• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Romney's '47 percent' remark alarms Republican strategists

Dooble said:
But what does this have to do with Romney shedding some light on your side of the spectrum? Do you disagree with his observation, and if so, why?
Click to expand...


My side of the spectrum is truly moderate I have issues on both the right and the left that I am for....romney is more my type of republican than lets say the total nutjob herman caine...I was a registered republican for 43 yrs until the far right took over the house
 
Loki97 said:
You are absolutely correct that they are extremely adept at rationalizing how they are somehow different than the other "moochers". I spent five years in Indiana(other than Indianapolis and the NW Chicago region about as red as you can get) in a town that had been absolutely devastated by the loss of manufacturing jobs and would have been a wasteland if not for the auto bailout. I'd say that 80% of the whites I knew there were living in poverty, collecting food stamps, insured by Medicaid, and received every other form of public assistance they qualified for. They were also overwhelmingly staunch conservatives who voted for McCain in '08 and will vote for Romney in '12 if his Mormonism doesn't offend their evangelical roots too greatly. Much of it is based in racism, the people I knew probably would have voted for Charles Manson before they voted for a black candidate. The other aspect seems to be a true victim complex where everyone else on welfare is lazy while they are working class heroes who fate has conspired against. I'm sure their cultural tendency not to finish high school and have at least two children before they are of legal drinking age has nothing to do with their circumstance.
Click to expand...
you have well described that cohort, who will rationalize their government dependence away and will vote - unless they were able to get some meth that day - for the candidate who is not black. because it is the government's giving to the black folks who cause them not to have a better standard of living, you know

one of our volunteers is mentally handicapped. he is high performing but it is obvious he is mentally retarded. and he spends his days watching faux news. he believes everything he hears from that propaganda machine. came in recently espousing romney and condemning Obamacare. said people should have to pay for their own health care. so, i asked him how he paid for his health care. how he paid for his recent heart surgery. how he paid for his full time assistant. asked him how he would have something to eat and housing if it were not for taxes paying for it. he just stared blankly, and returned to his faux news inspired rant about how Obama was running up the deficit paying for things people should have to pay for themselves. an amusing vignette, during which i realized that this 55 year old retarded fellow probably exemplified the average faux news viewer
 
johnny_rebson said:
The 47 percent are dragging the rest of this country down.
Click to expand...

I don't know about his numbers but he is right, we have lots of dead wood. I just saw an obamatard advertisement and its source for its claim was THE WHITEHOUSE

talk about bald faced BS!
 
All we have to do is get these people earning more money. Do that and they'll pay federal income tax. Though a lot already do pay pretty high taxes. The federal income tax only makes up 42% of federal tax revenues. In comparison, 40% of federal tax revenues come from payroll taxes. And obviously payroll taxes are disproportionately levied on middle class and down.
 
TheNextEra said:
What's really amusing about all this is the right has complained about Obama being such a divider and now they embrass Romney's message which is dividing. You can't make this up folks.
Click to expand...

... nor is Romney likely to "make this up" as he falls further behind in the polls in swing states.

Worry not, Repubs, Romney will make up the ground in the debates.... wait, he will have to open his mouth, which does not seem to be his strong suit. Do you think he could just yield his time to his opponent so that he could just stand there and smile?
 
Somerville said:
Maybe you didn't see my earlier post. Look at this map which shows those states with the largest percentage of their population that pay no federal income tax and the 10 states with the smallest percentage paying no income taxes.. Now tell us that the southern states, minus New Mexico, in addition to Idaho are likely to vote for President Obama. Far too many, of those Americans receiving financial benefits from the federal government either deny any such benefits exist or they simply have no idea just how badly they will be harmed by the Romney/Ryan budget plan(s)

View attachment 67134781


Romney, as is apparent with some of the comments posted in this thread and others, felt quite secure on that night in May, surrounded by others of his 'class', insulting a large portion of his base.
Click to expand...

Please. I am a Libertarian, so I already have my excrement filter installed when it comes to either an R or a D, but at least be intellectually honest as to the groups he was referring to;



Also, worth noting, the guy who noted his background could get a low pay job and pay for expungement. Outside of that, I concur that we need to have automatic expungement for certain offenses, otherwise we end up with an entirely unemployable class of citizens in this country, that will continue to grow as more and more laws get on the books.
 
Last edited:
Somerville said:
Romney, as is apparent with some of the comments posted in this thread and others, felt quite secure on that night in May, surrounded by others of his 'class', insulting a large portion of his base.
Click to expand...
Romney wants Americans to be able to stand on their own two feet. That is it in a nutshell. Obama wants the opposite - "you didn't build that, sucker, now get your a$$ in the welfare line, where it belongs".
 
Dooble said:
Romney wants Americans to be able to stand on their own two feet. That is it in a nutshell. Obama wants the opposite - "you didn't build that, sucker, now get your a$$ in the welfare line, where it belongs".
Click to expand...

