« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Mitt Romney’s ‘Very Poor’ Choice of Words

If you care about the poor, my opponent is standing by for your vote

Fresh off a dominant win in the Florida presidential primary, Mitt Romney managed to unload a clip of .45 ammunition in both feet on national television this morning. In an interview with Soledad O’Brien, Romney said the following (emphasis added):

Mitt Romney: I’m not concerned about the very poor; we have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich, they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of the America, the 90 percent, 95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling, and I’ll continue to take that message across the nation.”

Soledad O’Brien: “I know I said last question. You said I’m not concerned about the very poor because they have a safety net. And I think there are lots of very poor Americans who are struggling who would say that sounds odd. Can you explain that?”

Mitt Romney: “Well, you had to finish the sentence, Soledad. I said I’m not concerned about the very poor that have the safety net, but if it has holes in it, I will repair them. The challenge right now — we will hear from the Democrat Party the plight of the poor. And there’s no question, it’s not good being poor, and we have a safety net to help those that are very poor. But my campaign is focused on middle income Americans. My campaign — you can choose where to focus. You can focus on the rich, that’s not my focus. You can focus on the very poor. That’s not my focus. My focus is on middle income Americans, retirees living on Social Security, people who can’t find work, folks that have kids getting ready to go to college. These are the people who have been most badly hurt during the Obama years. We have a very ample safety net, and we can talk about whether it needs to be strengthened or whether there are holes in it. But we have food stamps, we have Medicaid, we have housing vouchers, we have programs to help the poor.”

While Romney’s intent was clearly to reiterate his focus on the middle class, which has suffered greatly in recent years due to economic troubles and rising unemployment, he committed not one but two major fouls in that statement (as well as a third that is only slightly less severe). First, he committed the cardinal sin of saying, in just so many words, “I’m not concerned about the very poor.” Context be damned, Romney has now provided a direct quote that can and will be used against him ad nauseum for the remainder of his participation in this election. Second, and perhaps worse, he said in almost so many words that not only does he not care about the “very poor,” but the Democrat Party does.

Take a minute to let that sink in. The presumptive nominee for the Republican presidential nomination, in a class warfare/economy/jobs election, said on national television that he doesn’t care about the very poor in our country, but that the opposition party does. As @Slublog noted on Twitter, “The only thing that could have made that Romney quote worse is if he ended it by laughing manically and lighting a cigar with a $100 bill.”

The fact he didn’t mean precisely that is immaterial; you simply can’t say that in a political campaign, particularly when you’re (a) already filthy rich (and have never spent a day of your life in the middle class, let alone as a ‘poor’ individual), and (b) running for the top position in a party that is already portrayed by media and opposition as being unconcerned with any Americans outside of the super rich. Again, the fact that (b) is entirely inaccurate is immaterial; just as every possible Rick Perry gaffe contributed to the narrative that he was incoherent, inarticulate, and mentally challenged, every statement by Mitt Romney that could possibly be construed as being out of touch with (and unsupportive of) “the 99%” adds to the narrative that the rich, white, out-of-touch GOP is preparing to nominate a rich, white, out-of-touch automaton to lead its party and the country.

In an election that will be focused on employment and the plight of working (and out-of-work) Americans, neither Romney nor the GOP can afford to provide any additional fuel for that narrative. In this case, all he had to say was something to the effect of, “My focus is on the millions of Americans who are suffering from the Obama economy.” The fact that Romney instead provided direct ammunition for negative advertising, while talking up his opposition’s support for the same poor he disavowed any concern for, is a major issue.

Of more minor concern is the fact that Romney twice addressed the problems with America’s social safety nets in conditional terms – if the safety net has holes in it, he’ll fix it. That ‘if’ should grate those who have spent the last several months, years, and decades warning of the major issues facing our entitlement programs and safety nets (not least of which is cost, like the $55,000,000,000,000.00 that medicare and social security are currently in debt over the coming 75 year horizon), and proposing solutions to address them.

Of greater concern, though, are the shots Mitt Romney fired into his own feet this morning with his declaration that he doesn’t care about the poor, but that the Democrats do – a simply inexcusable error.

