Tweet
I’m reading and watching reactions to the hilarious tapes of Romney crapping on 47% of Americans in front of his rich supporters revealed in a Mother Jones piece.
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.
I watched Romney flack Bay Buchanan flailing this AM as CNN’s Soledad O’Brien tried to ask her to explain how the GOP presidential candidate didn’t crap on half of Americans, since that figure includes people on Social Security, students with Pell Grants, veterans receiving benefits… not just the assumed “welfare queens” — those victim-mindset folks on the government teat that Romney was visualizing. It was a colossal spin fail. Bay couldn’t refute facts. From Politico’s Who are Mitt Romney’s ’47 percent’?:
Half of those nonpayers earn too little to pay any taxes, and half of them get there through tax deductions and exemptions, according to the Tax Policy Center. Of the latter half, 44 percent use tax deductions designed to help the elderly, and 30 percent use tax deductions that aid the working poor or children.
The Tax Policy Center uses a family of four earning less than $26,400 as an example. After the $11,600 standard deduction and four $3,700 exemptions, they have no taxable income.
But many of these people pay federal payroll and excise taxes, as well as state income taxes.
What wasn’t discussed was that fact that Mitt wasn’t talking about these “freeloaders,” was he?
When you hear the term “welfare” or “welfare reform” what comes to mind? If you are like most people, you conjure up images of people who are getting checks or food assistance each month. You may think of the many children who get assistance, or the millions of working families that get some sort of financial aid to help make ends meet each month. But what you may be surprised to know is that a heck of a lot of money gets spent in this country each year in the form of corporate welfare.
Corporate welfare takes a big bite out of our country’s finances each year. In fact, it’s estimated by the CATO Institute, that $100 billion per year is spent on corporate welfare in America. Yes, that’s billion. It’s a big problem that the country faces, and yet it’s one you barely ever hear about.
No, those are Mittens’ friends. The tapes, recorded at the Boca Raton home of private equity manager Marc Leder in May, are a motherlode of offensive tripe that only underscores Mitt Romney’s disdain for people not in his social strata, as well as his severe tone-deafness when it comes to political humor.
“My dad, as you probably know, was the governor of Michigan and was the head of a car company. But he was born in Mexico … and uh, had he been born of uh, Mexican parents, I’d have a better shot at winning this,” Romney says in the video. “But he was unfortunately born to Americans living in Mexico. He lived there for a number of years. I mean, I say that jokingly, but it would be helpful to be Latino.”
Romney is not Mexican, but his ancestors were white Americans who moved to Mexico when the state of Utah banned polygamy. Romney’s son, Craig, cut a Spanish-language radio ad in August making a point similar to the one that his father did at the fundraiser. “My grandfather George was born in Mexico,” Craig noted, leaving out the reason why.
Meanwhile, the brain-dead propaganda status of the network confirmed again. Fox and Friends host Brian Kilmeade bleats “I Would Love” Romney’s Remarks On The 47 Percent “To Be A Message For Any Candidate On The Stump” (via Media Matters).
Anyone who thinks Romney’s toast needs to remember this fact: no matter how much Team Romney or Mittens himself royally screws up his campaign, the sheer hatred of Barack Obama could still allow Mr. 1% to pull this election off.
A release put out by the DNC rounded up some of the reactions to the videos. It’s below the fold.
What They’re Saying:
Mitt Romney’s Shocking Candor With High Dollar Donors
AP: “Already scrambling to steady a struggling campaign, Republican Mitt Romney confronted a new headache Monday.”
Bloomberg’s Josh Barro: “This is an utter disaster for Romney.”
NY Times’ Paul Krugman: “The idea that half of Americans are just grifters is grotesque. If this is real, it’s very, very ugly.”
Washington Post’s Jonathan Capehart: “What the Republican presidential nominee said is reprehensible and unbecoming a man who claims to want to be president of all Americans.”
Slate’s Dave Weigel: “This is Tea Party rhetoric churned into something new and stupid.”
TPM’s Josh Marshall: “ It’s rare when the impact of some gaffe or embarrassment or revelation isn’t overstated on first blush. But this strikes me as possibly that rare exception. This tape strikes me as absolutely devastating.”
Shorter Romney statement… no apologies.
Category of Americans who don’t pay federal income taxes: U.S. troops serving in combatzones.
Many of us have seen pols pander to donors in closed events. I’ve heard my share Rs+Ds. Never anything this damaging however.
