Print

[lilly]

I NEVER heard him say he wouldn't represent these people, or do what he feels would be in their best interest.

You are right. He said "My job is not to worry about those people". It says it all, and doesn't have to be "spun".

I do see others trying to "spin" it though, by saying "Oh he didn't mean you, or you"

His job is not to worry about the people, his job is to worry about the corporations that provide him with campaign contributions.

And he's right. That IS his job.

[Monroe Native]

It's not the republican population in general who doesn't want to help people, its the tea party conservatives to which the moderates have to pander to.  Economic studies have shown that trickle down economics doesn't work and that ultra conservatives put more emphasis on social issues than the economy.  They use fear and obfuscation to avoid talking about the simple fact they want more money.  These people are against progressive drug policy that will get incarcerated youth out of prision and into the working force.  They discourage social policies that will actually help improve the economy.  To say that conservatives dont want to help the less fortunate may not be fully true because they want to help themselves first.

I think trickle down DOES work - when / if you target the tax cuts at companies to attract employment.

When companies do well they hire people and build facilities.  The people spend money, causing companies to want to expand, etc etc.

Now - if you are talking about trickle down on giving a Billionaire a tax cut, I may agree with you, though I think there is a limit to how much any one individual should have to pay taxes percentage wise.

Romney said corporations are people too - and for the discussion of taxation they are being treated like people.  If you were to separate companies including small businesses from individual income tax I'd perhaps agree with you on trickle down doesn't work.  If you include companies in the conversation, I must vehemently disagree.

I think your statement that conservatives only help themselves first is a generalization, and like most generalizations it may be true in specific cases, and totally incorrect in many other cases.  I am very active in programs to help the poor - and yes, that is driven through religious beliefs that is what we should be doing per instructions from my Savior.

For me this is not JUST writing a check, but being on the front line on 3 organizations helping to collect and distribute food, clothing, and other items that they find it hard to get for themselves.  I can introduce you to many other conservatives that work right along with me.  We don't want thanks, we just want to directly help people in our community that are having a hard time.  This is a family affair - I want my child to understand the importance of helping, and fortunately I think she takes the joy in it that my wife and I do.

Off subject - but unfortunately I am here to tell you the the need in Monroe County has been on a steady rise over the last 6 months.  Every time we do a distribution we get 10-15 new applicants then the month before, and very few are dropping off.  It is so sad to see new families and kids coming to get help.  You can be SURE I want to help them, I want them to have the American Dream just like my family.  I want them to get a good car, buy a house, get the education they want, a career they enjoy.  From what I am seeing in my volunteer efforts the need is increasing, and the resources we have to help are shrinking. 

[Monroe Native]

You are right. He said "My job is not to worry about those people". It says it all, and doesn't have to be "spun".

Just like Democrats complained that "you didn't build that" was out of context, please put that statement into context.

He was NOT saying he wasn't worried about those people - just that in the terms of WINNING THE ELECTION and Getting votes that was not the group he was targeting - that the dependent group that didn't pay taxes in the first place would not respond to low taxes as being a plus.

[lilly]

I think that trickle down doesn't work. It hasn't worked in decades. Businesses that are doing good, don't hire people spontaneously, they hire them when the demand is high enough that they can no longer produce enough product to meet demand.

Just like Democrats complained that "you didn't build that" was out of context, please put that statement into context.

He was NOT saying he wasn't worried about those people - just that in the terms of WINNING THE ELECTION and Getting votes that was not the group he was targeting - that the dependent group that didn't pay taxes in the first place would not respond to low taxes as being a plus.

He was talking about the 47% of people that don't pay income taxes. He was saying that those people love to live off the government, and that his job is not worry about those people.

What other context was there?

[Flanders]

I think that trickle down doesn't work. It hasn't worked in decades. Businesses that are doing good, don't hire people spontaneously, they hire them when the demand is high enough that they can no longer produce enough product to meet demand.
He was talking about the 47% of people that don't pay income taxes. He was saying that those people love to live off the government, and that his job is not worry about those people.

What other context was there?

From my understanding, the context was that he was talking about how to win votes, he was not talking about worrying about their well-being.

It's like saying his job to win votes is to "not worry" about making hollywood actors happy.

[MM1]

This is so funny.  The dems are seeing this as some sort of campaign winning boon and is frantically spinning it so fast I think the ocean currents are affected.   


