PLANK SEPTEMBER 17, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Hmm, maybe it isn’t too early to declare Romney’s candidacy dead after all. Mother Jones has just unearthed a video of Romney, at a fundraiser earlier this year, saying:
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. Forty-seven percent of Americans [quibble: it’s actually 46 percent] pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn’t connect. So he’ll be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich. I mean, that’s what they sell every four years. And so my job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives. What I have to is convince the five to ten percent in the center that are independents, that are thoughtful, that look at voting one way or the other depending upon in some cases emotion, whether they like the guy or not.
This video clarifies some terminology that Romney has used elsewhere.
1.) “Obama’s base.” Romney caught hell from me, Tom Edsall, and some others last month when he demagogued an offer by the Obama administration to allow states to find new ways to fulfill the work requirement in the welfare-reform law. It sure looked like Romney was reaching into the Willie Horton race-baiting playbook. One of the things that set me off was that Romney told USA Today that Obama had approved the policy in order to “shore up his base.” I read that to mean Romney was saying people on welfare constitute Obama’s base, and that sounded to me like an ugly racial slur. (As I explained in my earlier item, there aren't enough people on welfare to constitute a plausible electoral base for anyone; the entire caseload’s about two million people.) Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul, however, said that Romney wasn’t referring to welfare recipients as Obama’s base; he was referring to liberals as his base. But the above comments make clear that Romney meant what it sounded at the time that he meant: welfare recipients (along with lower-income people who work but have the temerity not to earn enough to pay income tax) are Obama's base.
2.) “Broaden the tax base.” Romney, when he talks about his tax plan (the one he’s lately stopped talking about) uses the phrase “broaden the tax base” to describe how he's going to pay for 20 percent cuts on all marginal rates, elimination of the inheritance tax, and a scaling back of investment taxes, including the capital gains tax. He says he’ll eliminate tax deductions and exclusions to pay for all that, but he’d have to raise so much revenue that he’d have to go after some pretty popular ones, like the mortgage interest deduction and the health care exclusion. Romney has dealt with this difficulty by refusing to say which tax breaks he’d eliminate. Romney has more or less given up trying to explain how he can implement his tax plan without raising taxes on “middle class” incomes below a threshold of $200,000 to $250,000 (a calculation at odds even with a highly sympathetic analysis by Harvard’s Martin Feldstein).
But what if Romney has other ideas about “broadening the base”? The phrase, as I explained in April, is more typically used by Republicans to describe putting Americans who earn too little to pay income tax—“lucky duckies,” in the Dickensian parlance of the Wall Street Journal editorial page—back onto the rolls. This idea has become increasingly respectable within the GOP, and in April House Majority Leader Eric Cantor attracted surprisingly little attention when he declared himself in favor of it. (If Grover Norquist has weighed in on whether a lucky ducky tax would violate his taxpayer protection pledge, I have yet to hear it. Perhaps he would argue that it protects taxpayers, not non-taxpayers, though of course the working poor still pay plenty of payroll tax.)
This GOP meme—which Romney has yet to endorse publicly, but seems to be endorsing here—is, among other things, a betrayal of a conservative invention: the Earned Income Tax Credit. The EITC was created by Sen. Russell Long D., La. (who in spite of being Huey Long’s son was pretty conservative); greatly expanded under Ronald Reagan; and then expanded yet again under Bill Clinton. The idea was that you should reward the “deserving” working poor, as opposed to the un-deserving poor on welfare. But after Clinton ended “welfare as we know it” in 1996 it got harder to scapegoat welfare recipients. So conservatives decided, what the hell, there are no deserving poor. As Romney says in the video above, poor folks who pay no taxes (on income earned from—remember—working!) don’t “take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” Shame on him.
(One conservative who, to his great credit, doesn't buy into this crap, and the stupid political “tipping point” analysis that goes with it, is Ramesh Ponnuru of National Review.)
42 comments
Romney's attack on food entitlements in this clip, re: food stamps is ridiculous. Providing food to the poor is morally right, and is great economic policy as well. It is a classic automatic stabilizer that provides fiscal stimulus as an economy turns down, without the input of officialdom. Conservatives who are critical of the notion that government can effectively manage economic growth because of the slowness of the legislative process should nonetheless support food stamps because they don't require legislative action. They work immediately. This attack is especially unconscionable given the fact that Romney blames unemployment on the president, not on the personalities of the unemployed. Romney is a heartless fool.
