Everyone is weighing in on the astounding video, made public by Mother Jones, that reveals what Mitt Romney really thinks about nearly half of the population of this country. So I thought I’d hop on the bandwagon. Here are some thoughts.
- Not elegantly stated? Hardly. Romney’s defense at his hastily-arranged and painfully embarrassing press availability once the video became public was that his comments were “not elegantly stated” and that he could “state it more clearly and in a more effective way.” But that is absolutely not true. In fact, Romney seems much more comfortable, confident, and at ease talking to the small circle of ultra-wealthy supporters in that video than he does in more public settings. And that’s not surprising, since much of Romney’s business career has been spent addressing very similar circles of very similar people, and he was obviously quite good at it. Watch the video again, and notice how emphatic he is in his characterization of this (mythical) shiftless 47% of the country, 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,” and as to whom he says he will “never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” That is a truly shocking statement, made all the moreso by the fact that Romney clearly, effectively, and I’d even venture elegantly, said it about as convincingly as he’s ever said anything. If you ask me, he meant what he said.
- Mainstream conservative reaction is scathing. Put aside the right-wing loons who actually agree with what Romney said (even though it’s factually not even close to correct – sorry Rob – as National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru among others points out). The “mainstream” conservative reaction to Romney’s video is extremely negative. Joe Scarborough said “this is one of the worst weeks for a presidential candidate in a general election that any of us can remember.” Bill Kristol (who is a borderline right-wing loon) called Romney’s comments “arrogant and stupid.” Rich Lowry of the National Review reacted this way: “The overall impression of Romney at this event is of someone who overhead some conservative cocktail chatter and maybe read a conservative blog or two, and is thoughtlessly repeating back what he heard and read.” Even Linda McMahon, the pro wrestling magnate and Republican candidate for Senate in Connecticut, rejected Romney’s comments, saying that “I know that the vast majority of those who rely on government are not in that situation because they want to be.” There’s a roundup of additional right-wing reaction in this post– entitled “Conservatives Agree: Romney’s Wrong” – at the Weekly Standard by Michael Warren.
Especially well worth reading is David Brooks’s New York Times column, hilariously entitled “Thurston Howell Romney.” When one of moderate conservatism’s most prominent voices in the U.S. is comparing the Republican nominee for president to a character from Gilligan’s Island, you’ve got big trouble. Here are some choice quotes:
[Romney’s] comment suggests a few things. First, it suggests that he really doesn’t know much about the country he inhabits. Who are these freeloaders? Is it the Iraq war veteran who goes to the V.A.? Is it the student getting a loan to go to college? Is it the retiree on Social Security or Medicare?
It suggests that Romney doesn’t know much about the culture of America….
Romney’s comments also reveal that he has lost any sense of the social compact. In 1987, during Ronald Reagan’s second term, 62 percent of Republicans believed that the government has a responsibility to help those who can’t help themselves. Now, according to the Pew Research Center, only 40 percent of Republicans believe that.
The Republican Party, and apparently Mitt Romney, too, has shifted over toward a much more hyperindividualistic and atomistic social view — from the Reaganesque language of common citizenship to the libertarian language of makers and takers. There’s no way the country will trust the Republican Party to reform the welfare state if that party doesn’t have a basic commitment to provide a safety net for those who suffer for no fault of their own.
The final thing the comment suggests is that Romney knows nothing about ambition and motivation…. Ambition is fired by possibility, not by deprivation, as a tour through the world’s poorest regions makes clear….
[A]s a description of America today, Romney’s comment is a country-club fantasy. It’s what self-satisfied millionaires say to each other. It reinforces every negative view people have about Romney.
Personally, I think he’s a kind, decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he is not — some sort of cartoonish government-hater. But it scarcely matters. He’s running a depressingly inept presidential campaign.
Well said, although the passion with which Romney made his statement does make me wonder whether Brooks is correct that Romney is play-acting. Brooks often drives me crazy, but now and then he really nails it.
- This isn’t going away. Some have argued that this is just like every other little “oops” moment that is a flash in the pan, but that fades after a few days and is basically forgotten by election day. I don’t think so. Because this video is new, and very ugly, information about Romney. Honestly, it’s the first real news about Romney that we’ve had in months. And now that it’s out there, it inevitably colors everything that Romney says about economic matters. Remember, George Allen’s “macaca moment” was on August 11, and he never recovered.
