Romney: 'I'm not concerned about the very poor'

[NVGonzalez]

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Politico, John Edwards's rhetoric on class was a much more minor part of why he wasn't a good candidate and why nobody likes or respects him any more than it looks like you're making it out to be.

[opebo]

In any case this will only be a gaffe if independent voters can be bothered to care about the poor, for the poor won't be voting for him anyway.

No, it doesn't depend on that, Simfan, because:

The comment is comically tin eared. It's the kind of thing that can actually lose votes. Accept this and move on.

You see it makes him look ridiculous - like a Daddy Warbucks or Colonel Blimp sort of character.  

Whether people actually agree with the implied criticism of the candidate isn't necessarily important - if he is easily caricatured and gaffe prone, its another way of seeming weak and incompetent, and this is what the insecures in the middle (independents) vote about.

[Link]

Who is the Obama plant that has infiltrated Romney's speech writing staff?

Seriously.  This isn't funny anymore.

[Link]

Mitt Romney, unfortunately, is a walking ad machine for the Democratic Party.

At the end of the day, the bottom 25% of Americans are deadweight.  It's true. The very poor will always have nothing and be leaches to taxpaying Americans.  That's not news

My parents grew up in the bottom 25%.  Now they are 1%ers paying taxes.  You disgust me.

[opebo]

Mitt Romney, unfortunately, is a walking ad machine for the Democratic Party.

At the end of the day, the bottom 25% of Americans are deadweight.  It's true. The very poor will always have nothing and be leaches to taxpaying Americans.  That's not news

My parents grew up in the bottom 25%.  Now they are 1%ers paying taxes.  You disgust me.

The Republicans all despise the poor, Link, no surprise there.  But I would caution you to be more skeptical of the Horatio Alger myth - individuals cannot better themselves in capitalism, unless there is redistribution to make it possible (as there no doubt was during your parents post-war heyday).

[Link]

Mitt Romney, unfortunately, is a walking ad machine for the Democratic Party.

At the end of the day, the bottom 25% of Americans are deadweight.  It's true. The very poor will always have nothing and be leaches to taxpaying Americans.  That's not news

My parents grew up in the bottom 25%.  Now they are 1%ers paying taxes.  You disgust me.

The Republicans all despise the poor, Link, no surprise there.  But I would caution you to be more skeptical of the Horatio Alger myth - individuals cannot better themselves in capitalism, unless there is redistribution to make it possible (as there no doubt was during your parents post-war heyday).

Perhaps.  But my point was my parents were in the bottom 25% and they studied hard in school and never took a penny from the government.  They now help numerous people through their work.  They don't just shuffle papers in an office or do BS Wall St deals.  The assertion that nearly 1 in 4 Americans is worthless and without potential is deplorable.

[Link]

Mitt Romney, unfortunately, is a walking ad machine for the Democratic Party.

At the end of the day, the bottom 25% of Americans are deadweight.  It's true. The very poor will always have nothing and be leaches to taxpaying Americans.  That's not news

It's interesting.  I suggest that in order to better utilize limited public resources we should withhold extraordinary and expensive care from severly mentally retarded children that are suffering from terminal diseases and I am savaged.

Meanwhile a Republican can in one stroke declare 1/4 of the US population worthless and that is okay?  Where is the outrage?

[NHI]

This is hardly a gaffe, merely something being taken out of context, again. The poor have a safety net, if the net is broken we can fix it. The rich are all set and are not the concern either.
The focus is on the middle American, the great silent majority if you will. These are the people who have been forgotten and it is time to have a president who is a champion for them.

I know the Democrats and even Newt will try to spin Romney's  remark into something or not, but the facts are in the pudding. The poor have the safety net, the rich have their safety, it's middle America that is without the safety and these are the people who need the help, by having an economy that works for them.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

I think we all know what he meant to say, but it's what can be spun easily by the media. When Romney says a line like that it galvanizes the left even more, sending more money and volunteers to the Obama campaign.

We don't need Obama to fire up our base. The Republicans are doing an ample job.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

You left out the part where he said he'd fix the safety net in instances where it's broken.  Poor wording on his part, but not the anti-poor statement that you attempted to make it sound like...

[Link]

I think we all know what he meant to say, but it's what can be spun easily by the media. When Romney says a line like that it galvanizes the left even more, sending more money and volunteers to the Obama campaign.

We don't need Obama to fire up our base. The Republicans are doing an ample job.

Speak for yourself.  He said he is not worried about the very poor.  He said he would would fix the safety net if it was broken.

This guy has been running for president for 7+yrs.  If he hasn't even bothered to check out the deplorable condition of the nonexistent US safety net I'm sorry he is completely out of touch and frankly irresponsible.

if indeed.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I think we all know what he meant to say, but it's what can be spun easily by the media. When Romney says a line like that it galvanizes the left even more, sending more money and volunteers to the Obama campaign.

We don't need Obama to fire up our base. The Republicans are doing an ample job.

