Monday, September 17, 2012

MoJo Catches Mitt Telling the Truth


Feelin' guilty, feelin' scared, hidden cameras everywhere 
Stop! Hold on. Stay in control 
                                                 -- Ray Davies, "Destroyer"

Sounds like ol' Mitt Romney was at a fundraiser recently and someone recorded his comments. And it also sounds as though we're supposed to shocked, shocked by what he had to say. David Corn of Mother Jones has the breathless dispatch, complete with money 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 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.
Ooh, that cold-hearted bastard.

Actually, he's got the math pretty much right. About 47% of Americans don't pay income tax, although the many of them do have income taxes withheld from their paychecks in what becomes essentially an interest-free loan to Uncle Sam. I don't think all of the 47% in question are Democrats, although many are.

Romney is actually explaining something that matters rather a lot. The reason pruning back government is going to be so horribly difficult is that many millions of Americans are essentially on the dole, either through Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SSI and other general relief programs. And because we've been running over 8% unemployment for the past four years, with a workforce participation rate of only 58%, the government has a lot of clients. And since the Democrats are the Party of Government, they will have a lot of support.

I don't think there's anything especially controversial about any of that. The devil is in the details, of course. The 47% number is pretty steady right now, but the composition of those in that 47% changes. Young people start out in that number and, if their lives go well, leave and become net taxpayers. Old people pay taxes, many for years, and as they retire they become part of the 47%. Politicians understand these things, which is why the Party of Government is always trying to scare seniors about Medicare. Lately the Republicans have been doing the same thing.

For me, the most interesting part of Corn's dispatch is what Romney says about the disenchanted Obama voters he's trying to reach:

We speak with voters across the country about their perceptions. Those people I told you—the 5 to 6 or 7 percent that we have to bring onto our side—they all voted for Barack Obama four years ago. So, and by the way, when you say to them, "Do you think Barack Obama is a failure?" they overwhelmingly say no. They like him. But when you say, "Are you disappointed that his policies haven't worked?" they say yes. And because they voted for him, they don't want to be told that they were wrong, that he's a bad guy, that he did bad things, that he's corrupt. Those people that we have to get, they want to believe they did the right thing, but he just wasn't up to the task. They love the phrase that he's "over his head." 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. He told you he'd keep unemployment below 8 percent. Hasn't been below eight percent since. Fifty percent of kids coming out of school can't get a job. Fifty percent. Fifty percent of the kids in high school in our 50 largest cities won't graduate from high school. What're they gonna do? These are the kinds of things that I can say to that audience that they nod their head and say, "Yeah, I think you're right." What he's going to do, by the way, is try and vilify me as someone who's been successful, or who's, you know, closed businesses or laid people off, and is an evil bad guy. And that may work.
This is a pretty realistic assessment of what has happened to this point. I've long understood and agreed with Romney on the main point -- no one likes having his (or her) nose rubbed in it. So I get the approach he's taken.

Of course, now that this snippet is out, that strategy will be well-nigh impossible to maintain. So what does Romney do?

I think the right answer is to call out Obama's failings, every single day and in every single way. The stimulus didn't really do much of anything. The bets Obama and his team made on green energy were busts. The Cairo speech was just a speech. And he needs to explain why the current path is unsustainable.

And Romney needs to tell people what he intends to do to change things, in clear terms. I do think the American people deserve that. If Romney does those things and loses, that's the way it goes. But if he tries to pretend that the clear meaning of what he said isn't really what he meant, he'll lose. And deserve to lose. At this point, Romney needs to own the statements, because the Democrats will make him do it anyway. And it's possible that the American people will understand.

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

Romney was probably going to lose anyway, but this, and Dick Morris' assurances, last week, that Romney will surely win, should be the kickers. Leaving asside his arrogance, and the utter disdain Romney shows towards people who would fail to vote for him, he repeats the farcical claim that 47% of the population don’t pay income taxes. Would that be gross or net? Certainly, many in the middle class pay no net taxes. But they (we) do pay state income taxes, payroll taxes, gas taxes, property taxes, and social security and medicare payroll taxes. Such people (like many of us), who have a mortgage, kids in college, kids in parochial schools and who pay for daycare aren't "victims", or "leeches". And I don't think this is going to sit well with many of them. Especially when coming from a guy who is paying 13% on his $30 Million dollar a year income (that we know of) from carried interest on his 200 to 300 million dollar nest egg. (And who still feels the need to shelter income in the Caymans, Bahamas and Switzerland).
Class warfare indeeed!

Good Lord this guy is a lousy retail pol. You might want to reconsider that "Surrender Dorothy" thing;)

Regards,
Rich

Anonymous said...

