The first rule of running for president is you don't say anything you don't want public.

Sep 17, 2012 19:51

I'm really, really sorry GOP. You deserved better than this guy. He just blew the campaign ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

ziabandito555 September 18 2012, 01:17:17 UTC
I suspect the psychological argument is that people won't think he was including him in that bracket so that might help. Honestly the argument is complicated in itself that you can work around it.

I'd like to know how heavily the hidden video was edited of course and what qualifiers if any were involved.

In a political-junkie sense this comes at a terrible time as this follows three weeks of mediocre stories and polling and enforces a narrative that his campaign is in trouble and that is damaging for fundraising and other resources if not in votes.

In my view the Iowa Republican party is the most to blame for all of this. The extremely poor handling of their caucus meant that we didn't find out until two months later that Rick Santorum had won the caucus. Rick Santorum lost a solid week of free media attention, momentum, and donations and the terrible organization story didn't get as much press as other stories later on as it came out after Gingrich had won South Carolina.

Say what you want about Santorum's policies and opinions I do think logistically he was the most capable of unseating Romney from the "inevitable" slot. If he had been declared the winner that night I suspect we would have had a very different next few months.

I don't think this blew the campaign we have several weeks to go and a lot can happen though this does creates difficulties for Romney. I maintain this remains an extremely close election.

Reply

maddogairpirate September 18 2012, 01:23:56 UTC
Give me a moment. I'll link you to it. Well, if you haven't seen it. It's a Mother Jones thing. Sure sounds authentic.

Edit:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/secret-video-romney-private-fundraiser

Some things to keep in mind about this 47% that didn't pay income tax.

22% are elderly. Elderly support who, usually?
Some of them are out of work folks who didn't earn enough and are trying to get on their feet. Those go to both parties. But after being told by Romney they want a free ride....
Students, I'm sure some supported Romney and just want the job market to get better for them.
And then let's look at the other categories in which Romney is deficient. Hispanics. Blacks. Women.

Add it all up. This is his Waterloo, I'm fairly certain.

Reply

ziabandito555 September 18 2012, 01:26:50 UTC
I've seen it a few times over by this point it seems authentic yes but so did the Shirley Sharod video. I don't trust video clips of political figures there are too many people with axes to grind that in a 24 hour news cycle can cut the video to make a story.

Not saying I disbelieve Romney did this its a decade old canard of the right by this point just saying I'm open to the idea this could have been edited.

Reply

maddogairpirate September 18 2012, 01:28:49 UTC
No, I get it, you're cautious. More than I am in this.

Reply

ziabandito555 September 18 2012, 01:34:55 UTC
I also believe that with several weeks left to the campaign Mitt Romney can pick himself up and this can change. I can think of several scenarios that would push this to the back and get people to turn to Romney.

Reply

ziabandito555 September 18 2012, 01:31:27 UTC
People within those groups if they agree with Mitt Romney will overlook the comment because they will argue they do pay taxes of one sort or another.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/17/romney-my-job-is-not-to-worry-about-those-people/

As Ezra Klein, forgive the clearly obvious bias of the article, does point out that 47% includes payroll tax payers, and all those people pay sales taxes and state taxes and other things so if they want to believe it they'll just say "well I do pay taxes so he wasn't talking about me."

Reply

maddogairpirate September 18 2012, 01:35:41 UTC
Absolutely. Some will rationalize that he didn't mean them. But he does say 47% who don't pay income taxes will vote for Obama, they're entitled, and he's not going to worry about them.

The big problem is that phrase. 47% who don't pay income taxes. He's talking about everyone who didn't pay them. Anyone who catches that and didn't pay them, and either was on the fence or was voting for Romney will be left cold.

Even if this dampens him a mere 3 or 4%, that's a 3 or 4% he cannot afford right now.

Reply

ziabandito555 September 18 2012, 01:37:07 UTC
No you're correct there in a tight election like this he can't afford a 3% or 4% switch. You make a good point there.

Reply

sonious September 18 2012, 06:56:34 UTC
That and as a Republican shouldn't he be trying to make it so that no one pays any income tax? Shouldn't this 47% be you know, trend setters?

Why angry that they aren't paying any taxes at all? Because he wants to not pay any taxes at all. It's why he won't release the returns. He paid accountants to pay as little as possible using as many methods as he could.

If only he embraced the "paying LESS taxes makes me more American, and I wish for more to pay less like me" he could have gone somewhere... he was trying to have it both ways. So he got no way.

Reply

ziabandito555 September 18 2012, 17:22:49 UTC
A comedian jokes on Sunday over his comments about the Consulate attack and the riots in from of American Embassies: Just imagine, every time Mitt Romney has a flub or makes an error or does something like this he's also saying "this is better then releasing my tax returns."

I think we all know the tax returns are just a clear and obvious attack line and talking point. Nothing in those taxes could possibly be that incendiary. It is, however, an interesting political calculation.

Reply

ziabandito555 September 18 2012, 15:56:52 UTC
All this said there is a policy aspect to this that I don't think has been asked yet or followed up to heavily.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have both said they feel the budget deficit is a large problem if not the biggest problem. They have both put out plans that rely on in part ending "tax loop holes" other wise known as the tax deductions Americans take such as deductions for charitable giving, deductions for children and deductions for home ownership. While Congressman Ryan and Governor Romney have advocated closing some of these "loop holes" as part of all their budget plans but they have not addressed which ones they would close or remove. As such it is hard to calculate the efficiency of their plans and its very vague on that point (a common theme in this election for both parties)

With these comments yesterday if they are indeed true in their intention and belief can we assume Mitt Romney intends to close the tax loop holes that affect this 47% of the population? If this is his actual position on people who currently do not pay income tax then does that mean he believes this loop holes that benefit low income families, middle class families, students, and the elderly should have these "loop holes" removed? Is that how he intends to balance the budget?

I doubt these questions will be asked by anyone people are going to focus on the way this appears over the substance but I am curious now.

Reply

sonious September 18 2012, 06:52:57 UTC
This one isn't fictitious, mainly because Mitt Romney said "He didn't put it eloquently".

So he admitted that it was authentic by saying that.

Reply

mikazo September 18 2012, 09:43:14 UTC
Your icon! U mad bro?

Reply

maddogairpirate September 18 2012, 10:15:25 UTC
That's always his icon. =)

Reply

ziabandito555 September 18 2012, 15:31:48 UTC
I didn't say it was fictitious. I just feel there is always the chance there is more context to a comment like this and the work might have been edited. Romney also said he wanted the full tape released and seemed to imply there was more context.

That said yes he stands by this statement which implies he does support it.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up