So, Gallup and Ipsos polls say that the reaction to the 47% comments is more negative than positive, but not a huge deal to quite a few. Gallup:
Ipsos:
So that’s as close to an answer of the actual question in the OP that we have so far.
Plus I suspect that a good many of the 47% were unaware that 47% of the population were exempt from federal income tax in the first place and are disapproving of it themselves.
So they don’t actually need food stamps, it is more of a convienence for them? Without the stamps, they’ll buy the same amount of groceries, just using cash?
It’s now DAY 3 of the 47% tape, so we can safely assume this dog is barking. Seamus Romney has competition! This is going to take the haircut all the way to the October 3 debate and beyond.
Nice to see the uptick in the Polls for our man Barack. 
Pawlenty quits as Romney campaign co-chair.
Does this guy take career advice from Sarah Palin? Why would he quit with just 6+ weeks left to go on the job? One would think for a winning campaign, he’d want to be known as a key part of that…
… oh, never mind.
That isn’t accurate either. People have to have food. They’ll likely buy the amount of food they need, from General Foods or whoever, while other letting other obligations and/or discretionary spending such as they might have slide.
As a volunteer and supporter for the San Antonio Food Bank, I can assure you that you are so full of shit you squeak when you walk. At least on this topic, anyway.
Please, please stop - you may actually do more damage to your reputation than your words in the Sandusky thread.
Given that Willard has given the world another flip flop I’d say Timmy didn’t like what he was going to do and wanted to leave with all the other rats as the ship is sinking.
In other words, they’ll use that money they’re sitting on.
It doesn’t really help matters to spend your rent money on food.
You can post like this in the Pit, but not here. Stick to the topic at hand and don’t insult other posters.
Point noted.
In what way am I full of shit. The food at the food bank got purchased at some point I’m presuming, so General Foods, et. al still got their evil lucre. And I can assure you that there are a ton of people who, in the absense of food stamps, use other of their money to buy groceries and never set foot in a food bank. Your volunteer work is admirable and I congratulate you for it, but that doesn’t mean that you invariably know what you’re talking about.
You seem not to have taken note that both testimony and the jury’s verdict in the Sandusky trial have substantiated my postions in that thread.
And you find this:
In 2010, 46.2 million people (15.1 percent) were in poverty.
In 2010, 9.2 million (11.7 percent) families were in poverty.
In 2010, 26.3 million (13.7 percent) of people ages 18-64 were in poverty.
In 2010, 16.4 million (22.0 percent) children under the age of 18 were in poverty.
In 2010, 3.5 million (9.0 percent) seniors 65 and older were in poverty.
The overall Poverty Rate according to the Supplemental Poverty Measure is 16.0%, as compared with the official poverty rate of 15.1%.ii
Under the Supplemental Poverty Measure, there are 49.1 million people living in poverty, 2.5 million more than are represented by the official poverty measure (46.2 million).iii
SA, I’m afraid these people cannot just defer their stable fees on their dancing horses…
Being classified by the govenment as being in poverty does not necessarily equate to being totally unable to buy food. There are currently people in this country who are receiving food stamps who are also buying houses and cars and paying utilities and clothing their children and…well, you get the idea. Food stamps are assistance to people in need as defined by the government, not a last alternative to dumpster diving.
Utterly unworthy of comment.
SA, you know what they call poor people who don’t get food stamps? Hungry. Maybe malnourished, too.
The suggestion that they can just skip a payment on their Cadillac or something is asinine.
If a person on foodstamps is paying on a car, that might be a good thing. Because that car may be necessary for that person to have a job. It may allow their kids to get to school.
You know, having a car doesn’t mean that you are well off. Our country is utterly car dependent in many paces. If you don’t live near a bus line or light rail, even poor people need cars.
Of course, if you don’t care about reality, you can ignore that and just keep repeating conservative liturgy.
I highly doubt you can find too many people qualifying for foodstamps and a mortgage…
You might find some who had a mortgage, in the not too distant past…
Looks like Willard’s flipping/flopping so hard it knocked Timmy clear out of bed and right into that revolving door of the lobbyists.
Not quite a Palin, but awfully darn close.