- rusty
September 17, 2012 at 8:23pm
Has this man no sense of responsibility to America as a whole? Has his Republicanism (or Mormonism) made him such an elitist, that he seriously doesn't value anyone non-elite? The big danger of the Republicans has been their disdain for safety-nets. Because then their policies create an enormous need for safety-nets (bank-bailouts, Government loans) which they've under-funded. This is how we get the fabled "Business Cycle" in the first place. But it's enormously destructive for the country. Surely the electorate can see this, even if Romney himself is delusional about it.
- AllanL5
September 17, 2012 at 8:41pm
Romney blows me away. He's claiming that all Obama voters are "dependent on the government," think of ourselves as victims, so forth - in fact Romney's most solid demographic is over 65 and they're very likely on Social Security, da bums. And Medicare! Memo to seniors: watch out, this guy doesn't like you. Also, Red State voters - hello? Romney doesn't like you either, tending to be poor, getting into tornadoes, hurricanes and floods - maybe needing FEMA, you better vote for Obama, you bums, because Romney doesn't like you. Minimum wage workers, Walmart shoppers, his job isn't to worry about YOU. This guy makes me sick. Why does he want to be President?
- Sophia
September 17, 2012 at 8:52pm
Yes, AllanL5 is right. He's just insulted America. I wonder if he's ever worked a real job? Hard, physical, minimum wage job? I'd be extremely surprised. A lot of poor people work their asses off. And many lower income people pay a higher tax rate than Romney. He brags about paying 13%? Oh man - Also, we ALL pay taxes. Poor people pay their landlord's property taxes ffs. And we all pay sales taxes, which disproportionately affect the less wealthy. And so forth. But then, Romney's job isn't to care about us anyway. I sure hope some of those working class voters hear this message from Herr Romney, loud and clear.
- Sophia
September 17, 2012 at 8:57pm
The Atlantic just showed a map that says that the 10 states with the most percent of zero-tax payers are all red, and the 10 states wih the least percent of zero-tax payers are all blue. Not only is he a jerk, he's a lying jerk. And the nerve - he boasts about how he has taken every legal advantage available to him when paying his taxes, and yet denigrates other who do the same. The man truly has no shame.
- austinous
September 17, 2012 at 10:02pm
Is this savage attack on Romney helpful? Is name calling ever helpful? No one in public life can escape name calling. Let's look at Susan Rice. If you saw her on the Sunday talk shows, either she is taking the heat for BHO or she is ill-informed: the fifteen minute movie caused spontaneous rioting in the Middle East. Is she serious? That sounds like something W. would say at news conference. We should look at the broad questions: do you want a government controlled economy and life or do you want a relatively unrestrained private sector? Romney represents the minimalist government position and Obama represents the European government model. The pros and cons of each position should be debated. Another question: has BHO made life in America better; will WMR do better? Meanwhile, if it weren't for Ben Bernanke, the economy would have negative growth. So, what has nice guy BHO done for anyone anyway?
- john336
September 17, 2012 at 10:53pm
"Is this savage attack on Romney helpful? [italics mine]" Sucks to be wrong, john336, don't it? The only attack in evidence here, john336, is Romney's self-inflicted assault on his own electoral chances. And, yes, anything that puts a stake through the heart of Romney's candidacy and through puerile philosophy of selfishness that underpins it is most helpful indeed.
- AaronW
September 17, 2012 at 11:29pm
ok john, explain why food stamps are bad economic policy.
- rusty
September 17, 2012 at 11:37pm
John European government model? You mean the Swedish, Danish, German, Dutch model that combined social programs with prudent spending, stready growth and solid economic performance? You're unreal man .... R
- icarus-r
September 18, 2012 at 12:39am
John336 said: "We should look at the broad questions" I'm trying to look at the broader picture here, but there is this giant asshole filling the entire frame. I would love it if the election could be about policy and governing philosophy, but Romney keeps making himself the topic of conversation through his incompetence, his mendacity, and now his disdain for much of the American public.