No, Mitt does not care about Americans being "able to stand on their own two feet". As is quite apparent, not only from his words on that night in Boca, but also as shown by his entire career in business and in politics, for Mitt - it is all about Mitt and protecting his specific way of life. The well-being of the 99% is of little real concern for him.


No, Obama does not want every "a$$ in the welfare line". You may believe it but it don't make it so.
 
Somerville said:
No, Mitt does not care about Americans being "able to stand on their own two feet". As is quite apparent, not only from his words on that night in Boca,
Click to expand...
We must be reading different articles, as I didn't get that from him at all. Perhaps he was a bit cynical about the resolve of that 47% Americans, but nowhere did I get that he wanted to keep them poor.

Somerville said:
but also as shown by his entire career in business and in politics, for Mitt - it is all about Mitt and protecting his specific way of life. The well-being of the 99% is of little real concern for him.
Click to expand...
He wants to protect his way of life, Somerville. I know that is a difficult concept for you to grasp, as you're a disciple of community redistribution: you didn't build that, Somerville; the community did. You don't own that, Somerville; the community owns it.

The point is, Mitt Romney protects what is his and builds on that, just like the liberal Nancy Pelosi protects what is hers and builds on her wealth. My question is, how can an "enlightened liberal" like Warren Buffet be worth so much more money than a "dirty money grubber" like Mitt Romney? Do you see the hypocrisy on your side?


Somerville said:
No, Obama does not want every "a$$ in the welfare line".
Click to expand...
Just those who aren't his cronies or those who aren't elitist boobs.
 
Last edited:
Doobie wrote
My question is, how can an "enlightened liberal" like Warren Buffet be worth so much more money than a "dirty money grubber" like Mitt Romney? Do you see the hypocrisy on your side?
Click to expand...

Mr Buffett has shown that acting in an ethical way can be a way to personal prosperity. Mr Romney has shown that acting in ways that primarily profit himself and his associates, whether ethically or unethically, his main goal is personal profit and to hell with others. It was the basic business model used by Bain, profit for the company first, if others benefitted fine but if others were harmed - eh, no biggie.


No I do not see hypocrisy on my side and I do see willing blindness to the actions of Mr Romney and many others who believe as he does.

Fortune magazine article, July 2012
Bain and its fellow buyout barons don't care in the slightest about whether they create jobs or destroy them. All they care about is making money for their investors and themselves, not necessarily in that order.
Click to expand...
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't know about his numbers but he is right, we have lots of dead wood. I just saw an obamatard advertisement and its source for its claim was THE WHITEHOUSE

talk about bald faced BS!
Click to expand...

You have to admire the refusal to surrender as the right watches its substitute golden boy swirl slowly down the bowl. ;)

But at least you got him to utter the same talking points we have heard here for quite a while now so the contempt for half the American people on behalf of the right is now at least out in the open.
 
Somerville said:
Doobie wrote


Mr Buffett has shown that acting in an ethical way can be a way to personal prosperity. Mr Romney has shown that acting in ways that primarily profit himself and his associates, whether ethically or unethically, his main goal is personal profit and to hell with others. It was the basic business model used by Bain, profit for the company first, if others benefitted fine but if others were harmed - eh, no biggie.


No I do not see hypocrisy on my side and I do see willing blindness to the actions of Mr Romney and many others who believe as he does.

Fortune magazine article, July 2012
Click to expand...

Oh for gods sake, Buffet's company is fighting over a billion dollars in disputed taxes. Enlightened my ass. Its PR disguised as CSR.
 
PeteEU said:
Buffet aint running for president.
Click to expand...

Scuse the **** outta me, Somerville brought Buffet up in this thread, I was responding with the way Buffet runs his business in comparison to Romney as in, businesses seek to lower costs. Its not always as ethical as people would want it to be, but they pretty much all do it---its not at all limited to Romney.

Maybe thats why Romney favors flattening the tax code so spending billions on tax abatement isnt profitable.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Scuse the **** outta me, Somerville brought Buffet up in this thread, I was responding with the way Buffet runs his business in comparison to Romney as in, businesses seek to lower costs. Its not always as ethical as people would want it to be, but they pretty much all do it---its not at all limited to Romney.

Maybe thats why Romney favors flattening the tax code so spending billions on tax abatement isnt profitable.
Click to expand...
Except for the fact that corporate rates are on a historical decline while efforts and schemes to avoid taxation increase.

corptaxrates_graph_2.jpg



You were correct, business will always seek to reduce costs...no matter the rate.
 
Last edited:
OpportunityCost said:
Scuse the **** outta me, Somerville brought Buffet up in this thread, I was responding with the way Buffet runs his business in comparison to Romney as in, businesses seek to lower costs. Its not always as ethical as people would want it to be, but they pretty much all do it---its not at all limited to Romney.

Maybe thats why Romney favors flattening the tax code so spending billions on tax abatement isnt profitable.
Click to expand...

