Romney: Obama voters dependent on government, entitled, don't pay taxes

[Anonymous]

Romney needs to make a poverty speech like Obama did with race.

[Anonymous]

Once again, I go back to my conspiracy theory - someone is trying very, very hard to make sure Romney loses this election. It's simply not possible that the person the Repubs put up for President is this stupid. Plus the pick of Ryan alienates that critical percent of undecided people, people who voted for BO last time. I am telling you this campaign is a sham. They are putting on a show for the base even as they throw this election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha! I'm doing something wrong. I support Obama, fall into Mitt's definition of middle class, and (unlike Mitt) pay 25% federal taxes.

Get a new accountant. You are wasting your money if your accountant doesn't know the laws.

Yes. Because, if you are paying taxes, it is because your accountant does not know 'the laws'.

[Anonymous]

Romney's math doesnt add up.

If almost 50% of people will automatically vote for obama (ignoring the fact that this is just people not registered voters), obama just has to get 1 person from the other 50% to vote for him to win.

Seeing that Obama has fundraisers with many rich people who pay taxes and are not part of the first 50%, I dont think that its that hard.

Thats just purely speaking on the math aspect of it all.

Well, except we elect the president with electoral votes, not a popular vote, which would make a difference in the math, right? (not being snarky)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Once again, I go back to my conspiracy theory - someone is trying very, very hard to make sure Romney loses this election. It's simply not possible that the person the Repubs put up for President is this stupid. Plus the pick of Ryan alienates that critical percent of undecided people, people who voted for BO last time. I am telling you this campaign is a sham. They are putting on a show for the base even as they throw this election.

But why? Why throw the election? I don't see that at all. I just think Mittens is rolling around in the fetal position in his hotel room bed, while his Mormon overlord prepares a ritual fire pit to toss sacrifices into. They've got this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I used to live in the South. The republic voters I knew lived in trailers, had the lowest paying jobs on campus, could hardly scrape by without family assistance. I always wondered why they would vote against their own interests.

To be fair, you could say the same thing about my family, with our mid six-figure HHI, voting for Obama. I prefer to beliebe the majority of the low-income Republican voters aren't evil, or even stupid - they honestly believe they are doing what is best for the country, just like I am, even if is isn;t exactly in their own interests.

I am well off and vote for Obama, but I would not say I am doing it for my country. It is self interest. My sense of well being is affected when people are lacking food and health care, and my bottom line will be affected when the gap grows wider.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Romney needs to make a poverty speech like Obama did with race.

That would be funny if there was actually 'a race speech', which of course there wasn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Using "Mittens" for Mitt isn't offensive; it's just pathetic and shows immaturity. It says much more about the liberals using it than Romney or his campaign, that's for sure.

Still, this issue in the thread is deflecting from Obama's poor performance after our Libyan ambassador was killed. I wonder if Obama now knows whether Egypt is our ally? Or is he, the leader of the free world, still confused on that point? Yeah, great guy you've got there.

Egypt is not our ally. Egypt is also not our friend. I hope that you know that it is possible to be neither an ally or friend. We have many of those, and continue to do business with such countries.

[Anonymous]

The country as a whole suffers when people lack basic things like food, shelter, access to a decent education. It's a fantasy to think you can live in a bubble shut off from people in your community, and that their lack of basic necessities doesn't affect you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, I go back to my conspiracy theory - someone is trying very, very hard to make sure Romney loses this election. It's simply not possible that the person the Repubs put up for President is this stupid. Plus the pick of Ryan alienates that critical percent of undecided people, people who voted for BO last time. I am telling you this campaign is a sham. They are putting on a show for the base even as they throw this election.

But why? Why throw the election? I don't see that at all. I just think Mittens is rolling around in the fetal position in his hotel room bed, while his Mormon overlord prepares a ritual fire pit to toss sacrifices into. They've got this.

As to why - because they know the person in the White House for the next four years won't be able to magically fix this economy. They know things are going to continue to suck for a long time (although I believe the trends right now are that things are improving, albeit slowly). I think they know that in 2016 there will be a regime change and they don't want to see another two term dem. They want a shot at two terms in 2016. They don't want a one termer in 2012.

[Anonymous]

This is an edited tape put out by Mother Jones (as far left as anyone is going to get).

The Obama people were whining about the ACORN tape being edited, so let's see them take responsibility for jumping down the Romney campaign's collective throat by going on and on about THIS edited tape.

Waiting.
Waiting.
Crickets.

[Freeman]

Anonymous wrote:This is an edited tape put out by Mother Jones (as far left as anyone is going to get).

The Obama people were whining about the ACORN tape being edited, so let's see them take responsibility for jumping down the Romney campaign's collective throat by going on and on about THIS edited tape.

Waiting.
Waiting.
Crickets.

Are you implying that it was edited to misrepresent what he actually said? If so, then Romney disagrees with you: "At an impromptu news conference Monday, Romney offered no apologies, conceding the comments were not "elegantly stated" and were spoken "off the cuff." He has not denied making the statement, or even that it was out of context, as has been the charge in the situations you are attempting to compare it to. If he actually made the statements, in context, in the released video, what exactly is your issue with the editing?

[Anonymous]

I love the fact that Romney keeps putting his foot in his mouth. Keep on talking, Mitt, keep on talking...

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:This is an edited tape put out by Mother Jones (as far left as anyone is going to get).

The Obama people were whining about the ACORN tape being edited, so let's see them take responsibility for jumping down the Romney campaign's collective throat by going on and on about THIS edited tape.

Waiting.
Waiting.
Crickets.

There is a difference between "editing" and "editing which changes the context." The Romney campaign is standing by the remarks. They are not suggesting that Romney didn't say the things that he is reported to have said. Romney merely claims that he was not elegant. The ACORN tape was edited in order to provide a distorted view of what occurred. People were shown answering a different question then the one asked. Nobody ever entered an ACORN office dressed as a pimp. If you believe these two situations have anything at all in common, your analytical ability is severely lacking.

David Corn hinted earlier today that the entire tape may soon be released. He implied that Romney would regret making the suggestion to release the whole tape.

[Anonymous]

You do realize though that Mitt himself doesn't dispute the contents of the tape or his statements, right?

He simply said something along the lines that it could have been more eloquent.