- Fishpeddler
September 18, 2012 at 12:49am
Namecalling? This person, Mr. Romney, is running for President of the US and he's just declared that 47% of us might as well as be dead for all he cares. He says senior citizens, disabled people, veterans, people making under $20,000 a year working hard, minimum wage jobs, students, and people who've become unemployed due to the recession are all bums and expendable and don't want to take care of themselves. I would say namecalling is the least of our worries. PS you wanna see a savage attack? We, the people, have been attacked and you are claiming this is a savage attack? Try not being able to feed your kids on your Walmart pay, or going without sufficient heat, or choosing between medicine and food. This is the result of vulture capitalism, at which Mr. Romney excelled, and destructive skewing of wealth and income to a very few Americans. By the way, maybe this person, Romney, shouldn't be talking too much about income taxes. Just sayin'.
- Sophia
September 18, 2012 at 1:01am
We know that republicans consider fetuses people. Are they included in the 47%?
- miceelf
September 18, 2012 at 6:37am
Cass Sustein, a smart guy, has an op/ed in today's NYT about "biased assimilation", in which he explains that people dismiss information that would falsify their convictions. True enough, as I don't doubt few would change their convictions about abortion, same sex marriage, or the death penalty if they were to hear information that might conflict with their convictions. Viewed from this perspective, which Sustein does, there's little to be done to bridge the partisan gap; Sustein suggests there are "validators", such as the appearance of the person providing the conflicting information, that can make the difference. Sustein misses an essential point about people: while people may disagree about some issues, they agree about many others. Romney's comments about the 47% highlight this phenomenon and hos successful candidates bridge the partisan gap. No, it's not by providing information on issues that separate people, but by providing information that bring people together. Indeed, Republican candidates are typically very good at it. Sure, they inspire the base with appeals to hot button issues like abortion, but what wins elections for Republicans are messages that cross the partisan divide, like patriotism, children, and security. Even though the candidate and her listeners may be far apart on certain issues doesn't mean they are far apart on all issues; it's the candidate who focuses her message on the issues that overlap who can win. It remains to be seen, but the risk to Romney is that his comments about the 47% could cause those 47% to dismiss Romney's message even about issues that overlap.
- rayward
September 18, 2012 at 7:22am
Mitt Romney promises that, if elected, he will dutifully represent only some of the people.
- Nusholtz
September 18, 2012 at 7:48am
Until a month ago, I would have given Obama two stars as a president and four stars as a demagogue. Now, with his foreign policy going up in flames in the Middle East, and Obama running a presidential campaign based on pure pandering (free birth control, cheap student loans) and demogoguery (the imaginary Republican "war on women," attacking Chinese trade and current policies after having denounced Romney for his attacks on the Chinese), I would give Obama one star as president and five stars as a demagogue. I do not believe in "Ryanomics" but I would agree with the GOP senate leader Mitch McConnell that the first thing we need to do to save the country is to make Barack Obama a one term president.
- Spengler47
September 18, 2012 at 8:46am
More than that. In order to balance the budget, while providing additional tax cuts to the wealthy ("job creators"), and increasing the military (who are we fighting with all that money?) he's going to have to reduce spending elsewhere. Apparently "entitlements" has finally been understood by the MSM to mean "Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid", and so he can't SAY he'll cut entitlements. But guess what is making the 47% lazy? Entitlements. Guess what Ryan's job in 2004 was? Figuring out Bush-II's plan to privatize Social Security. So this is the first step toward disenfranchising the needy in America, "for their own good". THAT is why he calls them lazy freeloaders.
- AllanL5
September 18, 2012 at 8:54am
Being that there is a lot more video to be released at this point I wouldn't be surprised if Jerry Sandusky shows up on that video and the two discuss how much they dig children.
- blackton
September 18, 2012 at 9:45am
This just in, secret video shows Romney calling the Slaves in the south during the pre civil war period "no good layabout moochers who paid not one penny in any taxes whatsoever and that to rectify this past injustice black people will now have to retroactively pay for those lost taxes and if they don't have the money have to make up for it with labor."
- blackton
September 18, 2012 at 9:47am
Spengler: "his foreign policy going up in flames in the Middle East" You mean the democracy project that neo-con Republicans were taking credit for, as the Arab Spring unfolded? "Obama running a presidential campaign based on pure pandering (free birth control, cheap student loans)" So you do not agree with cheap student loans. Cool, dude. I guess, like Santorum, you think it is being a snob to encourage young people to improve their skills through post-secondary education and to ensure that they are not crippled financially while they are studying. There is policy merit in your position. Oh what was that about pandering? Because, of course, Ryan-Romney's attacks on Obama on the alleged Medicare "cuts" and how they will "restore" them is not pandering. Jeez man - I mean, criticise Obama all you want. But be real.
