Mitt Romney’s Worried… About You!

Posted by & filed under 2012 Election, An Independent Viewpoint, Class Warfare, In the Press, Swing Voters

mitt romney

 

Poor Mitt Romney can’t catch a break. Just when Barack Obama’s post convention bounce was starting to fade, the release of secretly taped videos of Romney recorded at a $50,000 a plate fundraiser in May have offered the political media a chance to play pick your own gaffe with the candidate’s speech to donors. Since the full videos were released late on Monday, the main story has been Romney’s analysis that the 47% of Americans who pay no income tax (and thus are dependent on the government) won’t vote for him. Hooray for class warfare?

If Romney’s not worried about “the 47%,” just who is he worried about?

Oh. Of course. Independent voters.

Yes, despite recent headlines from mainstream media sources like “Undecided voters are a tiny cohort that may not matter in the end,” or “Dwindling numbers of undecided voters try to decide who is the lesser of two evils,” Romney still seemed to be concerned with independents (at least as far back as May) when he finished the second half of his now infamous ’47% remark.’

To win the election, Romney stated that instead of ‘the 47%’, he needed to focus on “the five to 10 percent in the center that are independents, that are thoughtful.” Now that’s more like it! Here’s two important points that we’d like to make about Romney’s remarks.

1. Romney’s right about independents. And in the tape, he was sharing his ‘true feelings’ on how to win the 2012 election and speaking candidly to the room, without a teleprompter or “quote approval.” Pure, unfiltered Mitt Romney! Ironically, with the release of said video, many of these independents or leaning Romney voters are probably having serious second thoughts about his candidacy. Why? Because…

2. Romney’s out of touch with independents. If it wasn’t already abundantly clear, this video’s release has sealed it. Fair, it’s hard to sound “in touch” with an average independent voter when trying to woo the rich political donor class, but for the Romney campaign who’s been attacking Obama’s “class warfare,” this could be a proverbial nail in the coffin on that issue.

Yesterday, Suzy Khimm of the Washington Post pointed out that polling of independent voters backs up point number two:

“It’s worth remembering that a significant majority of these independent voters also hold a strong view of the safety net: They believe that the government should help those in need—and that it should guarantee basic food and shelter, according to a Pew poll that Jim Tankersley flags.

In June, Pew found that 59 percent of independents believe that the government “should help those who cannot help themselves.” Moreover, 58 percent believe that the government should guarantee minimal food and shelter. Those views have weakened slightly over the past few years, but they’re still held more strongly by independents than self-identified Republicans, whose support of the safety net has plummeted:

(Source: Pew Research Center)

Some of these independents may agree with Romney that more of those receiving government assistance are able to help themselves. But most independent voters also believe that the government should “guarantee every citizen enough to eat and a place to sleep.”

What are your views on Mitt Romney’s remarks as an independent voter? Comment and let us know, especially if you’re one of ‘the 47%.’

Tags: , , , , , ,

5 Responses

  1. Roger Britton September 19, 2012 at 11:59 am

    I am part of the 47% except that I still pay taxes on My pension.I and millions of others have worked most of my life and paid taxes and social security which should have never been messed with by the fed govrnment1Mitt is out of touch with the middle class and does not care at all about the poor of America.His plan to not tax the rich will bankrupt the country and he thinks that the military needs more which is way over funded now!

    Reply
  2. Ray Blacketer September 19, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    While Mit isn’t my ideal choice, Obama’s tape regarding his idea about the need to redistribution of wealth was what tipped me towards Mit. Prior to that tape I was on the fence, leaning towards Mit, but not sure. Obama’s admission about redistribution of wealth tipped me towards Mit.

    Reply
  3. Susan T. September 19, 2012 at 12:59 pm

    Romney’s out of touch with independents like me and this IS the proverbial nail in his coffin for any chance at the Presidency. I will be voting for Obama.

    Reply
  4. ALEXANDRA LEIGON September 19, 2012 at 3:04 pm

    When an individual or a family is unable to adequately care for itself it has always been the belief of this nation that they should be assisted to re-establish themselves within the society at whatever level is possible for them. Implied in this view is the idea that assistance is decreased as their ability for independence increases. The government programs we have kept in place for this purpose have been hijacked by those for whom they have not been designed in order to gain financially or politically from them. This has meant an associated dependence on these programs that was not originally intended. Now that we see the outcome of this mismanagement, it is hardly the needy who should be blamed. What is needed in this country is a widespread reordering of propiorities and a general acceptance by ALL of the players for their parts in creating this mess. That should be followed by a coming together of all of the responsible parties and a group re-think of how to move forward with fair treatment of those we seek to support. Blame, shame and regret are useless . A refocusing on the purpose, intent, fairness and accountability needed to provide appropriate assistance for those who need it is what we should be working toward. When can we begin? I’m ready, are you?

    Reply
  5. Joan September 20, 2012 at 12:34 pm

    I listened to the video several times over and my impression remains that Romney was not browbeating those in the 47% who are working and pay taxes nor those who have lost their jobs and are accepting government help only because they need to feed their families until finding a job. Nor were his remarks directed toward the Independents. His remarks were toward those who believe in and are accepting their entitlements; that is those who don’t want to work and therefore pay no taxes but feed off the taxpayer. At least he was honest and told the truth, even though the media skewered it as uaual.

    Reply

Leave a Response

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>