Romney tells millionaires what he really thinks of Obama voters

[Masbee]

I truly wish that the good citizens of Mississippi, Louisiana, et. al. took him at his word.

What's funny is that someone somewhere in the Republican party realizes that a huge part of its crazy angry white base is dependent on government programs and that if they really followed through they'd basically be unelectable. So what Romney should REALLY say is "I was blowing smoke up these fat cats' asses! I'm effectively increasing taxes on the super rich by taking their money!"

Both political parties are big tents.

Both political parties have huge internal contradictions and warring factions.

We all already knew this.

 

[maxiep]

Interesting: http://www.businessinsider.com/cnbc...ers-really-liked-mitt-romneys-comments-2012-9

 

[STOMP]

Of course, it couldn't be that they disagreed with his policy prescriptions, could it? Or do they just hate him, because, you know...he's half black? Yeah, it has to be that racism thing.

desperately grasping at straws as per usual eh maxiep? Denny's point was that past Presidents had been able to work with those across the aisle. I provided insight that those across the aisle from Obama had decided (& pledged) that their party strategy was to oppose him no matter what he proposed. While it's inherently obvious that the opposition always has different views that they'd like to implement, I can't think of a time when the other side took such a hostile stance on everything across the board.

As Mitch McConnell famously stated, the Republicans top political goal has been to make Obama a 1 term President. Not to write good legislation addressing the needs of their constituents and to help the country flourish, they want the Presidency back by any means necessary. The way they sought to accomplish this was to grind the economy to a halt by not doing even slam dunk winners (like infrastructure bills where the money has already been raised via gas taxes), and then blame Obama. Again, they placed their party's lust for more power over their sworn oath to act in the country's best interest. But thanks for the racism red herring...quality stuff you're bringing

STOMP

 

[3RA1N1AC]

a certain percentage of people who cared enough to click on something regarding romney feel a particular way

interesting indeed

 

[3RA1N1AC]

But thanks for the racism red herring...quality stuff you're bringing

STOMP

yeah, but isnt it the left that always plays the race card? priceless

 

[blazerboy30]

ahh yes the "200k is poor in 0.0000001% of the world" argument

Manhattan is about 3M. The expensive portion of the Bay Area is another 3M. LA is easily another 3M. Chicago is another couple million. Etc, etc.

~5% != 0.0000001%

Very persuasive.

 

[RR7]

Manhattan is about 3M. The expensive portion of the Bay Area is another 3M. LA is easily another 3M. Chicago is another couple million. Etc, etc.

~5% != 0.0000001%

Very persuasive.

A third of NYC makes over 200,000? I'll call bullshit on that.

 

[Denny Crane]

desperately grasping at straws as per usual eh maxiep? Denny's point was that past Presidents had been able to work with those across the aisle. I provided insight that those across the aisle from Obama had decided (& pledged) that their party strategy was to oppose him no matter what he proposed. While it's inherently obvious that the opposition always has different views that they'd like to implement, I can't think of a time when the other side took such a hostile stance on everything across the board.

As Mitch McConnell famously stated, the Republicans top political goal has been to make Obama a 1 term President. Not to write good legislation addressing the needs of their constituents and to help the country flourish, they want the Presidency back by any means necessary. The way they sought to accomplish this was to grind the economy to a halt by not doing even slam dunk winners (like infrastructure bills where the money has already been raised via gas taxes), and then blame Obama. Again, they placed their party's lust for more power over their sworn oath to act in the country's best interest. But thanks for the racism red herring...quality stuff you're bringing

STOMP

My point was that past presidents have gotten things done with hostile congresses opposing them. Clinton let the govt. shut down and used PR to make it out to be Newt's doing. He got what he wanted, and Obama should, too.

As I pointed out, Woodward tells the story about Boehner and Obama reaching a grand deficit reduction budget with the tax hikes Obama wants to punish people with and all. So much for republicans opposing Obama to a man - Boehner might have brought 100 republicans on board.

So the DNC talking points are an outright lie. The Big Lie, in fact.

On the other hand, what were the republicans to do? Their proposals rejected out of hand, and no seat at the table to formulate the legislation you claim they should have.

Their only choice was to force Democrats to go it alone on the Bills they wrote on their own.