NOTE: Even unofficial Romney campaign spokesperson (and official Romney shill) Jennifer Rubin, who has a typically incoherent response at the Washington Post, can’t explain away such an egregious unforced error on her candidate’s part. Further, Rubin’s final line, ostensibly addressed to “the media,” is the height of irony. She writes, “Perhaps a less crazed approach to covering Romney would restore their credibility.” Ah, self-awareness.

COMMENTS

  • redcal

    And something most people don’t seem to appreciate — it’s not what you say, it’s how it plays into (for or against) the most likely narrative of your candidacy. If it takes a second parsing of the words/context to defend a statement, it’s a gaffe.

    • chadosborne

      This is a line from his stump speech that he used many times before. But I guess the line of attack now is that he is too honest and should be a little more phony and politically correct.

      If you want someone who will tell you what you want to hear, vote newt, the father of the Reagan revolution who is at the same time a great enthusiast of all the achievements of the Clinton administration.

      Obama may say that he is concerned about the poor but the poor know that it’s a lie. Romney gave millions away to charity.

      This will be a fun race.

      • redcal

        And if you think Romney is ‘too honest’, you should google for Mitt vs. Mitt.

    • lizcarter

      I’m not understanding all the fuss over Romney’s statement today – “I’m not concerned about the very poor,” he said. “There’s a safety net there, and if it needs repair I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich, they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the heart of America, the 95% of Americans who are right now struggling.”

      He’s right, there is a safety net right now for the very poor. And when the economy turns around, the very poor also have more opportunity. But what gets me more is that Obama and Newt attempted to paint Romney as “insensitive” today.

      Here’s what I find “insensitive” and out of touch and uncaring -

      Romney charitable donations in 2010 – 14% of his income.
      Obama charitable donations in 2010 – 1% of his income.
      Newt charitable donations in 2010 – 2.6% of his income

      And Romney’s estimated 2011 percentage is 19%.

      The only misstep Romney did on the poor, is thinking his challengers to the White House actually care about the poor and put their money where there mouth is…or actually act, instead of just pander.

  • Kyle-MI

    It is clearly a gaffe. It is one of those things everyone has experience sometime in their life where they try to say something, but the instant it leaves their month they realize it sounds terrible. As such Romney needs to apologize for the words in the statement and just admit that his mouth got ahead of his brain.

    Then he needs to return fire. What is more damaging to the poor, a verbal gaffe or higher energy prices? Can the poor live off of words and good intentions, or do they need jobs and a good economy just like the rest of us? At some point, everyone will say something they wish they could take back, but not everyone gets to squash a new supply of energy critical to the country.

    • Bill S

      …because what it does is simply reinforce the stereotype that is already there. There is no way for Mitt Romney to shake the “uncaring rich guy” label. It’s been there all the time and this just cemented it. He could give away every dollar he has and he’d still be Slick Uncle Moneybags.

      Time to start strategizing for 2016. This guy is burnt toast already.

    • streiff

      The devastating part about the quote is that it plays into the larger narrative being built about Romney, one that I have to say I largely agree with.

      I don’t care about the very poor.
      360K isn’t a lot of money
      I like to fire people
      Corporations are people

      add in Bain Capital and you have a bored rich guy who thinks he should be president which isn’t bad if he had any empathy for people who are barely making it in this economy or any real attachment to Americans who don’t make much money. But he doesn’t.

      He is essentially the flip side of Obama, without the strongly held beliefs. Where Obama is a cold, detached, uncaring socialist, Romney is a cold, detached, uncaring capitalist.

      • andystone

        I’m also unemployed haha.
        How about a $10K bet?
        The only tax I want to completely repeal is the investment income tax.

    • lineholder

      (1) conceded caring about the poor to the Dems
      (2) provided the left with what is being dubbed as “the perfect justification for the individual mandate”

      Problem with it is, these comments are just Romney being genuinely honest…and that speaks volumes about the kind of mindset he truly has in comparison to the kind of mindset he tries to lead the American people into believing he has.

      But if he isn’t going to stop and think before he opens his mouth, then he needs to just say nothing at all rather than handing our opposition an advantage.

    • fightnright

      Mitt repeated and reinforced the comment with no voice breakage or hesitation in his remarks.

