Romney: 47% of Americans are losers, don't care about 'em

[garbon]

He basically implied that the only reason to be a solid Obama voter is to be a loser dependent on government.

Is it something new to suggest that the other side only votes the way they do because they are stupid losers.  I think already several times in this thread it was discussed how there are so many individuals that should vote Dem for their own interests but vote Repub because of their religious views. I don't think the posters making such statements were suggesting those individuals are right to do so.

[DGuller]

And a related stupidity is to imply that those who don't pay taxes are dependent losers.  Maybe most non-Democrat low-income parents who get EITC will miss that dig or ignore it, but I'm sure quite a few would perceive a disdain coming their way.

[alfred russel]

My church does alot of AA stuff though so sometimes the parties have no booze.  I bet that woud not be true if Catholics had them.

Catholics even incorporated boozing into the mass.

[Neil]

Each side has nothing but contempt for the other.  Film at 11.

[CountDeMoney]

And a related stupidity is to imply that those who don't pay taxes are dependent losers.

I'm still curious as to how much in taxes Mittens paid prior to preparing his tax returns in anticipation of running for President.  Shame we won't know.

Retirees, disabled veterans and the working poor?  Losers, because they don't pay federal income tax. 
Multimillionaires with offshore accounts and an army of lawyers and accountants working every financial device imaginable in order not to pay federal income tax?  Winners! 

There's a moral compass disconnect there.

[alfred russel]

Or maybe it wasn't a major gaffe. The 47% number could be accurate, but do you think those 47% of people would realize Romney was talking about them? This is just an updated version of bitching about welfare queens, with some hysteria regarding America approaching a tipping point.

The problem is that he didn't attack the 47% of non-payers, he attacked the 47% of solid Obama voters.  Only then did he equate those two 47% blocks as if they were perfectly correlated.  The biggest of very many problems with Romney statement wasn't that he spoke the truth he shouldn't have said, but rather that he revealed a deranged worldview that used to be attributed to trash like Limbaugh.  He basically implied that the only reason to be a solid Obama voter is to be a loser dependent on government.

I don't think alienating solid Obama voters is going to hurt him too much.

It is a paranoid and silly worldview, but I bet this is a story that goes away in a few days and doesn't have more of a lasting effect than "bibles and guns" did.

[DGuller]

Or maybe it wasn't a major gaffe. The 47% number could be accurate, but do you think those 47% of people would realize Romney was talking about them? This is just an updated version of bitching about welfare queens, with some hysteria regarding America approaching a tipping point.

The problem is that he didn't attack the 47% of non-payers, he attacked the 47% of solid Obama voters.  Only then did he equate those two 47% blocks as if they were perfectly correlated.  The biggest of very many problems with Romney statement wasn't that he spoke the truth he shouldn't have said, but rather that he revealed a deranged worldview that used to be attributed to trash like Limbaugh.  He basically implied that the only reason to be a solid Obama voter is to be a loser dependent on government.

I don't think alienating solid Obama voters is going to hurt him too much.

It is a paranoid and silly worldview, but I bet this is a story that goes away in a few days and doesn't have more of a lasting effect than "bibles and guns" did.

I don't think locking up the vote for Obama's base is a good idea, but besides that, he insulted two 47% groups where the overlap is not nearly as great as he thinks.  All 47% of solid Obama voters, many of them yuppies like me who certainly do pay something in taxes, will now regard Romney is a total loon and completely give up on the idea of voting for anyone other than Obama or protest voting or not voting.  Some of the tax 47% who aren't actually solid Obama voters will likewise get the hint that Romney has contempt for them, and also may decide to do something other than vote for Romney.

[alfred russel]

DGuller, I think we just disagree on this. If you are considering not voting for Obama, then you really shouldn't feel personally insulted because you aren't a solid Obama voter.

He said something stupid, and is getting blowback for it, but it isn't as though Republicans insulting recepients of government aid is a new thing.

[garbon]

Each side has nothing but contempt for the other.  Film at 11.

[Jacob]

Is David Brooks a noted left wing pundit?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/opinion/brooks-thurston-howell-romney.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

[DGuller]

Is David Brooks a noted left wing pundit?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/opinion/brooks-thurston-howell-romney.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

I think he's viewed as a token conservative by the true believers.

[garbon]

Is David Brooks a noted left wing pundit?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/opinion/brooks-thurston-howell-romney.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

Was that rhetorical or an actual question?

[Jacob]

Is David Brooks a noted left wing pundit?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/opinion/brooks-thurston-howell-romney.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

Was that rhetorical or an actual question?

Actual. I don't know who he is or where he stands normally.

[CountDeMoney]

Actual. I don't know who he is or where he stands normally.

He's a Righty.  Editor at the Weekly Standard, used to edit at the WSJ.  Probably considered a RINO by now, since he works for Atlantic Monthly and contributes to the NYT.

[garbon]

Is David Brooks a noted left wing pundit?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/opinion/brooks-thurston-howell-romney.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

Was that rhetorical or an actual question?

Actual. I don't know who he is or where he stands normally.

His wiki page makes him sound very conservative.