Romney on the 47 percent seems a stereotype of an unsympathetic venture capitalist–going to be hard to overcome among non-base voters.
Ex-GWBush ad-maker McKinnon: Romney fund-raiser tape “potentially crippling”
Dem pollster Garin on Romney fund-raiser tape: “Reinforces impression he’s mistake/prone & arrogant. would be better off if he apologized”
Michael Falcone @michaelpfalcone
Note: The Romney camp’s 1st response to the videos comes from comms director Gail Gitcho, not Romney himself
SECRET VIDEO: Romney Tells Millionaire Donors What He REALLY Thinks of Obama Voters
Mother Jones // David Corn
During a private fundraiser earlier this year, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney told a small group of wealthy contributors what he truly thinks of all the voters who support President Barack Obama. He dismissed these Americans as freeloaders who pay no taxes, who don’t assume responsibility for their lives, and who think government should take care of them.
Devastating
Talking Points Memo // Josh Marshall
This is a Holiday for my folks. So I’ve only been half in touch with the news today. And I’m just getting up to speed on this purported tape of Mitt Romney saying he thinks the 47% of Americans who support Barack Obama are moochers who thinks the government has to take care of them. It’s rare when the impact of some gaffe or embarrassment or revelation isn’t overstated on first blush. But this strikes me as possibly that rare exception. This tape strikes me as absolutely devastating.
Romney: Nearly half ‘believe they are victims’
Associated Press // Kasie Hunt and Steve Peoples
Already scrambling to steady a struggling campaign, Republican Mitt Romney confronted a new headache Monday after a video surfaced showing him telling wealthy donors that almost half of all Americans “believe they are victims” entitled to extensive government support and adding that as a candidate for the White House, “my job is not to worry about those people.”
Romney Talks Bluntly on Those Dependent on Government
New York Times // Michael D Shear
Mitt Romney described almost half of Americans as “dependent upon government” during a private reception with donors earlier this year and said those voters will likely support President Obama because they believe they are “entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it.” The blunt political and cultural assessment by the Republican presidential candidate offers a rare glimpse into Mr. Romney’s personal views as the campaign enters its final 50 days. Liberals quickly condemned the remarks as insensitive and Mr. Obama’s campaign accused him of having “disdainfully written off half the nation.”
Romney slams Obama backers as dependent on government, tax dodgers
Los Angeles Times // Seema Mehta
Republican nominee Mitt Romney, speaking to donors at a closed-door fundraiser earlier this year, said that supporters ofPresident Obama failed to take personal responsibility for their lives, relied on government for their needs and paid no income tax.
Today, Mitt Romney Lost the Election
Bloomberg // Josh Barro
On the tape, Romney explains that his electoral strategy involves writing off nearly half the country as unmoveable Obama voters. As Romney explains, 47 percent of Americans “believe that they are victims.” He laments: “I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” So what’s the upshot? “My job is not to worry about those people,” he says. He also notes, describing President Obama’s base, “These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax.”
Romney derides Obama supporters in hidden camera speech
Reuters // Patricia Zengerle
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney dismissed supporters of President BarackObama – almost half of U.S. voters – as people who live off government handouts and do not “care for their lives,” in a potentially damaging video. “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,” Romney said in a hidden-camera video of his remarks at a private fundraiser earlier this year posted on Monday on the left-wing Mother Jones magazine’s website.
Mitt Romney trashes the 47 percent
Washington Post // Jonathan Capehart
Late Monday, Mother Jones released several video clips of a fundraiser where Romney (R-1 percent) tells weatlhy donors exactly what he thinks of those supporting President Obama. In one clip, he contradicts that botched expression of concern for the middle class. In fact, what the Republican presidential nominee said is reprehensible and unbecoming a man who claims to want to be president of all Americans.
Leaked Videos ShowMitt Romney Unscripted
ABC // Amy Bingham and Emily Friedman
Portions of videos that show Republican nominee Mitt Romney at closed-door fundraisers show him using some very different talking points from the ones he tends to use publicly. He is shown the videos sayingthat “no matter what” he does, 47 percent of the population is going to vote for Obama because they are “are dependent upon government.”
Romney to campaign donors: Obama voters “dependent,” see selves as “victims”
CBS // Brian Montopoli
Mitt Romney’s campaign has responded to video in which the Republican presidential nominee appears to be shown describing the majority of President Obama’s supporters as people who are “dependent on government” and “believe that they are victims.”
