Full quote, emphasis added: 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.” So basically half the country are just moochers - they pay no income tax. Never mind that many of them they pay a higher share of their income in taxes than Mitt Romney does. They are still moochers, because there’s one sort of tax they do not pay. And there’s nothing Romney can do about it: he’ll never convince them to take personal responsibility.
Back in reality, three factors account for 90% of the people who don’t pay income tax: Taken together, those three factors — incomes that fall below the standard deduction and personal exemptions; the exemption for most Social Security benefits; and tax benefits aimed at low-income families and children — account for almost 90% of the Americans who pay no federal income tax.
For further details and info about the other 10%, please see the study.
P.S.: The true fact — about half of Americans do not pay federal income taxes – often gets transmogrified in public discourse into the decidedly untrue claim that half of Americans pay no taxes. That simply isn’t so. There are many other taxes in our fair land, including payroll taxes, excise taxes, sales taxes, state income taxes, and property taxes. Most people who don’t pay federal income taxes still encounter some of these other taxes. Why do half of Americans pay no federal income tax? - CSMonitor.com
Well it’s obvious isn’t it: Mexicans make tremendous politicians and are significantly to the left of Republicans. If Mexicans (more like Marxicans) are permitted to remain in the country, expect a one hundred year Democratic reign.
and he’s offering remuneration to his base with lassez faire policy reflected in higher earnings from stock. A gambling take, perhaps.
I see the equivalence between “you didn’t build that” and “cling to guns and religion”, at least in perception. In reality, Obama empathises with business owners and the religious/NRA affiliated unemployed, even if he phrases such concepts in an inelegant, condescending way. Far better if he’d said “they seek solace in religion” or similar.
What’d be more equivalent is if Obama openly stated a claim of class interests at an IWW conference. “There exists a parasitic ruling class in this country that deprives the worker of their surplus labour through the deleterious combination of rent and wage. They believe they are entitled to property rights and the protection of their contracts through intervention from the police state. We will never get such people to vote for us. We will not win over a majority through rational policy, but must make demagogic appeals to solidarity and class consciousness”
How very clever: in explaining how I took Obama’s quote out of context, you took my quotes out of context.
I’ll say this again in a different way: Paul Ryan’s unethical budget is a much, much bigger deal than Romney’s unguarded comments. It is becoming clear that few people in the US believe that.
Why aren’t more people in the media world (left, right, or neutral) talking about how much Romney’s “successful” career at Bain depended so deeply on government handouts?
One good discussion of this is the last part of Matt Taibbi’s article in Rolling Stone a couple weeks ago. But people should be talking about this NOW, to show the breathtaking hypocrisy of Romney’s recently released remarks.
“Corporate welfare” is at least as pernicious as any other kind, and morally it’s obviously less defensible. And don’t give me any of that “job creators” malarkey.
What’s most amazing about this is it plays so perfectly into the Obama campaign’s hands- Romney explicitly says he doesn’t care about the poor (even if he’s just talking in the “campaign” sense)- and that the poor (and indeed, apparently, virtually all Obama supporters) are moochers.
Romney’s just bad at politics at the presidential level. He’s like a good Division-II quarterback playing his first game in the NFL.
What a campaign! Every day, I feel like a kid at Christmas and finding a shiny new bike from Uncle Mittens. Gotta love how Mother Jones is going to milk this and release little bits at a time.
It’s not surprising to me that Romney feels contempt and disgust for the poor. He simply can’t relate to anyone who wasn’t born with money. It’s hilarious to watch the right wing talking heads rally behind this clown no matter what he says. At some point, they’re going to read the writing on the wall and say “fuck this shit, we’ve lost the presidency so let’s concentrate on the House and Senate”. I personally can’t wait for that slimeball to take the microphone on November 6, concede defeat, and fade into the permanent obscurity that he so richly deserves.
Probably nothing. He seems content to let Romney dig his own holes. He hasn’t been devoting any time to attacking Romney, he has super pacs to do that for him.
I hadn’t realized how easy this election would be for Obama. According to his opponent, he starts with 47% of the voters firmly in his camp, and needs merely to peel 3 or 4 % off the other 53% to get a victory? So there’s himself, and there’s Michelle, they’re doing well, not on food stamps or anything, and there’s me, and right there Obama’s got 3 voters from the 53% who aren’t dependent on public aid–I think he gets over that 3-4% barrier pretty easily, and Romney seems to be saying so.
Except that of course they won’t think of themselves as part of the 47%. They know that they’re not freeloaders, so Romney must be talking about those other freeloaders.
If the Obama camp chooses to use this, their best approach is simply to point out to those people that “he’s talking about you.” If they could get that message out effectively, it’d hurt Romney in Florida and serve to disaffect some of his other core constituencies.
I don’t think this or any other single gaffe will lose Romney the election. The problem is that Romney needs to not make any gaffes in order to keep the pressure on Obama. Every gaffe, every news cycle we spend talking about Mitt’s latest potentially offensive statement, is another lost chance for the Republicans to sell their brand. And time is running out.
I don’t think these tapes will affect the campaign much.
We’ve already got TONS of evidence that Romney is a pathological liar with sketchy morals and a profound detachment from the average citizen. Seeing Romney on tape saying ridiculous things is nothing new.
All Romney has to do is say, “Well, of course I think half the country is mooching – but you? You work hard. You pay your bills. You pay your taxes. Everyone else is mooching off YOU! Don’t you see? You’re in the UPPER half being mooched off of by the lower half!”
Most of the people in the “lower 47%” he refers to aren’t going to think they’re in the “lower 47%” (although this percentage is ridiculous anyway because it ignores all the other types of taxes). However, this video certainly hurts him, at best, and gives Obama plenty of fodder. Romney will lose a few swinging independents in addition to a couple uneasy supporters. Definitely a blow against him, but it’s not crippling.