He DID NOT say he did not have to worry about the people.  He said he did not have to worry about their VOTES because are going to continue blindly followowing and voting for Obama, no matter what he does.   


Anyone other than a dem or mainstream media knows he was speaking of their VOTES, not THEM. 




I can't help but wonder how on earth, given all the media blackouts and spinning related to anything "Obama" and all the obnoxious Hollywood mouthpieces in favor of Obama vs. the complete media/Hollywood attack on Romney . . . . . how can it be 47/46? 

Interesting.

[Monroe Native]

I can't help but wonder how on earth, given all the media blackouts and spinning related to anything "Obama" and all the obnoxious Hollywood mouthpieces in favor of Obama vs. the complete media/Hollywood attack on Romney . . . . . how can it be 47/46? 

I think the Democrats are desperate to have released that tape now, and it too is back firing on them.

I almost feel sorry for them.  They can't campaign on their record.  They can't tout their accomplishments since it would remind the anti ACA crowd about the "big F'ing deal."

All they CAN do is throw mud and hope something sticks.

[Flanders]

I think the Democrats are desperate to have released that tape now, and it too is back firing on them.

I almost feel sorry for them.  They can't campaign on their record.  They can't tout their accomplishments since it would remind the anti ACA crowd about the "big F'ing deal."

All they CAN do is throw mud and hope something sticks.

I was thinking the SAME THING!!!  Didn't they have the tape since May?  Seems it should have been the "October Surprise", but desperately released the tape early.  If anything it only forced Mitt to solidify his stance and not be so wishy washy.

[Forsythia]

I think trickle down DOES work - when / if you target the tax cuts at companies to attract employment.

Here's an article stating the opposite.  When I was a much younger woman, 16 or so, I was an ultra conservative.  When I started taking economics classes I understood that trickle down doesn't work.

Here's a good article showing the myth of tricle down economics.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/the-big-lie-job-creationism/

The Big Lie: Tax cuts for the rich pay for themselves by creating jobs for the middle class.
 
The Truth: Tax cuts for the richest have a devastating effect on the economy by creating fiscal deficits and fueling income inequality.

Here's a little graphic showing how low taxes for the rich have become.  Please note that the US was most successful during periods of high taxation for the top 1%.  Give me an Eisenhower Republican, not an extreme Libertarian which is what we're getting these days.





Now tell me how this is helping Romney?  Basically he's saying that if you do not pay income taxes he doesn't give a damn about your vote.  How does that translate into how he actually feels about you?  The way he phrased that statement, and with the disdain in his voice, I can't believe all of you middle class individuals are buying into this.  He clearly thinks those in the top 1% are worth more as human beings than us regular people. 

[Flanders]

Here's an article stating the opposite.  When I was a much younger woman, 16 or so, I was an ultra conservative.  When I started taking economics classes I understood that trickle down doesn't work.

Here's a good article showing the myth of tricle down economics.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/the-big-lie-job-creationism/



Now tell me how this is helping Romney?  Basically he's saying that if you do not pay income taxes he doesn't give a damn about your vote.  How does that translate into how he actually feels about you?  The way he phrased that statement, and with the disdain in his voice, I can't believe all of you middle class individuals are buying into this.  He clearly thinks those in the top 1% are worth more as human beings than us regular people. 

I'm pretty sure he clearly stated that the appeal of lowering federal taxes really doesn't work for the voters who are paying zero taxes....  F, do you really not get this or are you just intentionally furthering the class warfare game?

[Forsythia]

I'm pretty sure he clearly stated that the appeal of lowering federal taxes really doesn't work for the voters who are paying zero taxes....  F, do you really not get this or are you just intentionally furthering the class warfare game?

He said those people don't matter.  Now why is it only class warfare when people of a lower income are attempting to better themselves and make sure the top 1% pay their fair share?  Why isn't it when the rich are attempting to increase taxes on the poor it's not called class warfare?

I get this.  I see through what Romney and his cohorts are trying to do. He wants to give wealthy business owners tax breaks so they can put more money in their pockets and increas profits.  Go ahead and read that article.  It explains a lot on how we were more successful as a nation when taxes were much higher on the .1% and the .01%.

Here's a little quote.

If tax breaks were a magic tonic that created jobs, we would be booming again. We are recovering, but millions are still out of work. Even while emerging from a financial crisis, however, America under President Obama has created jobs faster than President George W. Bush did in either of his terms. And that growth has occurred despite huge cuts in government jobs.
 