Romney fundraiser videos leaked
Washington Post // Rachel Weiner
Bits and pieces of a private fundraiser held by Mitt Romney have been leaked toMother Jones magazine, exposing some blunt talk from the Republican nominee on voters, his campaign and American society. In one video, Romney argues that 47 percent of voters support Obama because they are“dependent on government” and that he will “never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”
Leaked Fundraiser Video Shows Romney Saying 47% Of Americans Are “Dependent”
BuzzFeed // Andrew Kaczynski
The videos were orginally posted online in brief segments three weeks ago by YouTube user “Anne Onymous.” Video researcher James Carter said he contacted the original uploader who gave the whole length of the fundraiser
Excerpts from leaked Mitt Romney fundraiser videos
Washington Post // Vincent Bzdek
“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 nomatter what…
The Real Romney
New York Times // Paul Krugman
Oh, my. Mother Jones has what it says is a video of Mitt Romney talking to donors; it sure looks and sounds real. And it reveals a candidate who despises half the country: 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.
Secret Romney fundraiser video: 47 percent backing Obama like government-sponsored stuff
Politico // Maggie Haberman
Another portion of a Mitt Romney fundraiser that was filmed in secrecy has emerged,this time via Mother Jones, filmed at an unstated date and time, although supposedly once the primaries had ended. This one has a snippet of Romney explaining the state of the race, and President Obama’s vote share: 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. Thatthat’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: I’ll never convince Obama voters to take responsibility for their lives
Washington Post // Greg Sargent
The Huffington Post and Mother Jones both post audio of what may be a blockbuster moment: Mitt Romney telling a private fundraiser that 47 percent of the American people — the voters who can be counted on to vote for Obama — are “dependent on government,” “believe that they are victims,” and think government “has a responsibility to care for them.” “I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives,” Romney says. Mother Jones’ video is here.
Romney: 47 Percent Who Support Obama Want Government Handouts
National Journal // Naureen Khan
At a closed-door fundraiser earlier this year, Mitt Romney dismissed all of President Obama’s supporters as people who are dependent on government, pay no income tax, and believe they are victims.
Romney Claims Obama Voters All Depend On Government Checks In Unearthed Video
Talking Points Memo // Evan McMorris-Santoro
Behind closed doors, Mitt Romney sounds like the leaders of the far-right flank of his party. That’s the central message from a video purportedly taken during a Romney fundraiser earlier this year and posted online by Mother Jones Monday. The Obama campaign called the clip “shocking.” In the clip, which was recorded surreptitiously at a Romney fundraiser that “occurred after Romney had clinched the Republican presidential nomination,” according to Mother Jones, Romney tells a room full of donors that people who voted for President Obama — a full 47 percent of the country — are dependent on the government.
Romney: Obama voters ‘believe they are victims’
USA Today // Gregory Korte
WASHINGTON — Mitt Romney told a group of donors in a secretly taped video that 47% of Americans will vote for President Obama because they are “dependent upon government” and “believe that they are victims.” The video was obtained by themagazine Mother Jones, which said it came from a source who shot the video at a campaign fundraiser earlier this year. The magazine obscured all but Romney’s head in the video, and did not say when or where it was shot.
RNC Chairman Reince Priebus Says Romney Was “On Message” Regarding 47% Comment
BuzzFeed // Dorsey Shaw
The Republican leader doubled down on Mitt Romney’s statements that were secretly recorded during a private event. VIDEO
31 Comments
I’m still wondering about how Mitt managed to conflate the two groups of people in his two 47% statements. One group is the 47% who pay no federal income tax. The other was the 47% who will vote for Obama no matter what.
Those two groups are NOT THE SAME sets of people.
No one who plans to vote for Obama pays income tax? Really?
No one who pays no income tax will be voting for Romney? Really?
A HUGE chunk of the people who don’t pay income taxes are retirees relying on Soc Security. The over 65 demographic is the only group that Romney is winning.
A huge chunk of the working poor who pay no income tax will vote for Romney because of social issues.
Rick Santorum just said this weekend that the republicans will never have the elite, smart people on their side. Are all these elite, smart people who according to Santorum will vote for Obama, also people who don’t pay income tax?
Here’s two more things the Republicans will be hoping for on Election Day.