Speak for yourself.  He said he is not worried about the very poor.  He said he would would fix the safety net if it was broken.

This guy has been running for president for 7+yrs.  If he hasn't even bothered to check out the deplorable condition of the nonexistent US safety net I'm sorry he is completely out of touch and frankly irresponsible.

if indeed.

There's more than one program that makes up the safety net.  Not all of the programs need fixing.  And those that do have specific areas that need to be fixed.

[Link]

I think we all know what he meant to say, but it's what can be spun easily by the media. When Romney says a line like that it galvanizes the left even more, sending more money and volunteers to the Obama campaign.

We don't need Obama to fire up our base. The Republicans are doing an ample job.

Speak for yourself.  He said he is not worried about the very poor.  He said he would would fix the safety net if it was broken.

This guy has been running for president for 7+yrs.  If he hasn't even bothered to check out the deplorable condition of the nonexistent US safety net I'm sorry he is completely out of touch and frankly irresponsible.

if indeed.

There's more than one program that makes up the safety net.  Not all of the programs need fixing.  And those that do have specific areas that need to be fixed.

The sementics are irrelevant.  He is oblivious to the problems with the safety net.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

a) it's not really an 'out of context' situation... the whole structure and attitude of the comments are bad. He might mean something all together different... but in an election campaign, those things are going to come back and haunt him.

b) If you've been running for president since 2006... you really should be able to recognise the impacts of what you're saying... he's just not that politically adept.

[Eraserhead]

Mitt Romney, unfortunately, is a walking ad machine for the Democratic Party.

At the end of the day, the bottom 25% of Americans are deadweight.  It's true. The very poor will always have nothing and be leaches to taxpaying Americans.  That's not news

Agreed, guys. Hopefully President Romney will just gas all of them.

[pbrower2a]

We begin to see what happens as Mitt Romney increasingly sells out to the ruling elite of America and its economic interests.For them America would be a federation of plantations, sweatshops, and company stores... with most people in destitution despite their long hours of hard toil under brutal management.

The top 1% of income-grabbers have done everything possible to gut the effectiveness of unions (the only defense that they have against a rapacious and despotic elite) and the ability of independent small-scale businesses to stay in business.   

So how do we improve the earning potential of people now in the bottom 25%? Our economic system casts people off as if they were yesterday's newspaper. 

[Lincoln Republican]

Those trying to make it seem as if Romney really does not care about the poor, quit the pontificating.

We all know what he meant, which is that the poor will be cared for in a Romney administration.

However, I have to agree that this was indeed a major gaffe on his part and is not, obviously, beneficial to his campaign.

He had better go into some clearly stated damage control to settle this matter.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

He's made this same statement over and over again during his campaign. At one point he modified it to say the poor need real help, but he's reverted. 
Note how Romney divides people into classes.  He doesn't talk about a tide that lifts all boats; he doesn't talk about structural barriers. He's going to focus on the middle class.  Someone else can be the President for the poor, I guess.  Whether formerly middle class people who have been unemployed for a few years are included, I'm not sure.
Really, the suggestion that our safety net puts the poor in a less troublesome position than the middle class is absurd and out of touch.  He's placing a blind trust in our social programs that is disconcerting from a conservative or libertarian perspective.

[Colbert]

Mitt Romney, unfortunately, is a walking ad machine for the Democratic Party.

At the end of the day, the bottom 25% of Americans are deadweight.  It's true. The very poor will always have nothing and be leaches to taxpaying Americans.  That's not news

Larry Ellison and Oprah Winfrey disagree with your assessment.

Anybody who has any love, any basic decency and routine kindness in their bones disagrees with his assessment.

I strong agree with you, but in a campain made by and for money, romney's speach is not surprising. US are not a real democracy (95 % of congressmen had win ther seat with a campaing found more important than their opponants).

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Note to GOP Establishment:  Romney sucks as a candidate.

[TheGlobalizer]

I don't think this has much traction.  To be frank, most of the middle-class people I speak to don't care about the very poor (at least as far as government programs are concerned), and feel like they're getting the shaft from both ends, rich and poor.

I think this will turn a few soccer moms off, but I doubt this changes the game much at all.  Good that it happened in the primaries.

[TheGlobalizer]

I'm not concerned about the very poor, and neither are most Americans.  They give money to charities, in the hope that it helps the few who have encountered tragedy in their lives.  The rest?  Largely responsible for their own situation.

Americans are for lifting up the deserving and helping those who face difficulties.  People who suck at life?  They can drown.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I'm not concerned about the very poor, and neither are most Americans.  They give money to charities, in the hope that it helps the few who have encountered tragedy in their lives.  The rest?  Largely responsible for their own situation.

Americans are for lifting up the deserving and helping those who face difficulties.  People who suck at life?  They can drown.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Romney won't lose because he's too conservative. He won't lose because he's too liberal. He'll lose because he's the most awkward person to run for president in modern times. As unlikable as Nixon without the gravitas; as gaffe-prone as Dubya without the likability.

And unfortunately for the GOP, he's still the best they have.