Mitt Romney Stands by Comments About ‘Entitled’ Obama Supporters in Leaked Videos

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Amy Bingham and Emily Friedman - ABC News


http://i.imgur.com/rrhUh.jpg

Leaked video of Republican nominee Mitt Romney at closed-door fundraisers show him saying that “no matter what” he does, 47 percent of the population is going to vote for Obama because they are “are dependent upon government.” Tonight in California, Romney did not back down from what he had said.

The video clips, which were posted by Mother Jones, show Romney telling donors that 47 percent of voters will chose Obama “no matter what” because they are people “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.”

“My job is not to worry about those people,” Romney says in the video. “I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnB0NZzl5HA&hd=1

Portions of the video were posted anonymously on YouTube in June while longer, but still incomplete, versions were posted on Monday by Mother Jones, which claims it “has confirmed its authenticity.” ABC News has not thus far been able independently to validate the authenticity of the clips.

Mother Jones reported that the event took place on May 17 at the Boca Raton, Fla., home of private equity manager Marc Leder.

Responding to the leaked video on Monday night at a press conference in Costa Mesa, Calif., Romney stood by what he said in the clip, but he admitted he could have been more eloquent at the time the video was shot.

Romney said that he was speaking “off the cuff” in response to a question.

“It’s a question and answer, as I recall, about the process of the campaign and how I’m going to get the 51 or 52 percent I need, and I point out it’s by focusing on those folks that are neither in [Obama's] camp nor in my camp,” Romney said.

“I recognize that among those that pay no tax, approximately 47 percent of Americans, I’m not likely to be highly successful with the message of lowering taxes. That’s not as attractive to those who don’t pay income taxes as it is to those who do,” Romney said. “And likewise those who are reliant on government are not as attracted to my message of slimming down the size of government. And so I then focus on those individuals who I believe are most likely to be able to be pulled into my camp and help me win the 51 or 50.1 percent that I need to become the next President.”

Earlier on Monday, the Obama campaign responded swiftly and harshly to the video.

“It’s shocking that a candidate for President of the United States would go behind closed doors and declare to a group of wealthy donors that half the American people view themselves as ‘victims,’ entitled to handouts, and are unwilling to take ‘personal responsibility’ for their lives,” Jim Messina, Obama for America campaign manager, said in a statement. “It’s hard to serve as president for all Americans when you’ve disdainfully written off half the nation.”

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Not sure why the media is trying to make a big deal about this, he's 100% correct on this matter.

[Pony]

Is the number of people that don't pay income tax really that high?

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Is the number of people that don't pay income tax really that high?

Yes, it is predicted to break 50% here in the next year or two if changes aren't made.

[Pony]

Wow, that's shocking. How the hell can so many people work without paying taxes?

[Muddy]

He's correct, but that never stopped the PC police before..

[Muddy]

http://i.imgur.com/TtU08.jpg

[Acid Trip]

Wow, that's shocking. How the hell can so many people work without paying taxes?

It's called credits (money paid to you) and tax deductions (money you exempt from paying taxes on). If you have a couple kids and own a home it's easy to get off with no income tax if you make 75k or less.

[FBD]

“It’s hard to serve as president for all Americans when you’ve disdainfully written off half the nation.”

:potkettle: so what about the 50% of americans that obama's written off? [-(

[perrhaps]

:potkettle: so what about the 50% of americans that obama's written off? [-(

We don't have time to protest tomorrow because we have to go to work.

[Southern Belle]

Not sure why the media is trying to make a big deal about this, he's 100% correct on this matter.Exactly.

[PorkChopSandwiches]

We don't have time to protest tomorrow because we have to go to work.

Bwhahahahah :qft:

[Hal-9000]

"...who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them...."


So if the government is not there to take care of people, why pay tax? Up here federal and provincial tax are a pretty big chunk out of my bi weekly paycheck. I don't see how some Americans can get away without paying tax while working. We get charged for that sort of skullduggery..