Bad weather (I kid you not .. usually lower voter turnout among Demos during bad weather Election days) and voter apathy by the Demo voters who think “we have this one in the bag”.
As much of an idiot Romney appears to be … yes he could win.
Interesting post.
Santorum just said the republican cannot attract the “smart” people???? If there is a bigger moron than Rick Santorum on the planet, I haven’t met him.
OTOH, he IS right. But, were I him, I wouldn’t have admitted that.
I don’t disagree, but Romney seems be losing suport and credibility almost weekly. I don;t recall a candidate dooing this bad a job since Dukakis.
Nice piece Pam.
Many of these people buy light bulbs and pay sales tax too, but that’s as irrelevant as the rest of the list.
Santorum insulted every person he was speaking to and they didn’t even realize it. I rest my case.
Obama had made a similar statement to venture capitalist in 2008 about Hillary Clinton’s supporters in rural America. The guns and butter argument and how all they have left is clinging to their guns and bible.
(It’s me again. I’ve already posed a Southern Strategy possibility this morning in FDL. Just wondering.)
There’s another bad smell in all this. Like utter desperation. How much certitude is there that this is an unplanned video leak? Was Karl Rove at this event? Smells like his fingerprints. And it could work. Who among us cannot picture the a-holes in the street who are voicing agreement with Mitt’s sickness, and they all watch Fox and believe it all.
The 47%
solutionproblem.ATTENTION MODERATOR
Ya might want to have someone turn on the comments for Jon Walkers post.
Thank you and please delete this rude interruption.
I’m on the fence. I cannot figure out if KKKarl Rove, et al, deliberately leaked video in order to: a) continuing derailing the already inept Bishop HighFalutin “campaign” bc, in reality, they truly want Obama to “win” (why not? he does what Wall St says), or b) continuing to brainwash deluded TeaGOPers that what Bishop SnottySnob said simply didn’t apply to them but to “those OTHER people” (nudge nudge wink wink), and so, therefore, GOTV for MittBot2012 cuz he’ll “protect” you TeaPartiers from those lousy dirty blahs & browns, blah blah blah…
So confusing…
Two percent at a time, Romney continues to bury himself. He can’t be that stupid. His staff can’t just sleep through these events. I’m getting a sneaking hunch this whole election is a put-up job; was from the beginning.
Were the billionaire financiers of Romney’s campaign not in on the deal? Could it be that Karl Rove just needs to definitively demonstrate that money is all that matters in electoral politics.
Maybe Fox will demonstrate that Fox is all that matters in electoral politics.
And on the other side, the conservative blogs consider this to be Mitt’s finest hour. They had their doubts before, but now they know he is really one of them.
My take is:
* Mitt’s toast. Always has been, but by now the chances that he can drag himself across the finish line are too low to consider.
* The Rs want to keep the House and maybe take the Senate. That means turning out the base. That means proving to the base that he’s one of them, regardless of Mitt’s lame attempts to appeal to moderates.
So one of the plutocrats at the dinner decided to DOWNSIZE MITT. Nothing personal, bro, just business.
Massachusetts Mitt had a small chance, but would depress R turnout and cost them Congress, Teabagger Mitt has zero chance but might boost R turnout just enough to cling to obstructionist power. In particular, keeping Obama from making 2+ Supreme Court nominations.
Romney cannot be elected President. Even if he were to win the popular vote, he is now so far behind in electoral votes he cannot win under any plausible scenario.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map
Stop with the fear mongering. Please.
It has always been pretty stupid, even their name makes no sense. It’s also not new, wasn’t this something going around during the primaries via Rush et al?
Sadly, however, there is a very good chance that Romney wins the Presidential election. He can make these statements with impunity because he already knows the election is bought and paid for.
The exit polls presented on Election night will be very different from the actual numbers that are used to represent the votes cast in the election. It’s already clear, through the GOP voter suppression activities and our own voter apathy, that Romney can very easily win this election.
I’m hearing, for instance, many more Democrats and Independents talk about voting for third party candidates than I’m hearing of similar dissent within the GOP. If the GOP voters turn out in lock-step for Romney and the other segments of the voter population split among Obama and several third party candidates, then we get exactly what we deserve and no chance to keep these Randian individuals out of the White House. No chance.
Just remember that.
hmmmm…Sounds diabolic enough to be true. I think I like it better than my position that it could be planned Southern Strategy in behalf of Mitt.
Maybe it’s both: “If it doesn’t work this way, we can still make it work that way.”