 

[STOMP]

Yes. Just like McCain was Bush V2. Let's keep beating that dishonest drum.

how is it dishonest to state that Willard has surrounded himself with former Bush advisors when he has done exactly that? Domestically he's been vague about laying out the particulars of his tax plan, but he's advocating many of the same macro level strategies... more tax breaks for the rich at the expense of the middle class, getting rid of Wall Street & Banking regulations, cutting back on social services. Like George, he comes from privilege and is former Gov. who claims his business experience is what will help him succeed at the job. Also like George he's shown a talent for putting his silver foot in his mouth.

I'm sure he'd carve his own legacy if he were to become the POTUS, but there are lots of parallels between the two so a comparison is hardly a stretch worth whining about. How would you differentiate the two?

STOMP

 

[Denny Crane]

There is no "AT THE EXPENSE OF THE MIDDLE CLASS" - that's a lie, get it?

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Best Romney tweets:

Someone on my blog just referred to Mitt Romney as Money Boo Boo. I got nothin' that'll top that.

I wish the lazy, shiftless, contemptible, mooching 47% of America would stop waging class warfare.

I guess the moral is "Don't rip on the 47% while they're still in the room serving you drinks"

Romney apologizes for calling #47percent of Americans "victims". Says he meant to say "lazy bastards."

Mitt Romney's campaign is so dead the Mormons just baptized it

Hey Mitt Romney, You Know That Huge Lead Obama Has? You Built That.

Romney can fit 47% of his foot in his mouth

"A Christmas Carol is a horror story about a wealthy man terrorized by evil welfare ghosts" - excerpt from leaked @MittRomney video

That akward moment you realize Mitt Romney’s Slogan, “Keep America American” was the same slogan used by the KKK in 1922…

How long a work day would you need to put in at a minimum wage job to pay federal income taxes? 24 hours.

Mitt Romney's best party trick is yelling "BOOTSTRAPS!" without dropping the silver spoon in his mouth.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

Manhattan is about 3M. The expensive portion of the Bay Area is another 3M. LA is easily another 3M. Chicago is another couple million. Etc, etc.

~5% != 0.0000001%

Very persuasive.

you cant be this dumb but ill play along...

are you saying that in all of chicago, or all of LA, 200k is poor?

because that would just be fucking moronic, so you cant be saying that, right?

the average income in the most affluent zip code of chicago is $62,345.96, so making 3 times that is still poor right?

manhattan is $66,818...so again, 3x that is poor right?

and what is "manhattan is 3M" even mean anyways? the link shows 119,047 households with > 200k income in manhattan

conservatives have no grasp on reality once again, and when faced with it, often grow hostile

 

[maxiep]

desperately grasping at straws as per usual eh maxiep? Denny's point was that past Presidents had been able to work with those across the aisle. I provided insight that those across the aisle from Obama had decided (& pledged) that their party strategy was to oppose him no matter what he proposed. While it's inherently obvious that the opposition always has different views that they'd like to implement, I can't think of a time when the other side took such a hostile stance on everything across the board.

As Mitch McConnell famously stated, the Republicans top political goal has been to make Obama a 1 term President. Not to write good legislation addressing the needs of their constituents and to help the country flourish, they want the Presidency back by any means necessary. The way they sought to accomplish this was to grind the economy to a halt by not doing even slam dunk winners (like infrastructure bills where the money has already been raised via gas taxes), and then blame Obama. Again, they placed their party's lust for more power over their sworn oath to act in the country's best interest. But thanks for the racism red herring...quality stuff you're bringing

STOMP

And you don't think Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi had the same goal in 2004 and 2008? Of course congressional leaders want to see the candidate from their party win the White House. The difference was the way McConnell phrased it. The House has negotiated and negotiated, but Reid won't even bring up a budget. Obama's budgets were so ridiculous, they didn't receive a single vote, either Democrat or Republican. And healthcare legislation? It was presented as a "take it or leave it" proposition by the Democrats. When confronted with a broken filibuster (thanks to Scott Brown), they rammed it through on a technicality. When the "stimulus" bill came up for debate, Obama claimed "I won". It takes two to tango, and the only ones who want to dance are the Republicans.

Again, I think you're dramatically underestimating how far to the Left the Obama/Pelosi agenda has been. The size of government has increased from roughly 20% of GDP to 25%, and that's without Obamacare. Of course Republicans have a problem with the policies. Yet those on the Left personalize it because they can't justify why Obama can't get a deal done. "It has to be because they HATE him. How can it be anything else?"