[FBD]

welcome to the progressive tax structure, hal! make no money, get paid. make money, pay. make a lot of money, pay. make a shitass ridiculous ton of money, pay piss in a bucket.

[Lambchop]

Not only should they focus on the individuals who do not pay taxes but also the companies who avoid taxes by paying into offshore accounts or using other unorthodox methods. Not sure how prevalent this issue is over in the US but in the UK there are quite a few companies who have employed various methods to avoid very large amounts of tax.

Not sure why he just wants to go for the individual and not set an example by going for the big dawgs as well???

[Acid Trip]

Not only should they focus on the individuals who do not pay taxes but also the companies who avoid taxes by paying into offshore accounts or using other unorthodox methods. Not sure how prevalent this issue is over in the US but in the UK there are quite a few companies who have employed various methods to avoid very large amounts of tax.

Not sure why he just wants to go for the individual and not set an example by going for the big dawgs as well???

Overseas earnings by a US based company are not taxed unless the funds are repatriated (ie brought back to the US). The corporate tax rate is so high that most US companies keep that money out of the US economy so it stays untaxed.

[Muddy]

Overseas earnings by a US based company are not taxed unless the funds are repatriated (ie brought back to the US). The corporate tax rate is so high that most US companies keep that money out of the US economy so it stays untaxed.

So how can we fix that?

[FBD]

:lol: lower the corporate tax rate to a reasonable level that corporations will pay, then eliminate loopholes. pretty simple, but lots of people get hung up on the "reduce the corporate tax rate" and look no further.

[Muddy]

:lol: lower the corporate tax rate to a reasonable level that corporations will pay, then eliminate loopholes. pretty simple, but lots of people get hung up on the "reduce the corporate tax rate" and look no further.

So what partys gonna do that?

[Acid Trip]

So how can we fix that?

That's the hard part. If you give overseas earnings a lower corp tax as an incentive (like 10% or none at all) then the business community will move most of their operations out of the US and to other countries. Why pay 39% corporate tax on earnings if you can earn it overseas and bring it back to the US at a 10% rate? That could very well make things worse due to outsourcing.

Trying to lower the corp tax rate as a whole (domestic and overseas) would result in Democrat upheaval and more class warfare nonsense.

Welcome to the global economy where no answer is a good answer.

[PorkChopSandwiches]

Awesome

[Arkady Renko]

I think his assessment of the situation is about correct, but saying he won't even try to change things is a lousy attitude, why should the people who do pay taxes vote for him if he doesn't believe he can help matters?

[KevinD]

He didn't say he wouldn't try to change things. He DID say that he's not going to worry about trying to change the voters minds of those who won't vote for him anyway.
I don't agree with this for the most part, but I definitely understand his point.
The base (on both sides) is strong enough that neither Romney nor Obama is likely to sway voters already decided. What both are working on (imho) is the "independents" and those undecided. This is why as bad as I personally find Obama's policies to be, I don't think this election will be a "landslide" for either side. If it turns out to be one, I will immediately suspect voter fraud, or Electoral sellout.

[Acid Trip]

He didn't say he wouldn't try to change things. He DID say that he's not going to worry about trying to change the voters minds of those who won't vote for him anyway.
I don't agree with this for the most part, but I definitely understand his point.
The base (on both sides) is strong enough that neither Romney nor Obama is likely to sway voters already decided. What both are working on (imho) is the "independents" and those undecided. This is why as bad as I personally find Obama's policies to be, I don't think this election will be a "landslide" for either side. If it turns out to be one, I will immediately suspect voter fraud, or Electoral sellout.

According to the DOJ voter fraud doesn't exist. And yet somehow thousands of dead people voted in the last election...

[FBD]

It will be an electoral college landslide

[KevinD]

It will be an electoral college landslide

That's what worries me more than anything else..