Doubt that very much. Romney and Bain have abused the tax code to their advantage for decades, and I doubt very much Romney would ever "flatten" the tax code as he claims. The GOP has been saying this for decades and yet with 6 years of absolute power they did absolutely nothing. The "Tax business" lobby is simply too powerful at the moment.. so both the GOP and Dems have not interest in simplifying the tax code what so ever.

But it sounds great politically, but in reality it will never happen under the present political structure in the US. Fact is those with most political power now days, also provide most of the big funding for the politicians and benefit hugely from the present complicated tax system.
 
Romeny will be ok. Obama has put his foot in his mouth backwards even heel first, and was able to bounce back off the public ignorance. so will the Mormon.
 
The only people who care about strategists are strategists, politicians, and the media. Voters dont care what strategists think. They either agree with Romney's statement that being dependent on govt is bad thing, and the implication that low taxes and less govt will get people off govt, or they agree with Obama that govt is the solution to everything. And a politician being caught being honest wont change their mind on that. Romney was exactly right when he said its hopeless to campaign to the 47% who wont vote for you no matter what. And thats why both Romney and Obama mostly preach to the choir, and rarely do events with people who disagree with them. This is a non issue just like every gotcha moment in politics.

And i wasnt voting for Romeny in the first place.
 
Except for the fact that corporate rates are on a historical decline while efforts and schemes to avoid taxation increase.
Click to expand...

Marginal rates are due to tax abatement. Companies make great pains to avoid taxes as much as possible. If you flatten the tax codes by both lowering taxes and decreasing the ability to abate taxes with various shelters companies will do more business due to lower initial rates and less cost from abatement schemes and more revenue is realized---both to the company and to the government.

From Pete EU
Doubt that very much. Romney and Bain have abused the tax code to their advantage for decades, and I doubt very much Romney would ever "flatten" the tax code as he claims. The GOP has been saying this for decades and yet with 6 years of absolute power they did absolutely nothing. The "Tax business" lobby is simply too powerful at the moment.. so both the GOP and Dems have not interest in simplifying the tax code what so ever.
Click to expand...

Tax | Mitt Romney for President
Reducing and stabilizing federal spending is essential, but breathing life into the present anemic recovery will also require fixing the nation’s tax code to focus on jobs and growth. To repair the nation’s tax code, marginal rates must be brought down to stimulate entrepreneurship, job creation, and investment, while still raising the revenue needed to fund a smaller, smarter, simpler government. The principle of fairness must be preserved in federal tax and spending policy.
Click to expand...

Ryan talks about this all the time. Romney talks about this all the time. Your doubt and corporate envy isnt very convincing.
 
Somerville said:
Mr Buffett has shown that acting in an ethical way can be a way to personal prosperity. Mr Romney has shown that acting in ways that primarily profit himself and his associates, whether ethically or unethically, his main goal is personal profit and to hell with others. It was the basic business model used by Bain, profit for the company first, if others benefitted fine but if others were harmed - eh, no biggie.
Click to expand...
Nice slant, Somerville. Thank you for your bias, but I think I'll pass.

Truth is, your little darling billionaire is no saint. Read below:

Warren Buffett’s hokey tax-hike call--Editorial - NYPOST.com

Mitt Romney isn't any worse of a person than Warren Buffett. They're both rich (Obscenely rich in Buffett's case) and they both have their strengths and weaknesses. My question, however, remains unanswered, so I will ask it again: Being that you're a Socialist, how can you tolerate Warren Buffett's massive wealth? It seems to me that regular lefties like you should be equalizing elitist lefties like Buffett and also about 90% of Hollywood.

Somerville said:
No I do not see hypocrisy on my side
Click to expand...
And this is an ongoing problem on your side.
 
Last edited:
Dooble said:
Romney wants Americans to be able to stand on their own two feet. That is it in a nutshell. Obama wants the opposite - "you didn't build that, sucker, now get your a$$ in the welfare line, where it belongs".
Click to expand...

See, the scary part is that the GOP has convinced you this is true. You want to know who is in that 47%?

- Every high school student or college student with a crappy, part-time job. Working hard to get themselves out of the category
- Military personnel E-4 or lower. Care to call them a dependent class? (shifted out if they've served enough years and get paid more, I believe)
- Seniors who are retired and collecting social security, which they paid taxes for their whole lives. Government dole, my ass. They paid their dues.
- Working family of four making $26,400 or less.
- Someone who lost their job in the recession and is collecting unemployment while they look for a new job.
- 7000 millionaires.
- Someone whose income is entirely from investments, which still get taxed, but as capital gains instead of income. (some overlap with previous, I imagine)
- Stay at home mom.
 
Last edited:
OpportunityCost said:
Ryan talks about this all the time. Romney talks about this all the time. Your doubt and corporate envy isnt very convincing.
Click to expand...

The GOP have been saying the same for 30 years and have yet to do anything about. They had 6 years under Bush and did nothing.. so why do you suddenly expect them to do something now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom