Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Brentai]

Two, two, TWO campaign enders in one week!

So if you search around just a little bit you're gonna see this repeated news article that Romney defined "middle income" as $200,000-$250,000.  Which on the face of it pretty much confirms everybody's idea that Romney can't even see people who aren't rich unless they're moving.

Almost every comments thread, of course, opens up with an apologist truthfully correcting the article: "Romney said Middle Income is $200,000-$250,000 or less."

There are two problems with this.  One, of course, is that we're supposed to assume that $0 is also middle income.

The other problem is the actual context of the quote.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

So... $100,000-$250,000.  More reasonable, but you're still talking about the top 5% here.

The point is that Romney doesn't know what the numbers look like down here.  He has absolutely no reference level, and people are going to hit him with that constantly for the next few months, if he still has a campaign (if he can survive mocking the murder of an ambassador, the man can clearly say whatever the hell he wants).

Anyway, the full transcript is here.  There are tons of goodies and I certainly can't pull them all out, but just a little extra moment of Zen here:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: You know Democrats are going to be wanting to get much more detail from you on how you’re going to pay for your tax cuts.  We’ve heard that at the Democratic Convention.  President Clinton said your math doesn’t work.  I know you dispute what President Clinton said and what the Democrats  that say that you’re going to have a $2,000 tax hike on middleclass families.  I know you dispute that.  You cite your own studies.  But one of the studies you cite by Martin Feldstein at Harvard shows that to make your math work, it could work, if you eliminate the home mortgage, charity, and state and local tax deductions for everyone earning over $100,000.  Is that what you propose?

MITT ROMNEY: No, that’s not what I propose.  And, of course, part of my plan is to stimulate economic growth.  The biggest source of getting the country to a balanced budget is not by raising taxes or by cutting spending.  It’s by encouraging the growth of the economy.  So my tax plan is to encourage investment in growth in America, more jobs, that means more people paying taxes.  So that’s a big component of what allows us to get to a balanced budget.

WAIT SHIT WHAT IS THAT WHAT MY BUDGET PLAN IS SHIT NO WAIT FUCK UM MY PLAN IS TO DO GOOD STUFF THAT'LL BE GOOD OKAY LOOK IT'LL WORK OKAY

[Mongrel]

"But will anyone actually notice?" asked the dunce in the corner.

[Ted Belmont]

There was also this:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: How about the film that seems to have sparked all this, the Innocence of Muslims film?  Secretary Clinton today said she thought it was disgusting.  How would you describe it?
 
MITT ROMNEY: Well, I haven’t seen the film.  I don’t intend to see it.  I you know, I think it’s dispiriting sometimes to see some of the awful things people say.  And the idea of using something that some people consider sacred and then parading that out a negative way is simply inappropriate and wrong.  And I wish people wouldn’t do it.  Of course, we have a First Amendment.  And under the First Amendment, people are allowed to do what they feel they want to do.  They have the right to do that, but it’s not right to do things that are of the nature of what was done by, apparently this film.
 
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: We’ve seen General Martin Dempsey call Pastor Jones to say, “Please don’t promote this film.” You think that’s a good idea?
 
MITT ROMNEY: I think the whole film is a terrible idea.  I think him making it, promoting it showing it is disrespectful to people of other faiths.  I don’t think that should happen.  I think people should have the common courtesy and judgment– the good judgment– not to be– not to offend other peoples’ faiths.  It’s a very bad thing, I think, this guy’s doing.

WHY IS MITT ROMNEY SYMPATHIZING WITH OUR ATTACKERS

[Thad]

"But will anyone actually notice?" asked the dunce in the corner.

That's the $64,000 question.  (Not sure why anyone would ever get worked up about $64,000 since that's well below middle income, but there it is.)

There are a handful of demographics Romney's going to have to win.  His most reliable is, of course, his own demographic -- the rich.  And while of course the rich are NOT a monolithic group and rather a lot of them are backing Obama, the ones who want Romney to be President are probably going to continue to want Romney to be President no matter what stupid shit he says or does, and will show up reliably to the polls to vote for him besides.  (Another demographic Romney belongs to and can count on: Mormons.  But the only two swing states I can think of that may have a significant enough Mormon population to tip the scales are Colorado and Nevada  (Then again, Florida was close enough in 2000 that pretty much any goddamn demographic you can come up with would have been enough to determine the outcome.  As Tom Tomorrow put it at the time, "Forget Nader; the candidate from something called the Workers' World Party got enough votes to tip this election six times over."))