      It was a deliberate leak for the media to seize on and carry Mitt’s message (free!) to a disgusted middle class. The middle classes are tired of being ignored in the efforts of the political class to buy the votes of the poor with handouts, and give carrots to the rich for their campaign $$$. The middle class, feeling politically disenfranchised, is a key moderate demographic for Repubs this year.

  • earlgrey

    more in the past few years than the very poor. It was a profoundly dumb thing to say, and if he said it before yesterday than Fl might have looked different.

    The fact is that if we can’t get people who want to work back to working, than we won’t be able to support the safety net for the very poor. That is what Romney should say.

    Romney. Hire me. I can’t do any worse than the staff you have helping you. (well, I probably could, but that is hard to see right now.)

  • beach91

    about Perry saying STUPID things or that Newt was going to go off the reservation! This guy is friggin ridiculous! Why give the left this kind of ammo as a freebie. Geez how stupid but I forget he is the most ‘electable.’ What a crock of horses#%t!

  • jamesm

    Romney is now playing class warfare. Dividing up americans into rich and poor. Simply…he cant win because conservatives care about the poor too! Put a fork in him..he’s done

    • sharrondeer

      Because that’s who the establishment want to be the nominee. I knew before the campaign started that he’d be the nominee because of that.

      I hate the guy and I think in many ways he’d be worse than Obama. (Not that I’m going to vote for Obama, of course!) Romney has no ability to understand what life is like for anyone but the rich and can’t be trusted to do anything that helps the middle class. He obviously has no beliefs other than “Greed is good”. And “Greed is good” is not the same thing as saying “capitalism is good”.

      I want to live in a democracy, not a plutocracy.

      • redcal

        And the Tea Party and Occupy movements are symptoms of that, not causes. Obama has strongly signalled (for months, and then again in the SOTU), that he’s going to wage a class warfare campaign.

        But Romney is TERRIBLE on class warfare. Totally unsympathetic positioning except to a small handful of plutocrats. It now looks like Rick Santorum would have been better suited to this election — able to speak convincingly about everyone along the economic spectrum while maintaining a very strong core of (social, though not fiscal) conservatism.

  • bonnman

    It fails from whatever perspective you look at it. First, he just plain comes across as not caring about the poor. But second, he supports the safety nets and will fix them, not reform them, but just patch them up a little. The safety nets are not working. They are not helping people transition out of poverty to become productive and prosperous individuals. He had a golden opportunity to contrast the current failed dependency programs with conservative reform ideas and instead not just maintained the status quo but tossed the opposition a damaging soundbite. How is this guy winning the primary?

    • http://jeffemanuel.net Jeff Emanuel

      The alternatives are even more awful

      • acat

        (nothing further)

  • NeoKong

    Romney did not say he didn’t care about the poor.
    He said he is not concerned because he knows as well as you know and everybody here knows that the “poor” in this country don’t have it so bad and quite frankly are in no hurry to leave the “safety net”.
    That safety net has become a hammock.
    The poor are fat Jeff.

    Romney is saying I believe that his priority is to shore up the people who pay the bills in this country and are the back bone of the economy. The middle class.
    The “poor “are not going anywhere and they are not exactly starving.
    They ain’t gonna’ vote for Romney anyways so who cares if the “poor” are offended.
    Romney needs to connect with the people who are tired of paying for the poor.

    Obama has the black vote locked up.
    That is a given.
    If Romney wins it won’t be by a landslide.
    It will be less than 51-49.

    The point being that he doesn’t need to connect with the “poor”.
    All he has to do is get everyone who voted for McCain and peel away 10% of the people who voted for Obama.

    • sharrondeer

      How do you define the middle class? People use that term all the time, but it’s never clear what they mean by that.

      • NeoKong

        They are the people who live the house that when you drive by you say “Wow…that’s a nice house ” and you feel a little jealous.
        5,000 sf. on a 15,000 sf. lot.
        They got a pool.
        They got a Mercedes, a Lexus suv and maybe a second home someplace nice.
        They are not moneybag rich but they do all right.
        They could be for example a successful real estate agent who married a dentist.
        Their kids go private school and are definitely going to college.
        On a good year they may pull down together 3 or 4 hundred grand.