Again, you fail to explain how Clinton can work with Gingrich--someone far to the right of Boehner--yet Obama can't work with the Speaker. Bush worked with Pelosi, he worked with Ted Kennedy. Reagan worked with Tip O'Neill. The failure is Obama's.

 

[maxiep]

A third of NYC makes over 200,000? I'll call bullshit on that.

Easily 3MM people in the Tri-State metro area make over $200K. The number is probably higher.

 

[MickZagger]

Boston, NY, Chicago, SF, LA, etc. The point is that cost of living is an important component, not just the gross income.

If you're living in the nice parts of those cities, sure. Doesn't it make sense that those cities are expensive to live, the higher paying jobs are generally in the bigger cities.

 

[maxiep]

If you're living in the nice parts of those cities, sure. Doesn't it make sense that those cities are expensive to live, the higher paying jobs are generally in the bigger cities.

The point is that even your Dear Leader thinks $200K is middle class. And it's not just the "nicer" parts. Just buying a house can be cripplingly expensive, and home ownership should be part and parcel of being middle class.

 

[MickZagger]

Republican strategists must be up an arms about Romney's latest gaffes. Oh, man, the meltdown is going to be fun to watch. Wonder if it will be of Herman Cain proportions.

 

[MickZagger]

The point is that even your Dear Leader thinks $200K is middle class. And it's not just the "nicer" parts. Just buying a house can be cripplingly expensive, and home ownership should be part and parcel of being middle class.

That was never your point.

 

[maxiep]

That was never your point.

We're talking about how people you would think are "rich" are actually middle-class. Barack Obama agrees with me.

 

[maxiep]

Republican strategists must be up an arms about Romney's latest gaffes. Oh, man, the meltdown is going to be fun to watch. Wonder if it will be of Herman Cain proportions.

That's certainly the narrative the Democrats would like to create.

 

[MickZagger]

you cant be this dumb but ill play along...

are you saying that in all of chicago, or all of LA, 200k is poor?

because that would just be fucking moronic, so you cant be saying that, right?

the average income in the most affluent zip code of chicago is $62,345.96, so making 3 times that is still poor right?

manhattan is $66,818...so again, 3x that is poor right?

and what is "manhattan is 3M" even mean anyways? the link shows 119,047 households with > 200k income in manhattan

conservatives have no grasp on reality once again, and when faced with it, often grow hostile

 

[MickZagger]

That's certainly the narrative the Democrats would like to create.

According to polls its reality.

 

[maxiep]

According to polls its reality.

http://www.businessinsider.com/cnbc...ers-really-liked-mitt-romneys-comments-2012-9

 

[maxiep]

A few things. First, no one said "poor". Second, there's this thing in statistics called "distribution". While the average may be one number, very rich and very poor live next to one another.

 

[MickZagger]

http://www.businessinsider.com/cnbc...ers-really-liked-mitt-romneys-comments-2012-9

Touche! Thats some scientific evidence right there...

 

[maxiep]

Touche! Thats some scientific evidence right there...

It's a poll.

 

[MickZagger]

A few things. First, no one said "poor". Second, there's this thing in statistics called "distribution". While the average may be one number, very rich and very poor live next to one another.

You're trying to make lemonade out of mangos.

 

[maxiep]

You're trying to make lemonade out of mangos.

Really? That's the best half a Gonzaga education can do? Disappointing. Go back, re-read the posts and try again.

 

[MickZagger]

Really? That's the best half a Gonzaga education can do? Disappointing. Go back, re-read the posts and try again.

We've gone over this a few times. Never attended Gonzaga. Just a lowly Union honk.

 

[Masbee]

how is it dishonest to state that Willard has surrounded himself with former Bush advisors when he has done exactly that? Domestically he's been vague about laying out the particulars of his tax plan, but he's advocating many of the same macro level strategies... more tax breaks for the rich at the expense of the middle class, getting rid of Wall Street & Banking regulations, cutting back on social services. Like George, he comes from privilege and is former Gov. who claims his business experience is what will help him succeed at the job. Also like George he's shown a talent for putting his silver foot in his mouth.

I'm sure he'd carve his own legacy if he were to become the POTUS, but there are lots of parallels between the two so a comparison is hardly a stretch worth whining about. How would you differentiate the two?

STOMP

Who is Willard?