Now, the Republican Base is of course the demographic that Romney continues bending over backwards to appease -- and I think that's exactly what just happened with the shit-talking about Libya.  As far as the people who are motivated primarily by their hatred of the Kenyan Muslim Socialist in the White House are concerned, Romney didn't step on his dick on this one, he did exactly what they wanted.  I think it is reasonable to assume that is the only demo that is MORE likely to vote for Romney because he politicized the murder of an ambassador.

Now, as far as people ranging from center-right to center-left (and Libertarians, because who the fuck ever knows how they're going to vote?), you've nailed the big question: will they notice?  Will they hear these stories, remember them, show up to vote, and have their votes swayed by them?

As loud a fucking din as those of us on this board think the elections have been for the past year, the majority of the public hasn't been paying attention.  They didn't follow the primaries or the conventions; they've got a firmly-developed opinion of Obama (whatever it may be) and a much less developed opinion of Romney (mostly "rich businessman", whatever that entails).

Is there such a thing as a career-ending gaffe like the Dukakis-in-a-tank photo anymore?  The Daily Show recently argued that there isn't, that the 24-hour news media picks up on the latest stupid thing for a little bit and then moves on to the next one, sometimes within a matter of hours.

But the other thing is, even if people forget by next week that Romney said something stupid and out-of-touch, that's okay, because he'll have some whole new stupid and out-of-touch thing to say by then.

Even acknowledging the rather weird point that there's a whole big swath of people who hasn't been paying attention and will be getting their first real indication of what kind of guy Romney is in the coming debates, well...I do not foresee Romney doing very well in the debates.

Course, besides that, if anyone making Obama ads has any goddamn sense we'll be seeing the "$200,000 is the middle income" clip pretty much constantly for the next 7 weeks.

[Büge]

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

So... $100,000-$250,000.  More reasonable, but you're still talking about the top 5% here.

I get it, Romney isn't a Cardassian. He's a Ferengi:

[Brentai]

I would rather see "$175,000 is the middle income", just to drive the point home that those two words tacked on the end only make the statement less stupid out of context.

Literally the right keeps trying to call the left out for selectively quoting Romney by selectively quoting Romney, and that more than anything else is what they (both) need their balls stapled to Twitter for.

[Thad]

Wired: Feds Urge Appeals Court to Overturn ‘Dangerous’ Indefinite-Detention Ruling

The Obama administration on Monday demanded a federal appeals court immediately halt a ruling blocking legislation authorizing the government to indefinitely detain without trial individuals, including U.S. citizens, who are deemed to “substantially support” groups “engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners.”

The government called the lower court’s ruling “dangerous” and a threat to national security. The court found the rule to be unconstitutional as it was so vague it could apply to U.S. citizens and journalists exercising their constitutional rights.

“The district court has entered a sweeping injunction, directly against the President and the Secretary of Defense, that strikes down as facially unconstitutional a federal statute relating to the United States’ power to detain individuals as part of the conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces, with implications for ongoing military operations and causing potential harm to national security,” the administration said in an emergency appeal (.pdf) to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in new York.

...so really, guys, who should I vote for?

Johnson's not entirely bad but if I can't hold my nose and vote Democratic I don't see how I can hold my nose and vote Libertarian.  While I think Libertarian sentiment is the best thing that can happen to the Republican Party, it's become synonymous with a total lack of empathy for your fellow man and a pornographic reverence of the mercenary corporate control that I believe is primarily responsible for pretty much everything that's horribly wrong with the way our government is run.  There's Stein with the Green Party, but I lost a lot of respect for those guys in '04 when they seemed to buy into the "all Nader's fault Bush is President" narrative and deliberately restrain themselves from being any kind of serious or influential political organization.

I really am considering a pure protest write-in vote for Carter as quite possibly my best option here.

[Büge]

I really am considering a pure protest write-in vote for Carter as quite possibly my best option here.

Jimmy or Billy?