        They take trips.
        They buy $3,000 refrigerators and send their kids to soccer camp in the summer.
        They spend money. Lot’s of it
        Landscapers, piano lessons nannies and housekeepers.
        The pool guy.
        Nice restaurants.
        Not the Golden Corral.
        They pay more in property taxes than some people earn in a year.

        They don’t like it when Obama implies that they are not working hard enough or are not paying enough when between them they may employ twenty people who are not on food stamps.
        They carry a lot of people.

        No one pays their bills for them and if Obama can squeeze another $30,000 or $40,000 out of them then somebody is going to lose their job.
        That person then goes on unemployment and viola’!
        The $30,000 is wasted on a govt. benefit to replace what they had when they were working.
        Punishing the rich just put one more person on food stamps.

        • civildebate

          Middle Class is typically defined as close to the median income. So for a household we’re talking 40,000 to 100,000 per year not 400,000.

          According to the Economist, the low end of the 1% being in 350k to 380k per year in household income.

          I just checked and a 5,000 square foot house anywhere near Minneapolis/St.Paul, MN goes for 2-3 Million dollars.

          • NeoKong

            $40,000- $100,000 is middle class ?
            I know firemen who make more than that.

            $300,000 isn’t all the money in the world.
            It definitely is not the 1%.
            It certainly does not buy a $3 million dollar house.
            It would take $600,000 just to qualify for the mortgage.

          • trelane

            You defined middle class as having a Mercedes, Lexus and a second home and you’re calling HIM crazy? Lol.

          • NeoKong

            On two incomes ?
            Then after taxes?
            Then take out mortgage payments, water bills, utilities, any daycare plus property taxes.
            Let’s throw some food in there too.
            They might get hungry.
            What if they want to take a vacation that involves palm trees and airplanes…?
            Now we are starting to cut it pretty thin.

            They would be lucky to save a thousand dollars a month and if one of them lost their job they would be screwed.
            I do not define middle class as a couple who can be put in financial distress so easily.
            That couple is one or two emergencies away from taking part time jobs at night.

            How long do you think it would take them to save up $75,000 so they can put down a decent down payment on a house and still have some money left.
            It would take years.

            That ain’t middle class.

          • Common_Cents

            But overall based on the numbers it is. You forget the millions w/out a car, live in apartments, trailers etc…. Plenty of people unemployed or making 500 bucks a week. Isn’t our median income 40k?

          • NeoKong

            “But overall based on the numbers it is. You forget the millions w/out a car, live in apartments, trailers etc?. Plenty of people unemployed or making 500 bucks a week. Isn?t our median income 40k?”

            They live in a trailer park and don’t even have a car or a job….?
            I’m pretty sure that even in your neck of the woods people call that poor.
            Obviously you are under the impression that I am sitting in a hand carved red velvet chair with my feet up on a chest of gold coins but I assure you that is not the case.

            I’m not rich although I would like to be.
            I’m not middle class and I’m not angry about it.
            I pay my own way and just took a nice vacation but this old boy can recite you the Dollar Menu in a heart beat and I know where the closest WalMart is.

            That couple I described making $100,000 a year….?
            If they live near me they are either renting or living in an owner occupied multi-family and can tell you every time the guy upstairs flushes his toilet.
            No garage.
            Vinyl siding and in the summer of couple of air conditioners hanging out the window.

            If the wife wants to keep her job then she will be dropping her kids at daycare every day for about $300 a week.
            Bang…right there almost half her take home pay is gone.
            So actually now they really only have one and a half incomes.

            Two cars.
            Two cell phones.
            Cable plus a landline service.
            Oh…there’s another $500 a month if they don’t have to make car payments.
            They cut their own grass and it ain’t because they like the exercise.

            Maybe if after ten years when they pay down the house a little and both of them make a little more money and both have some gray hair, maybe they can upgrade to a single family home in a nicer area.

            If that is the middle class then I hope I can skip it over and go right to being rich.
            Those poor people are working their tail off.

          • lapert

            Unless you want to define middle class as the top 20% or so of incomes than yes people earning less than $100k are middle class. Your $300k above may not be in the top 1% but he is easily in the top 5%..

    • http://jeffemanuel.net Jeff Emanuel

      is a lot less important to Romney’s cause than convincing evangelicals, catholics, and others who believe wholeheartedly in charitable giving and looking out for the poor that he’s worthy of their support when he’s willing to say things like this.