Oh...and BTW, he is just plain wrong.

Guess where the 47% mostly come from (here is a hint: think Southern Strategy)

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/where-do-the-47-percent-live/non-payers-by-state/

So this clown doesn't even understand his own base.

It's not too late to take a stand by voting for Gary Johnson.

Regards,
Rich

Anonymous said...

One more observation...guess who falls into Romneys group of "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...who pay no income tax"?
Answer: Members of the Armed Services. Especially enlisted men and junior officers with families. Then again, these folks don't even merit a mention in Romney's RNC speech.

Wow...just wow!
I sure do hope he defends this speech. It's gonna be fun to watch.

Rich
Rich

Mr. D said...

So here's the question for you, Rich. Even if all the assertions you've made are true, how do you sustain the current spending trajectory? And if the Democrats regain complete control by leveraging this statement, how will they deal with the multiple crises coming on all fronts? There's no way to pay for Social Security, federal pensions, Medicare, Medicaid and a host of other goodies as we go forward. And that's to say nothing of the needs of mendicant states like Illinois and California, who will be coming hat in hand to Sammy because their state governments are going to be overwhelmed.

Obama might win, but he's demonstrated over the last four years that he has no concept of how to deal with all this. And if you took away every penny Mitt Romney has or has ever earned, it would pay for the government for about a minute or two.

Are you sure you want to "win," Rich?

Mr. D said...

Such people (like many of us), who have a mortgage, kids in college, kids in parochial schools and who pay for daycare aren't "victims", or "leeches". And I don't think this is going to sit well with many of them.

Of course, you weren't going to vote for him anyway.

W.B. Picklesworth said...

I continue to not be worried. For anyone who doesn't understand basic math and can't be bothered to scratch beneath the surface of the media narrative, Romney was already a terrible, unthinkable candidate. Why would they want to be a racist, women-hating robber baron?

But for many who want their children to have a future such blunt talking is not going to be problematic.

I'm also not particularly worried because it doesn't even matter what Romney says or doesn't say. Whatever is necessary is breathlessly reported for people to parrot. It has always been the case that Romney needs to communicate over the heads of the media. I'm not convinced he's good at that, but this brouhaha doesn't change the dynamic for the worse.

Night Writer said...

There's no way to pay for Social Security, federal pensions, Medicare, Medicaid and a host of other goodies as we go forward. And that's to say nothing of the needs of mendicant states like Illinois and California, who will be coming hat in hand to Sammy because their state governments are going to be overwhelmed.

No problem. After the election, in the name of "fairness" and "financial security" Obama and co. will go after the trillions sitting in 401ks and private pension accounts and require that 20% or more of these funds be converted to "secure" Treasury bonds so that the money can be used to bail out the union pension plans and other government favorites. Oh, and that gold and silver you've got buried in the back yard is going to be illegal again. It's happened that way in Argentina, in Poland, in Ireland and is happenng in France. Bulgaria and Hungary, IIRC, didn't even bother with requiring a percentage of the accounts; they took it all and essentially put the seniors on a government allowance.

Brad said...

BTW, what happened to all the outrage (OUTRAGE I tell ya) displayed by leftists when James O'Keefe used hidden cameras to expose corrupt lefty institutions like ACORN and NPR?

Notice how Romney at least has the fortitude to back up what he said whereas the aforementioned lefty institutions (and their enablers) squealed like stuck pigs over O'Keefe's tactics instead of answering for their own actions.

Anonymous said...

Brad...Wow! You have got to be kidding me. You can't be serious. This is gonna be easy:

The James O'Keefe videos(Acorn and NPR), and the attempt by O'Keefe to tap Mary Landreau's phones were either illegaly obtained or just flat out criminal acts, and are inadmissible in a court of law because of that. Also, the Romney video is not a set up; nobody falsely posed as someone they weren't and asked Romney leading questions about the subject matters he addressed. Romney was speaking on his own and jamming his foot in his mouth all by himself. Whereas O'Keefe was trying to set people up with a fictional scenarios and then portraying the results as symptomatic of the entire organization. Lastly, Romney's remarks are being released in toto. They are not being edited and didacted to present a false and misleading conclusion. Nice try...Not!

Rich

Anonymous said...

BTW...Mitt Romney only pays Federal taxes on carried interest...no income tax. Does this mean Romney is voting for Obama?

Bwaaahaahaahaa!
Keep the hits coming boys! This is getting fun. I just hope I am not stating this too ineloquently ;)

Rich

Chuckwagon Boy said...

I have to agree with Rich on the kiss of death from Dick Morris. When I heard him say that Romney would surely win all I could think of are is he smoking something and what polls is he seeing?