Either way, I smell a rat as filthy as Karl Rove, but maybe he’s not the only rat in the pack.
Thank you, Pam, great compendium of reactions and stories.
The media gatekeepers are realizing what many of have known about Romney for a long time: he’s an out-of-touch elitist with no connection to the American people, and he’s mean-spirited and angry to boot. There’s a reason Mitt’s never shown himself to the voters: this is what he looks like.
Now that this is known and exposed such that no one can look away, his candidacy is essentially over. Sure, Team Obama needs to work hard to overcome voter suppression efforts that could appear to turn the tide on Election Day, but that’s where the battle is. The fight for Americans’ votes is over.
I think you make a valid point or case. And another matter that should not be forgotten is the incredibly consistent poll numbers making this a tight race. In spite of all common sense and reason. (The cause of which has always been my point–racism. Unspoken does not mean it doesn’t exist.)
If the Repugs were throwing this contest, they wouldn’t be so aggressive on denying voters in places that would swing the election.
It must not be forgotten that the U.S. public is the most politically ignorant and least class conscious electorate of any advanced industrialized country. With that anything is possible.
Not rational to say that hatred alone could still bring down Obama when he’s liked by an even greater number of people than will vote for him. That’s why he’s the perfect Trojan horse–many people continue to be so insecure they’ll vote for him, to prove they’re not haters, despite his policies.
The MSM is comfortable with Obama. Romney IS toast. The many links you supply tend to suggest this as well.
Tight races are going to be the rule in a two-party system. The biggest landslides we’ve had at the Presidential level are around 20 points (84, 72, 64, 36, 32). The working definition of “landslide” seems to be 10 points. Five points (distressingly close to the margin of polling error) is a good solid victory. Either major party seems to have a floor of around 37% of the popular vote.
The Electoral College magnifies those small popular vote margins into big EC vote margins – seven points for Obama in 2008 gave him a 2:1 EC victory.
This election won’t be as definitive as 2008, but the margin is plenty big to predict the winner, barring last minute world events.
Got it. And doesn’t this support the concept that we are a one-party (with 2 faces) system?
Whenever bringing up the value of a multi-party system and the viability of coalition governments, I can’t seem to get my head around the most frequent answer: “The 2-party system is the American tradition, end of discussion”. I’m sure other systems have downsides, but that’s not a decent reason to cut off debate. Some countries seem to make it work and what we have now really sucks.
Better to have self-professed disciples of Ayn Rand in the White House than a man who pays lip-service to principles of economic fairness and social justice while enabling corporate hegemony and the liquidation of public assets. There isn’t really a major faction in either party committed to building and nurturing a sustainable economy (i.e.- one that isn’t dependent on cheap oil, consumer credit and perpetual growth). Considering that a complete blowup of our whole system is quickly coming, I’d rather the blame be correctly assigned to right wing economics.
Obama is the worst of both worlds because he implements conservative/neo-liberal policies while sounding just progressive enough for leftism to take the blame.
Another area that I could see vulnerability is the fact that Romney is the hypocrisy of Romney suggesting that he got where he was by himself. His PARENTS put him through school. His PARENTS paid for his housing while he was in school. His PARENTS paid for his first car. Shorter Mitt Romney: Poor Americans should have done a better job picking their PARENTS then they wouldn’t be victims reliant on the government for things like school aid or health care or food and shelter.
Then there is his VP, who got where he was by using government support to get through school. According to Mitt Romney, Ryan was being a “victim” when he utilized the government programs available to him.
I’m not voting for either of them. Although I don’t necessarily agree that it is better to have zombie Rand in the WH then Zombie Reagan.
OTOH, Ryan did the prudent thing. He married money.
FYI, Ryan’s wife is a distant relative of mine. Quite distant. But true.
The video of the fundraiser revealed that Romney has contempt for and no problem insulting the 24 million unemployed Americans who paid no taxes last year, but who took government unemployment checks — calling them irresponsible, entitled, government-dependent moochers. And how many of them are unemployed due to venture capitalists like Romney who outsourced their jobs overseas or closed their companies?
Who would vote for someone who kicked them when they were down? Could Romney afford to lose those 24 million votes which he had been courting by criticizing Obama’s efforts to get them back to work and promising a speedier return to full employment?
I always thought Romney was smart, if a bit out of touch. Now I know he’s both not smart and also very out of touch.