      The narrative outweighs the reality by orders of magnitude. Romney has given millions annually to charity, but that simply doesn’t matter when the narrative is propped up with quotes like “I’m not concerned about the very poor,” and declarations that the Democrats, on the other hand, do.

      • bonnman

        And not to say Romney hasn’t donated money to the poor but the majority of his giving goes to the Mormon Church as part of his tithing responsibility.

        • Ann_W

          They had a huge response to the tsunami, for example. Plus bishop’s are handing out food and rent money to poor people constantly, among other things.

      • NeoKong

        But when someone does that they have to be a little dishonest with the facts.
        They have to leave out the charitable giving part and also edit the clip so as to not hear all he said.
        It will be on MSNBC tonight no doubt as Al Sharpton will mumble out some angry stuttering rant about rich white people.
        But that is nothing new.

        It’s what they do every night.

        I understand what you mean by how it looks but by the time next fall rolls around I think many people are going to be a little weary of the Tiny Tim campaign crutch and being called racists for four years.
        It’s pretty weak soup.

        MSNBC flips out when Gingrich calls Obama “the food stamp president” because it cuts deep.
        They desperately want that topic off limits.
        While I agree that maybe Romney should choose his words more carefully I think he should point out loud and clear at the Obama economy and the people he made poorer.

        • http://jeffemanuel.net Jeff Emanuel

          And….?

    • The_Rebel

      (no pun intended), I think Romney is really trying to appeal to the Tea Party people. After all, it was 3 years ago that Rick Santelli of CNBC started the movement that became the Tea Party, when he said that it would be nice to reward the people who are carrying the water instead of those who are drinking the water.

      Just substitute the carriers for the working middle class and the drinkers for the very poor. I get what Romney was saying. He just didn’t say it very well. Let’s move on. It’s a long campaign.

      • goodgovernance

        It’s bad enough he said this at all, but after six years of campaigning you’d think he’d be better.

        Let’s get real, here: If he says something like this in October the media pounces all over it and Mitt is done. Done!

        • Common_Cents

          If you try to be something you are not, you come across as phony and you start gaffing.

          Pawlenty made the same mistake early on. He tried to come across as aggressive and angry. People laughed at him.

          Romney should just admit he’s stiff and rich. Work it to his advantage saying he’ll create the right environment for others to apply themselves and become rich etc…

          Gingrich should come out and admit, he is a mad brainstorming thinker. Nothing wrong w/ that as people will discount some of his wilder ideas and brainstorming wont hurt him.

          Gingrich can deal w/ that objection and urge people to look at what he’s actually accomplished, not what he says on a daily basis.

      • NeoKong

        Rick railed on about having to pay his neighbor’s mortgage and it connected with people.

        Let me tell you a story.
        My nephew and his school teacher wife were living in a nice family owned apartment complex that was sold to an out of state company a few years back.
        It has hundreds of duplex style units.
        The new company immediately began renting it to the state as sec.8 housing. They make a fortune.
        I cannot tell you how mad it made my nephew to know that the very same apartment he and his wife were paying $1,400 a month for was free for his new neighbors who seemed slightly under employed if you get my drift.

        They moved and bought a nice house with an in-law that they rent out.
        They don’t like Obama even though the wife is a school teacher.
        She teaches at a private school.
        Watching their neighbors have for free what they paid a lot of money for made them feel like suckers.

      • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

        he wouldn’t have to try to “appeal to the Tea Party people.” That he has to try this hard is an indication he just doesn’t get it and probably never will. I don’t begrudge him his wealth, but don’t pretend it doesn’t make a difference.

  • opinionscount93

    “Clueless” is already the headline at The Huffington Post. Those comments will be viral by the weekend and played 10,000 times between now and November. If I still have choices when the primary gets to Georgia, I will pull the lever for whomever gives us the best chance for a brokered convention. How can ANYBODY support Romney now? He just put a millstone around his neck that will absolutely sink him in November. Instead of the focus being on his win, it is that he doesn’t care about the poor. If I were the DNC, I would start putting out adds now in support of Romney. He’s the most electable? Seriously? Can I please have a lever to pull that says “none of the above” and take my chances at the convention?