[Thad]

Jimmy.  While I think everyone in America who enjoys good beer owes a debt of gratitude to Billy, if I were going to vote for a dead guy it would absolutely, without a doubt, be Frank Zappa.

[TA]

"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 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."

[Thad]

But if we're– but we, but you see, you and I, we spend our day with Republicans. We spend our days with people who agree with us. And these people are people who voted for him and don't agree with us. And so the things that animate us are not the things that animate them. And the best success I have at speaking with those people is saying, you know, the president has been a disappointment.

That's the one part of the whole thing that makes Romney seem like a much smarter campaigner than, well, any of his actual campaigning.

Other'n that?  Don't know.  I don't think this story will come as much of a surprise to anybody of any political stripe, even if the media DOES decide to stop talking about foreign riots over a Youtube video for a few days and make this the week's top story.

I mean, yeah, obviously it's pretty fucking distasteful, but I don't think anyone's going to be surprised that Romney thinks Democrats just want handouts.  Hell, he's said as much when he KNEW he was being recorded, and so has pretty much every Republican who's ever run for any office since 1980.

[Brentai]

Vote for me.

It'll be 8 years before I can run for President under the common-sense Youth Party (because that wonderful, impeccable constitutional document just loves to fuck with people born immediately after the leap year), but getting support now can't hurt.

[Caithness]

I'm voting Green on the assumption that they'll become the new party of the Left when the Republican Party collapses and the Democratic Party becomes the new party of the Right.

[Thad]

I thought they had a real shot at that back in '00, when Nader was running.

I believe the direction of the party in years since has instead established them as the "Vote for us (but only if you're really really sure you're not taking votes from a Democrat who really needs them)" party.  The Democrats and the press said mean things about them and they became meek and unserious.

But at least they didn't nominate Roseanne after all.

[James Edward Smith]

But if we're– but we, but you see, you and I, we spend our day with Republicans. We spend our days with people who agree with us. And these people are people who voted for him and don't agree with us. And so the things that animate us are not the things that animate them. And the best success I have at speaking with those people is saying, you know, the president has been a disappointment.

That's the one part of the whole thing that makes Romney seem like a much smarter campaigner than, well, any of his actual campaigning.

Other'n that?  Don't know.  I don't think this story will come as much of a surprise to anybody of any political stripe, even if the media DOES decide to stop talking about foreign riots over a Youtube video for a few days and make this the week's top story.

I mean, yeah, obviously it's pretty fucking distasteful, but I don't think anyone's going to be surprised that Romney thinks Democrats just want handouts.  Hell, he's said as much when he KNEW he was being recorded, and so has pretty much every Republican who's ever run for any office since 1980.

He's describing exactly how I've figured his party has thought of elections and the issues me mentions for a long time. It's comforting to have a tape of him actually saying it, straight up with no bullshit so I know I'm not fooling myself into believing something about them that I want to.

Uhm that said though. I don't think that most people understand this.

[Thad]

I'd say that likely voters are largely split between Democrats who believe that's what Republicans really think, and Republicans who really think that.  Think of Reagan's "welfare queens".  Seriously, bring up welfare or the Affordable Care Act to a Republican sometime and you'll hear a diatribe very much like that whole spiel.

Truth is, Likely Voters are a pretty ossified bunch.  Democrats and Republicans largely fight over scraps in the amorphous "Moderate and Independent" blob, while largely ignoring opportunities to turn Unlikely Voters into Likely Voters.

[Classic]

Welfare queens don't really exist, but there are people who take government handouts CAN live a middle-class-or-better lifestyle by committing tax evasion (and whatever other crimes are associated with that undocumented income).

Romney knows you can actually receive a hideous number of kickbacks on your taxes with only a little bit of fraud.

[Büge]

Hence not wanting his records released.

[Rico]

Probably common knowledge around these parts, but surprise, surprise, people who don't pay Federal income tax disproportionately in red states.

(THAD EDIT: Fixed a typo that repeated that link text.)

[Mongrel]

Course, besides that, if anyone making Obama ads has any goddamn sense we'll be seeing the "$200,000 is the middle income" clip pretty much constantly for the next 7 weeks.

Not quite, but at least someone's got their head screwed on straight enough to hit the "OBVIOUS!" button:

Romney's Thoughts on the Middle Class