• 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

Wow, this "news" story had a short shelf life. Already gone.
 
Wow, this "news" story had a short shelf life. Already gone.

yes, notice how no one is discussing it any more [/s]
 
Romney's comment is completely arrogant and condescending...and it clearly displays what most of us have known all along - Unless you are part of the wealthy elite, Romney isn't concerned about you and doesn't plan to work for you.

So you didn't listen to what he said. Got it!
 
This forum and MSNBC don't count.

Right. We can only go with Fox News to get an idea of how long people are talking about Republicans ****ing up.
 
yes, notice how no one is discussing it any more [/s]

Maybe because the Obama administration is now having to admit to a terrorist attack, while dealing with expiring tax cuts.
 
So you didn't listen to what he said. Got it!

No I listened to what he said....and he said exactly what a lot of us have known about Romney since the start of this campaign. Romney is completely out of touch with the average American. He just doesn't get it and doesn't have any desire to get it. He will work to protect the interests of the wealthy. He is a Marie Antoinette candidate.
 
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?

I think you missed the mid terms where we started primarying the people that dont want to do anything about spending. GOP eliminates them in primaries, Dems embrace them as fellow travelers.

The GOP congressional caucus is a bit different than it used to be.
 
I think you missed the mid terms where we started primarying the people that dont want to do anything about spending. GOP eliminates them in primaries, Dems embrace them as fellow travelers.

The GOP congressional caucus is a bit different than it used to be.

No it aint. The mid-terms changed nothing. Did the Tea Party members refuse pork? Of course not.. they embraced billions for their districts. Did the GOP come with credible plans for budgets, cutting the deficit and so on? Of course not, they came with very partisan hack and slash the usual suspects and expand the military and lower taxes massively for the wealthy. Nothing has changed since the mid-terms. The only thing the GOP has wanted to do is to sabotage the economy so they can rid of that black guy in the White House.
 
See, the scary part is that the GOP has convinced you this is true. You want to know who is in that 47%?
Not from you, as that list represents none of the people Romney was talking about. See, the real scary part is that you already know which groups he is referring to, but the Left has convinced you otherwise.
 
No it aint. The mid-terms changed nothing. Did the Tea Party members refuse pork? Of course not.. they embraced billions for their districts. Did the GOP come with credible plans for budgets, cutting the deficit and so on? Of course not, they came with very partisan hack and slash the usual suspects and expand the military and lower taxes massively for the wealthy. Nothing has changed since the mid-terms. The only thing the GOP has wanted to do is to sabotage the economy so they can rid of that black guy in the White House.

If race baiting is going to be your go to tactic, you have no argument. Try harder.
 
The impression I got was that Romney was referring to Obama's rock solid base of about 47% as beyond reach as far as winning their vote.

So if we are to assume that America is roughly 50/50 Democrats and Republicans you are saying only 3% of Democrats pay income tax?

I don't think he was referring to everyone who received government help or whom voted for Obama. He is reaching out to the small percentage of swing voters who will decide this election.

He was referring to the 47% of Americans who pay no income tax.

Here is the quote:

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 that 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. . . . These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn’t connect. . . . And so my job is not to worry about those people—I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.



It's no different than Obama's decision to write off non college whites.

When did he decide to write off non college whites?
 

Lets review your quote more closely, before you tossed your deflection:
The only thing the GOP has wanted to do is to sabotage the economy so they can rid of that black guy in the White House.
So ALL of the GOP is trying to sabotage the economy because a black guy is in the White House. YOU, personally, are race baiting with that comment.

The people doing the chair BS are stupid---whats your excuse?
 
Lets review your quote more closely, before you tossed your deflection:

So ALL of the GOP is trying to sabotage the economy because a black guy is in the White House. YOU, personally, are race baiting with that comment.

The people doing the chair BS are stupid---whats your excuse?

why is an excuse necessary when telling the truth?
 
The GOP caucus in the House is VERY different than it used to be but not in a good way. To me it is insane that the Speaker of the House kowtows to Eric Cantor who is just that whiney kid in class who thought he was always right now all grown up.
 
Back
Top Bottom