    • writescribe

      life. He is simply out of touch. I harbor the man no personal ill will.

      However, to the extent the President of the United States is supposed to represent in some form the people of the country, this guy is an epic fail.

      • writescribe

        to Jeff Emanuel, very nice analysis.

        • http://jeffemanuel.net Jeff Emanuel

          n/t

  • codenametimna

    It is true the very poor have a safety net. What is disgusting is that Mitt Romney doesn’t seem to care about a particular class in America i.e. the very poor, which any decent, normal human being with a conscience should care about and so should his administration if Romney actually gets elected president.

    Which brings up another point. Here you have an ultra rich Republican candidate who now appears even more out of touch with the American people whom he is seeking to govern. Needless to say, the Democrats are absolutely going to use this sound bite against Romney in the general election if indeed Romney becomes the Republican nominee.

    How does a Republican candidate go from a huge landslide victory in the Florida primary, to the next day shooting himself in the foot, and is now being portrayed as possibly even more unelectable than before because he is now looked upon as not only not caring about every American but also is using the same kind of “class” preference mentality that Barack Obama has engaged in. Obama hates the rich obviously. Obama hasn’t really helped the poor either for that matter. But Mitt Romney’s careless use of words saying he’s not at all concerned with the most needy in our country is beyond the pale and will definitely come back to haunt him if he ends up facing Obama in the Fall.

    Republicans are already being portrayed by Democrats as not caring for the less fortunate in society. Mitt Romney’s shameful words only furthers that perception. Of course, Republicans do care about the poor and want every American to prosper and thrive.

    Mitt Romney’s demeaning words not only ended up shooting himself in the foot the day after his huge victory in Florida, it also ricocheted right through the heart of the Republican Party and may possibly ruin his chances to become the Republican nominee. Four years ago Mitt Romney self-destructed and it appears he may be on track to do a repeat. This huge gaffe only helps his opponents and obviously Obama too, if indeed, Romney miraculously (after so great a gaffe) becomes the nominee. This gaffe will hurt his chances even more in my opinion.

  • jabailo

    The problem is this country is not nets with holes. The large number of unemployed who are not rioting because of starvation is proof of that.

    The problem is that so many of the formerly middle class have fallen into those nets. The bigger problem is the number of ladders that have been kicked down by the elites so that people will be forever caught in those nets that seem comfortable, until they run out of air.

    With ever increasing taxes on incomes and gains, with a monetary policy that favors being part of the large government largesse over the application of mind and effort, with a stagnant investment community, with a declining real estate market, Americans ask, where are the jobs that will pull us into the ranks of true wealth and prosperity?

  • snowshooze

    We have a very ample safety net, and we can talk about whether it needs to be strengthened or whether there are holes in it. But we have food stamps, we have Medicaid, we have housing vouchers, we have programs to help the poor

    And he says we are going to plug all the holes.
    Am I going to be the plug?

    • texastaxpayer

      If this guy is our nominee. Talk about “oops”….

  • opinionscount93

    I’m a conservative that’s very concerned about the poor. So concerned, I believe that they need access to the free market system. So concerned that I would like to see them cast off the chains of slavery politely called the “saftey net” and gain dignity through honest work. So concerned that I don’t want to see the saftey net repaired but become an unnecassary relic of the past. With comments like Romney’s, I’m concerned the republican party will become the same.

    • streiff

      I’m sure a lot of people are rather happy for the chains of slavery that keeps them in a place to stay and provides them with food. But no matter what the economic condition there are people who fall on hard times, the idea that a safety net isn’t needed in an era where most do not have extended families to fall back on is truly bizarre. I say this from the perspective of having been unemployed for about a year at one point in my life.

  • elayman

    Didn’t Romney also declare that “Somebody who’s fallen from the middle class to poverty, in my opinion is still middle class.? He has no idea what it’s like to be “middle class” and live paycheck to paycheck and be so deeply in debt you’re actually “poor” … Both the poor and the middle class share the same safety net but one is more deserving of immediate relief ? Strengthen the safety net to relieve debilitating levels of personal debt ? How is that even going to begin to work in practice ?

  • Samsara

    But don’t worry, I’m sure the hunt is on right now for a first rate interview coach.