This video will kill Romney because even if he is right he said it so poorly and stupidly that he will not be able to recover. He is not really liked anyway - even from some in his own party - so this will just add to his image of a clueless white rich guy with no idea how the rest of the nation lives. I had him losing by 4 to 6% of the popular vote, but now I think it will be 6 to 9% - not to mention losing the electoral vote.

Oh, and didn't Romney and his staff learn from Obama's comments about central PA voters when he was taped at a Dem fundraiser in 2008? In this day and age phones and cameras are going to be everywhere. If you are saying one thing about the Palestinian/Israeli peace process and then another to certain groups of people, you will be found out. It is too easy to catch that stuff these days.

Can anyone say, "Jeb Bush 2016"?

Mr. D said...

Six weeks to go, boys. Lotta things can and will change in the next six weeks.

CB,

No, I can't say "Jeb Bush '16." But thanks for asking! ;)

Brad Carlson said...

Also, the Romney video is not a set up..

You sure about that, Dick?


Romney's remarks are being released in toto. They are not being edited and didacted to present a false and misleading conclusion.

Not necessarily, Dick....er..."Rich."


Since the election is seven weeks out, the superficial aspect of this story will get swept away. I'm sure the Obama surrogates would have preferred to save this for the "October surprise" but given the rotten performance of the administration last week, they had to find a distraction.

However, the salient issue of entitlement reforms is one that will continue to be at the forefront....as it should.

Chuckwagon Boy said...

I stand by my prediction of Romney losing as well as saying that the Senate remains in Dem hands. It appears Warren will beat Brown in MA (though it is still close) and Kaine is up by 8 points over Allen in VA. Re: the House of Reps, I am not sure who will control it as it is too close to call.

So if you cannot say, "Jeb Bush 2016" Mr. D then how about "A Better Republican Candidate for President in 2016"? :)

Mr. D said...

So if you cannot say, "Jeb Bush 2016" Mr. D then how about "A Better Republican Candidate for President in 2016"? :)

I'd always like a better Republican candidate, CB, but the only way I'll ever get that is if I run myself, and that ain't happening. And Jeb Bush isn't a better candidate than Mitt Romney.

Seven weeks left, my friend. A lot of things can happen in seven weeks. You're old enough to remember 1980 and at that point, a lot of the polls showed Carter winning.

Anonymous said...

Brad,
Third grade taunts...and poor ones at that. You must really be frustrated, and I must really be living rent free in your head. Thanks for the space!

I know how you feel. I've watched two horrible candidates of mine from Mass. implode their own campaigns. It is frustrating. I feel for you buddy. Seriously. But there is always 2016. You guys should have an easy task with Hillary;)

BTW, only my immediate family and everybody at work calls me Dick. Mi familia because I am a Jr., and Sr. and III are Rich and Richard, so it just makes sense. But I ask everyone at work to call me Dick. First, because I love dick jokes as much as anyone. Secondly, because people ALWAYS remember the guy named Dick. It seems to be working here too. So if you guys don't mind, please call me Dick. I would be honored. Just remember to show Dick some respect;)

Regards,
Dick

Chuckwagon Boy said...

Mr. D., I would love to have you run for Pres - you would be awesome! Plus you could put in some music trivia in your press conferences and maybe have some different tunes playing in the background each time. :)

And regarding 1980, you are correct in that Carter looked like he might win and the result was unexpected. It could happen here too and I don't mind being wrong. I like to quote the Dennis Miller tagline after his rants, "Of course that is my opinion and I could be wrong."

I got my popcorn ready to watch the end of the show. It should be interesting - especially the debates!

Pudster said...

Yes, the government provides too many necessary services to too many people. That's exactly why simplistic "small" government ideology attempts to "prune" government always end up creating deficits instead of reducing government.

Our spending is not unsustainable, we just have to sustain it. The US is not broke, we have a $16 trillion economy that's the largest in the world, twice as large the next largest economy. We can afford our government and it's services, but we have to collect the necessary tax revenue.

Stuffed Pork Roast with Prunes said...

hey pudster... where did you get that? if that's true why the economy of US still dropping?

Pudster said...

Stuffed Pork,

The economy is not shrinking, and even in the midst of the great recession our economy remained twice as large as any other country in the world. The tax revenue has always been there. The reason you may be noticing the growth is we've dramatically increased wealth disparity over the last decade or so, somewhere around 90% of the new income is being captured by the top 10%. http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=us&v=65

Pudster said...

Sorry, meant to say: "the reason you may NOT be noticing the difference..."

pr checker said...

i don't know him but in all of the comments i think i know him now...