How? Tax cuts for the 95% of Americans who aren’t rich.
 
When it comes to stimulating the economy, what’s always most effective is helping those in need. Unemployment insurance and food stamps have a far higher multiplier effect on growth, while tax breaks for the rich often sit in bank accounts. If cutting taxes on the rich creates jobs, those jobs are overseas.

And another picture showing the inflation adjusted income of the wealthiest people in the US.

Before Reagan’s tax cuts for the rich in the 1980s, the top one-tenth of one percent”s share of the economy hovered below five percent. Since 1985 their share of the income has never been below five percent. Often it has reached over ten percent.
 
Those numbers reveal the true goal of  Job Creationism is revealed. The point has never been to create jobs or to cut the deficit — Romney’s plan would hurt the middle class and radically explode the debt. The point has always been and always will be to make the rich richer.

[Flanders]

He said those people don't matter.

No he didn't, not in the sense you are trying to make it.  Again, he was talking about his arguement to win votes.

The rest of your lower class mid class 1% evil rich working poor has nothing to do with how he was discussing his strategy to win the election.

[Monroe Native]

Here's an article stating the opposite.  When I was a much younger woman, 16 or so, I was an ultra conservative.  When I started taking economics classes I understood that trickle down doesn't work.

Here's a good article showing the myth of tricle down economics.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/the-big-lie-job-creationism/

Here's a little graphic showing how low taxes for the rich have become.  Please note that the US was most successful during periods of high taxation for the top 1%.  Give me an Eisenhower Republican, not an extreme Libertarian which is what we're getting these days.





Now tell me how this is helping Romney?  Basically he's saying that if you do not pay income taxes he doesn't give a damn about your vote.  How does that translate into how he actually feels about you?  The way he phrased that statement, and with the disdain in his voice, I can't believe all of you middle class individuals are buying into this.  He clearly thinks those in the top 1% are worth more as human beings than us regular people.

What is the saying?  I you aren't liberal when you are young you don't have a heart, and if you aren't conservative when you are older you don't have a brain?  Something like that.  Not sure what going the other way would mean.

How is it helping him?

Intelligent people who actually listen to what he said, and the context he said it in realize that he was saying that 47% of the people have made up their mind, they are voting for Obama NO MATTER WHAT, and he can't worry about them.   He never said he didn't care about the 47%.  He never said he didn't want to help them.  He is NOW saying that, and explaining HE can help them, while OBAMA has failed.  It has focused his campaign.

You seem to be in the 47% that will vote for Obama no matter what.  If Israel dumps on NUKE on Tehran, and the Middle East is in WW3, Iran attacks us for fun so we are sucked in also, and gas is $12 a gallon you will still vote for him.  If more and more people are in poverty but the unemployment number is down because no one is looking you will vote for him and say what a wonderful job he is doing.  There is NOTHING anyone, including a personal visit by Romney and Ryan to your office will change that.  Why should he focus on winning you over?

It helped him because the statement seems to be spontaneous and genuine.  It helped him because he had the guts to say that 47% dependent on the government and not paying taxes IS a problem.  There of those of us that worry that Mitt is more of a progressive then a conservative, so that statement said the way it was said seemed genuine goes a long way. 

Keep lying to yourself this is sinking Mitt.  No need for you to vote in November.  This election is over!

[Forsythia]

No he didn't, not in the sense you are trying to make it.  Again, he was talking about his arguement to win votes.

If he doesn't care about my vote what makes me believe that he actually cares about me and my well being?  What about how he took a cheap shot at his wife and Latino voters?

That tape was so full of wonderful kernels the Democrats can exploit it's insane.

And yes, his strategy was directed at the 1% and those who believe in his rhetoric.  His tone, inflection, and all around demeanor was that of a privlidged person not carring about the majority of his potential constituents.

[Flanders]

It helped him because the statement seems to be spontaneous and genuine.  It helped him because he had the guts to say that 47% dependent on the government and not paying taxes IS a problem.  There of those of us that worry that Mitt is more of a progressive then a conservative, so that statement said the way it was said seemed genuine goes a long way. 

Looking back, I think this will be the story that comes out of the election.  Like I said, it forces Romney to be foreceful.  Which is something that has been missing from his campaign.