- icarus-r
September 18, 2012 at 10:18am
john336: "We should look at the broad questions: do you want a government controlled economy and life or do you want a relatively unrestrained private sector?" We should look at false choices. There is no conflict between government regulation where the market doesn't work very well (health care) and a robust private sector. I don't think the Canadians, Brits, Germans, or Australians are suffering a dearth of economic freedom.
- dsimon
September 18, 2012 at 10:18am
I think there needs to be a "I am the 47%" and "I am the 53%" ad. In the first, you have a series of people - white working class, seniors, vets, students - who talk about not paying federal income tax, but paying more in social security deductions than Romney paid in taxes. With Obama concluding, 'The President of the United States has to worry about 100% of Americans'. Or something along those lines. The 53% ad would have a brother and sister, or a senior parent and a working child, with the 53% guy or woman saying, "don't pit me against my senior mother." Or something like that. I mean, they should not go on the attack on this. Here is the chance to skewer by being totally positive.
- icarus-r
September 18, 2012 at 10:29am
"do you want a government controlled economy" Seriously dude. What do you mean? Where in the Western world does the government "control" the economy, and to the extent it does - central banks, banking regulation and such like - note which parts you disagree with. Labour regulations? Occupational health and safety? Environmental regulation? I mean, it's OK if you want to return America to Lochner days, but instead saying silly generalities like that, be specific. And as dsimon pointed out, some of the most heavily regulated economies are among the most dynamic.
- icarus-r
September 18, 2012 at 10:33am
Somewhere in that audience was a Chanel clad trophy wife wondering "47 percent of Americans are black?"
- dubyadoubte
September 18, 2012 at 10:50am
The "relatively unrestrained private sector" brought you Bain Capital buying out companies, bankrupting them, then outsourcing them. It brought you the 2008 CDO meltdown. It's bringing you contaminated wells in Fracking zones, oil spills, loosened air pollution standards, unsafe coal mines. The only entity large and powerful enough to restrain the private sector enough to follow the rules IS the Federal Government. And the Federal Government answers to us, while the private sector answers only to its CEO and board of directors.
- AllanL5
September 18, 2012 at 11:12am
But yes, it is much too early to declare the Romney candidacy dead. For one thing, if you declare it dead NOW, who's going to go to the polls in November? Republicans, that's who. And Romney's going to be around for the next 6 weeks, whatever happens. By November, this issue could be "yeah, yeah, he mis-spoke, 47% hah, hah, that was weeks ago. But what has Obama done for you lately?"
- AllanL5
September 18, 2012 at 11:16am
Hey, John336. Romney is a fucking asshole, a real first-class shit. I only regret that it is too late for me to cast the first stone.
- roidubouloi
September 18, 2012 at 11:47am
As much as I respect Timothy Noah and like his writing, articles like this worry me. Simply as a factual matter, no, it's way too early to declare Romney's candidacy dead. All sorts of things can happen, not least regarding voter suppression and the Right's financial advantage, to make that assumption. Plus the polls show Obama with only a narrow lead even after all of these Romney fumbles. But most of all, writing him off easily translates into overconfidence that means fewer Obama supporters will vote, donate time or money, etc., which obviously hurts Obama but also undermines down-ticket Dems in close races. In other words, this article could constitute part of a larger meme that becomes a self-defeating prophecy.
- Thunderroad
September 18, 2012 at 11:52am
A quibble, maybe more: Romney and his donors haven't decided that there are no deserving poor. The deserving poor are those who deserve to be poor. And anyone who is poor deserves to be poor.
- bMorHon
September 18, 2012 at 11:56am
"I am rich and increased with goods and have need of nothing." Romney- embodying the villians in Christ's parables: priceless.
- miceelf
September 18, 2012 at 12:02pm
What Thunder said.
- ironyroad
September 18, 2012 at 1:01pm
All right, I'm an admitted paranoid, but Thunderroad's warning about overconfidence resonated with me. Unpredictable things happen, October surprises happen. I'm superstitious about doing a victory lap when the contest is still on. So I'm still contributing to Obama's campaign (also to Elizabeth Warren's), still making those phone calls. Even if things are looking good at this moment, I'd rather be sure than sorry.
- JackR
September 18, 2012 at 1:25pm
Yup. Chicken, egg, hatch, Lee Atwater, that kind or thing.