    I used to think his campaign slogan should be “Rich? Old? Romney!”. Now I think he should go with “I’ll Fix the Safety Net”.

    Mitt needs to stop channeling Clinton by pretending to feel our pain and deliver a clear growth message that is going convince people he can do better. He is not going to out “Clinton” Obama.

  • generica

    “I?m concerned about the very heart of the America, the 90 percent, 95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling”

    Really? He’s basically saying, “I’m going to fight for the middle 95% of people between homeless and millionaire status”. Which is a great campaign message to get out subliminally but rather pandering to just come out and say. How do you ‘focus’ on 90% or 95% of anything?

  • aesthete

    First, as noted by everyone in the blogosphere, it makes Romney look like the guy lighting $100 bills on fire in front of starving Ethiopians — terrible imaging.

    Second, it once again reinforces the idea that Romney cares not a whit for fundamental government reform — the clear implication from his statement is that a) Democrats, rather than Republicans, will let him know if something’s wrong with social welfare programs, and that b) he will be reactive, rather than proactive, when it comes to the “fix”.

    Third, it really puts the ball in the Dems’ court as far as talking points go. If the poor are OK due to a government safety net, and the rich are OK just because, then does it follow that the “struggling” middle class need to be provided for by government, in the same way that the poor are? Per Mitt Romney’s statement that he’ll be an ally to the middle class, that seems a fair interpretation of this statement, and represents a fundamental shift in seeing government support as something for the truly needy, and having it be an omnipresent cure-all for anything that people generally find an encumbrance or inconvenience. How does this differ from OWS talking points? This aids Democrats in their rhetoric, rather than demolishing it.

    Finally, the appeals to the “middle class” from the rich guy come off as extremely insincere — not only because it’s the same crap that’s been repeated ad nauseum by ever campaigner in the modern era, but also because Romney doesn’t seem to understand the problems of the American middle class, or how to appeal to them. Middle-class Americans take umbrage to the notion that they are dependent on, or need government assistance — even if that is the truth (as it is when it comes to SS and Medicare). Phrasing it in that way is going to seem out of touch and will turn off middle-class America. When Romney already has class-based image problems, this statement is inopportune, indeed.

  • snowshooze

    Newt has plans coming out his ears.
    My only point being that Romney won Florida on the mud. He is going to have to think about putting some substance into his campaign pretty soon, because you can only throw so much mud before you run out, and people get tired of it.
    So, when there is no more mudd in the mitt… what will he come up with?
    I realize, that with Newt, there is a considerable amount of mud…

    • texastaxpayer

      I read his 59 point 160 plus page economic plan and whew what a page turner….. The entire thing can be summed up in four words ” keep the status quo”. Besides fiddling with some marginal tax rates its an encyclopedic approach to saying “do nothing”. The guy even advocates Obama and his soak the rich routine taking cap gains to zero for only those making 200k a year or below. Sound familiar? I am guessing after this offering we have seen the end of “plans” from Romney. Besides writing things down is too restrictive for his “style” of politics…

      • snowshooze

        I’d take a look at that postcard though…
        Actually, I wasn’t aware of the plan. I could only see mudslinging and counter mudslinging, but Newt slipped in some substance.
        The entire season is going to have to evolve, or it will flame out.
        Both sides get some of this.
        I’d sugggest each quit spending so much time infatuating, and get back to work.
        I don’t pretend to be able to understand the accountant speak or legaleese.
        I do know about a business plan. Mine was too simple/ Make Money. .
        They wanted to know just how I was gonna do that in several thousand words…
        SBA is big on words, and nothing else.

  • maybenexttime

    I’m firmly convinced Romney is a plant by the Democratic party to ensure Obama gets re-elected this fall. These tin-earred gaffes keep playing right into the 1% narrative that the DNC-run Liberal Media will be pushing heavily during the general election.

    This is too politically stupid to have been an accident. Granted, Romney is correct that the welfare/food stamp safety net is in place for low income people. They won’t starve. They won’t be homeless. Obama and Uncle Sam have it all covered.

    That said, you don’t get on national TV one day after your big primary win and say you don’t care about the poor. That is simply political malpractice of the highest magnitude.

    It’s time to ditch Romney before it’s too late. This guy will set the GOP back 50 years, or more.