[FBD]

Just a bit worse than reagan carter would?? I think the media has some serious blinders on, they keep clicking their heels going "he's still the one...he's still the one..." and there's such a huge percentage of people that absolutely hate the guy. bush was bad at math but at least he was a red blooded american :lol:

[PorkChopSandwiches]

It will be an electoral college landslide

http://i.imgur.com/6U5UB.jpg

[KevinD]

Just a bit worse than reagan carter would?? I think the media has some serious blinders on, they keep clicking their heels going "he's still the one...he's still the one..." and there's such a huge percentage of people that absolutely hate the guy. bush was bad at math but at least he was a red blooded american :lol:

Hah, no lol, I was thinking the Electoral landslide would be in Obama's favor, irregardless of the popular vote.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

I don't think we should abandon the electoral college and go to strictly popular vote, but I think it's time to revise the college and make the electoral votes proportional to the popular vote in the state.

Let's face it, democrats have a HUGE advantage because they already start the election with California and New York in their back pocket, and that's 84 electoral votes right there. Throw in Massachusetts and Illinois which more often than not vote democrat and there's an additional 31 electoral votes. That puts the democratic candidate 42% of the way to 270 to start the election.

EDIT TO ADD: The only really big state the republican candidate has in their corner is Texas with 38 electoral votes.

[KevinD]

I agree. The Electoral College system was set up for a reason, and that reason is still valid. There could be room for improvement though.

[Acid Trip]

They should award electoral votes based on the popular vote.

If Romney gets 60% of a states vote and Obama gets 40%, they should give 60% of the electoral votes to Romney and the other 40% to Obama.

That way Republicans/Democrats in California/New York/Texas/etc don't feel like their vote is wasted. It also takes the power away from swing states who garner the most attention.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

They should award electoral votes based on the popular vote.

If Romney gets 60% of a states vote and Obama gets 40%, they should give 60% of the electoral votes to Romney and the other 40% to Obama.

That way Republicans/Democrats in California/New York/Texas/etc don't feel like their vote is wasted. It also takes the power away from swing states who garner the most attention.

I wish I would have thought of that :-k

Oh wait, I did on the other page :slap:

:razz:

[Muddy]

They should award electoral votes based on the popular vote.

If Romney gets 60% of a states vote and Obama gets 40%, they should give 60% of the electoral votes to Romney and the other 40% to Obama.

That way Republicans/Democrats in California/New York/Texas/etc don't feel like their vote is wasted. It also takes the power away from swing states who garner the most attention.


I wish I would have thought of that :-k

Oh wait, I did on the other page :slap:

:razz:

I agree.. Screw this winner take all BS!

[perrhaps]

Turning back to the original topic, I read either 4 or 5 newspapers daily. What I find very interesting is that in all of the letters to the editor and stories I read about Romney's statement, not one average voter has been quoted as saying this remark will change his or her vote.

It's also had virtually no effect upon the national polls. Seems to me folks are really fed up with the way things are, and I'm starting to think that Romney will have to get caught with a dead teenage girl, or a live teenage boy, in his bed to lose this election.

[Leefro]

Go after the 53% then

[FBD]

Hah, no lol, I was thinking the Electoral landslide would be in Obama's favor, irregardless of the popular vote.

http://www.examiner.com/article/mitt-romney-double-digit-lead-unskewed-data-from-reuters-ipsos-poll-1

[Arkady Renko]

They should award electoral votes based on the popular vote.

If Romney gets 60% of a states vote and Obama gets 40%, they should give 60% of the electoral votes to Romney and the other 40% to Obama.

That way Republicans/Democrats in California/New York/Texas/etc don't feel like their vote is wasted. It also takes the power away from swing states who garner the most attention.


I wish I would have thought of that :-k

Oh wait, I did on the other page :slap:

:razz:

about time they did that because if you think about it, a candidate could win the majority of the electoral votes with as little as 25% plus x of the popular vote.