- icarus-r
September 18, 2012 at 1:37pm
Romney should just make this his campaign song. Except that he should change the chorus to “Kill the 47%”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgpa7wEAz7I Efficiency and progress is ours once more Now that we have the Neutron bomb It's nice and quick and clean and gets things done Away with excess enemy But no less value to property No sense in war but perfect sense at home: The sun beams down on a brand new day No more welfare tax to pay Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light Jobless millions whisked away At last we have more room to play All systems go to kill the poor tonight Gonna Kill kill kill kill Kill the poor: Tonight Behold the sparkle of champagne The crime rate's gone Feel free again O' life's a dream with you, Miss Lily White Jane Fonda on the screen today Convinced the liberals it's okay So let's get dressed and dance away the night While they: Kill kill kill kill Kill the poor: Tonight
- NateG
September 18, 2012 at 1:40pm
What I can't understand is that one of the few effective lines from the Republican Convention was Ann Romney's assurance that her Mitt would do the hard work necessary and never fail us. This stream of gaffs, miscalculations and incomplete plans that are irreconcilable with reality, makes me doubt his competence and wonder when he is going to start doing all that hard work. The man has been running for president for 6 years now. Why is he still making easily avoided mistakes?
- aduncanson
September 18, 2012 at 2:09pm
Blame it on his Mormon upbringing which teaches hard work, self reliance and support from family, friends and religion with government as a last, rather than first, resort when difficulties arise. An alien notion upon which no nation can prosper.
- rvogel
September 18, 2012 at 2:26pm
I've tried to keep an even hand in observing Romney and making judgments about him, noting what I thought were weaknesses and strength where they appeared and not wanting to imfantilizie myself in demonizing, the latter which I still don't want to do. The tired, trite joke (via Kinsley) of course is in politics a gaffe is when you say publicly what's really on your mind. I woke up not knowing about the 47% comment. I've since heard it and have seen some reporting on it and this comment, as things now stand, things can change, fucks up any chance of Romney had of winning, methinks. Obama has horseshoes up his ass. What a *political* bonehead and shmuck he's running against!
- basman
September 18, 2012 at 2:55pm
Just for the record, I don't really think Romney's campaign is dead. That first sentence is an ironic reference to a post I wrote earlier in the day saying it was too early to say Romney's campaign is dead. However: It just got a lot harder for Romney to get himself elected. And it wasn't particularly easy before.
- Timothy Noah
September 18, 2012 at 3:08pm
...However: It just got a lot harder for Romney to get himself elected. And it wasn't particularly easy before.... Good way to put it: fair and balanced.
- basman
September 18, 2012 at 3:18pm
Spengler47, Since when is "free birth control and cheap student loans" pandering on Obama's part? You got something against population control and education? Perhaps you want to see women barefoot, illiterate, and pregnant. Maybe because, with a little help at the polls, they would then put their X on the Republican side of the ballot? And Obama's foreign policy is going up in flames in the Middle East? Tell me in specific terms how Romney would have stopped the reaction of mobs of religious fanatics to a video. Perhaps he would have circulated his own video before the incidents calling them "jobless bums." Yeah, that's the ticket.
- magboy47.
September 18, 2012 at 3:53pm
Two reasons I subscribe to TNR is the high quality of the writing, and a chance to see how the left thinks. The left does itself no good when it attacks its opponents using language that is banned from radio and television, and when it can not control its vitriol for conservatives and Republicans. There must be tolerance for opposing viewpoints. When intolerance becomes extreme, violence is the next step.
- john336
September 18, 2012 at 5:16pm
"Just for the record, I don't really think Romney's campaign is dead. That first sentence is an ironic reference to a post I wrote earlier in the day saying it was too early to say Romney's campaign is dead. However: It just got a lot harder for Romney to get himself elected. And it wasn't particularly easy before." Thanks for the clarification, TN.
- Thunderroad
September 18, 2012 at 7:41pm
Tell it to the Tea party and the rest of the wacko reactionaries and conservatives, John. Have you ever listened to conservative talk radio? Do you have any concept of the vicious lies and insults constantly directed by your crowd at even the most moderate elements of the left? The swill of lies that they circulate over and over again about Obama? There is absolutely nothing comparable to this on the left. I get Human Events for the same reason you claim to get TNR, to get a regular glimpse of what those on the wacko right are saying to each other. Pretty grim. So, fuck off with your self-righteous bullshit, John336. The left really doesn't need your advice on how to succeed.
- roidubouloi
September 18, 2012 at 10:36pm