- Don’t miss the video about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. This morning Mother Jones released another installment from the same fundraiser in which Romney says that “the pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish,” that “this is going to remain an unsolved problem” comparable to China and Taiwan, and that the best he could hope to do as president is “kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it.” To be sure, the Israeli/Palestinian situation is difficult. But to throw up your hands and declare that it cannot be solved unless “somehow, something will happen,” well, that just doesn’t seem very presidential to me.
oceandreams says
Stand for anything or believe anything are wrong. He believes in the superiority of rich business people and that government should exist to help him and his circle acquire more money. I agree with David that Brooks was wrong in saying Romney was play acting on this. You can see real passion from Romney when he says things like corporations are people. I’m convinced that Romney truly believes the 47% of people who don’t pay income taxes aren’t worth worrying about — except of course for the ones who are his millionaire friends who escaped paying federal income taxes.
What kind of campaign strategy writes off AND insults almost half of the electorate when they’re trailing?
centralmassdad says
I don’t think I am ready to set the airship afire just yet. So far, it seems clear that this latest “incident” is primarily offending those who are not under any circumstances potential Romney voters. And people seem to be so capable of hearing “moochers” or whatever, and not thinking “me” even if they don’t pay federal income taxes, and receive federal benefits. (“Hey, I EARNED those benefits; those moochers he is talking about didn’t.) He sure isn’t helping himself, though, and that’s for sure.
It is even possible that this takes the heat off his blunder over the attack in Libya. Which was worse, IMO.
Again, I don’t think he beleives in much besides the ambition of one Willard Mitt Romney. It is certainly fair for you guys to attack him as though he does, as you are all campaigning for the other guy, and make him suffer for this stream of own goals.
As was the case in Massachusetts, the more people know Romney, the less they seem to like him.
Ryan says
You don’t think large swaths of that 47% are Romney votes? I’d submit that there are probably more of them than there are Obama voters. At least some of them will connect the dots and be very angry about it.
centralmassdad says
I think the dynamic is, generally:
I EARNED my benefits; its those “other” moochers that are bleeding the country dry, etc., etc., etc.
Let’s remember: We must oppose this tyrannical socialist government involvement in healthcare! And don’t cut my Medicare!
So no, I don’t think this was a game-ender. It may be a setup for a game-ender, perhaps in the debates, or if he reinforces this particular screwup.
I just don’t think the “%” thing has that much in the way of legs.
HR's Kevin says
I don’t think this is a “game changer”, because the game changed weeks ago. Romney is dying the death of a thousand self inflicted cuts. This is not the first cut nor is it the last, but this is a pretty deep one nevertheless.
The fact that it is a candid video of Romney speaking in his own words makes it especially dangerous for him, because it is going to be appearing in campaign ads for weeks to come. So I do think this has “legs”.
sco says
I had this same conversation with Mrs. sco about those in the 47% who will assume that Mitt is talking about those OTHER freeloaders.
That said, those people are mostly folks who have been drinking deep of the right-wing discourse well and ‘just know’ that the Democratic base is 100% people on the govt dole. The people who are most likely to react poorly to this are folks who are non-ideological voters who like Obama personally, but think that Mitt is just the kind of can-do businessman that can get us out of this mess. The more Mitt acts like a right-wing ideologue, the less likely these people are to vote for him. How many of these voters are there? All it takes is enough to swing Ohio.
Ryan says
I think I misunderstood you above. I get how one could think those in the ‘47%’ who support Romney would somehow think he’s talking about someone else, but ultimately I think voters are a little more sophisticated than most people give credit for and a lot of those people will figure it out… if only because it’s making so much news that the 47% figure itself is being fully explained.
Plus, there are still a lot of Republicans or Republican leaners out there who are genuinely nice people and may trend conservative, but don’t want any part of the vitriol Romney is fuming in the video. A good chunk of them are going to be so disgusted with Romney by the end of this election by stuff like this video and his Libyan comments that they’re either going to vote Obama or stay home.
kbusch says
On the famous tape, Romney says:
That means he will be on the look out for other foreign policy events at which he can advertize his incompetence.
