30 2012, 04:17 PM
Post #171


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Dingo @ Nov 30 2012, 10:25 AM) *
Generally Ted you are clueless on about 90% of what you say but I will agree with you on one thing. Without making a value judgement, Social Security contributes to the deficit. Any government expenditure does no matter what terminology they hide it under. But then there is the question of stimulus. The argument for stimulus from deficit spending is that it multiplies growth which will eventually allow the deficit to be payed off in corresponding tax growth. That certainly proved true under Roosevelt. Whether it is true now with peak everything and a fast degrading environment is a question that is up for grabs. We should be seeking no growth sustainability in my view and if part of that is partial or full default on our debt then so be it.



what specifically is wrong with anything i have said above? and we have done a 'stimulus" and it failed miserably so if Dems think that they are just going to raise taxes and spend more and Republicans are going to buy it they are dreaming. the reality is that neither party wants to cut the waste because that means angering their buddies - but we need to demand they do it. here is where we can start....

http://www.cagw.org/

just one example from above link:
QUOTE
Our nation is facing its fourth straight year of $1 trillion-plus budget deficits, and the national debt is nearing $16 trillion. At the same time, farm income is at an all-time high of $98 billion, or twice as much as it was in 2001, and commodity prices reached record levels from 2005-2010. Nonetheless, the House Agriculture Committee’s Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act (FARRM) would cost nearly $1 trillion over 10 years -- 60 percent more than the 2008 Farm Bill and billions of dollars more than the Farm Bill passed by the Senate on June 20.

Despite the “reform” in its title, the FARRM Bill completely fails to modernize Depression-era, command-and-control programs for commodities like dairy, sugar and peanuts. The sugar program alone costs Americans $1.9 billion annually in higher prices at the grocery counter and has wiped out at least 75,000 jobs in industries such as candy, cereal, and baked goods manufacturing. The price supports, marketing controls, and import quotas that keep the price of sugar in the U.S. at roughly double the price on the world market cost taxpayers $1.2 billion each year.

The FARRM Bill continues to fund the Rural Utilities Service Broadband Access Program, which was intended to help bring Internet broadband service to underserved rural communities. However, RUS loans have a documented track record of profligacy, including a loan to a company providing broadband access to affluent suburban neighborhoods near Houston, Texas.

The FARRM Bill also keeps intact the Market Access Program (MAP), one of the federal government’s most blatant examples of corporate welfare.


This post has been edited by Ted: Nov 30 2012, 04:19 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

9 Pages V  « < 7 8 9
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: July 21st, 2018 - 04:18 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.