Mark L. Bail says
where I turn on MSNBC. Just for laughs. There’s no good reason to watch several hours straight of talking heads talking about Romney’s self-revealing comments. It is what it is. I don’t need Chris Matthews or Al Sharpton to tell me what it is. But it’s funny. It will, however, be worth watching Stewart and Colbert.
There are a lot of independents who are not as temperate as CMD. A lot of people, including Republicans, have been holding their noses and planning to vote for Mitt. Many will switch to Obama, many will write someone in. This statement, and Mother Jones has more coming, is Mitt’s Palin moment.
centralmassdad says
McCain went you-know-whats up when he “suspended” his campaign to address the financial crisis, and then pretty much wound up seeming like Admiral Stickdale: “Umm. Well, I got nuthin’.”
I am not trying to minimize this video. It is a big fumble for Romney, made worse by the panicky press conference.
I just don’t think that it is game over. There are too many things: any/every Middle Eastern country, Iran, Isreal, Syria, the Euro, China/Japan, that could go sideways over the next few weeks to send this the other way. Obama should be having the really bad week right now– no security in Benghazi, and murky reports that there was a warning from the Libyan government– but is skating, almost entirely because Romney has spent the last five days dramatically pooping his pants. Can’t count on Romney doing a Seamus to bail you out next time.
David says
are among my favorites ever posted on BMG. Well done, sir. 😀
Ryan says
almost his entire hour was one big laughathon tonight. Just the theatrics of his dialog made it worth it, and he brought on funny guests like Anna Marie Cox who know exactly what to do with this material.
Bob Neer says
You read a lot into “the passion with which Romney made his statement.” To me, his offensive comment (I personally pay income taxes, probably at a higher rate than him, and I voted for Obama, so screw you Mitt Romney) is completely of a piece with his say-anything approach to health care policy, foreign policy, etc. What he said was what he thought the rich guys at the fundraiser wanted to hear. I agree with Brooks and CMD that the consistent piece is Romney’s ambition (not to mention his desire to surpass his Dad). And I agree with CMD, and I suspect everyone else on this blog, that it is way too soon to call the election.
kbusch says
The Romney campaign plan so far has been to put the focus on the economy. “We win if we talk about the economy.” As a result, they’ve avoided talking about how sincerely nice Mitt Romney was in the Mormon community. They’ve also avoided talking about their policy plans because eliminating Medicaid’s support for nursing homes, shifting huge medical costs onto states and seniors, and whittling down social security will lose them all but their kool aid drinkers.
That’s why they didn’t define themselves. And now that they are being defined against their will, it looks quite ugly.
It was quite possibly impossible to run a competent campaign if it has to consist of 3 parts subterfuge and 1 part mendacity. It may be structural not a personal failing of the Executive Who Failed.
centralmassdad says
I think that you are almost certainly right. 3 parts subterfuge plus 1 part mendacity is essentially the only way one could (i) win the GOP nomination; and (ii) have a shot in the general.
Unfortunately, I don’t think that this campaign is going to break the GOP fever. Rather, it will seem like the Kerry campaign– “we were too worried about “electability” and not enough about our dearly held core values.” What the GOP and the country needed was a GOP candidate to confront the crazification of their party, who could then be poised to redirect the party after crazy national candidates produce wrack, ruin, and lost elections.
Romney, circa 2003, was an ideal guy to accomplish this, and so it is a bit sad to see what he has made of himself for the last decade.
Mr. Lynne says
… has no hope of being ‘poised to redirect’ anything.
centralmassdad says
I think it is pretty clear that he isn’t the guy, and likely never was. But the potential was there, and the opportunity he squandered is depressing.
Mr. Lynne says
… back then as well. Many just didn’t know it because his political history as a candidate was sparse (obviously), although a GOPer declaring to be left of Teddy was probably a big clue.
As such, there was no potential Or rather, there was a lot of potential something but it wasn’t going to be leadership.
whosmindingdemint says
gotta sweep ’em for bugs first.
kbusch says
We have that on good authority from Senator Reid.
centralmassdad says
Gallup is showing the Obama post-convention bounce to have been fleeting, and the national polls still very close indeed.
The share of the poll indicating support for Obama is amusing.