Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Kicking your base (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Kicking your base
Aris Katsaris
Member
Member # 888

 - posted      Profile for Aris Katsaris   Email Aris Katsaris   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
How can anyone honestly defend that as even remotely accurate or honest? Just turnout numbers alone debunk that, since that would amount to 75-80% of the total turnout from the 2008 election
Well, the Principle of Charity would suggest that if he said "47% of the people will vote for the president no matter what." he most likely meant either
"47% of the people that will actually bother to vote will vote for the president, no matter what"
or alternately
"47% of the population, if they actually bothered to vote, would vote for the president, no matter what".

There, that's two easy ways to defend the statement as honest.

It's really tempting to interpret your opponent's words in the stupidest way possible, but it only dulls your own intelligence to do so.

[ September 19, 2012, 08:24 AM: Message edited by: Aris Katsaris ]

Posts: 3318 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TCB
Member
Member # 1677

 - posted      Profile for TCB         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
JWatts said:
quote:
I think that's pretty much rose colored glasses. Liberals are going to assume Obama meant the best and conservatives are going to assume the worst. The truth is somewhere in the middle, but the comments were despicable.

And the statement Romney made will be interpreted in the opposite manner. But I think in any neutral manner, Obama's statement is far harsher.

I love this. People will evaluate these remarks differently based on their subjective points of view. But, ojectively, my point of view is correct. [Smile]

It's pretty unlikely this will negatively impact Romney. Americans have grown so accustomed to the welfare state that they don't realize how much of their lives are subsidized by it. Most old people won't think this statement applies to them, even ones who pay no income tax and receive far more in Medicare benefits than they ever paid in. I doubt most poor people in the military or the working poor think this applies to them either.

If you spend some time reading conservative blogs, you'll see that the 47% figure is used to conjure up images of vast hordes of lazy welfare recipients. It's often used by conservatives who don't know any Obama supporters and are trying to reconcile that with opinion polls. It's also sometimes used to imply that we need to cut Medicaid to get them out of their hammocks - Paul Ryan even remarks on this from time to time.

The 47% figure is highly misleading precisely because it includes all kinds of groups that we tend to think of as deserving, but that "misleading-ness" is exactly what will insulate Romney from any fallout.

Posts: 824 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
PSRT
Member
Member # 6454

 - posted      Profile for PSRT   Email PSRT   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Aris, you should perhaps read the rest of what Pyrtolin wrote, since he provided the context that makes Romney's statement either a lie or borne of ignorance that should be unforgivable in a presidential candidate.
Posts: 2152 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The impact of Romney's statements will depend on how seriously his constituents take him.

If they believe that he truly believes that those who don't pay taxes are Obama supporters, it could seriously demoralize a good part of his base. Republicans who don't pay taxes--the retired, students, the unemployed, the underemployed--would realize that their voices won't count. They will be shoved to the side, much like the Log Cabin Republicans.

This may not make them vote for Obama, but they may simply sit this election out. And if that happens, Romney is toast.

If, on the other hand, they brush it off as election year rhetoric, or simply don't realize that they are part of the group he is describing, then it will have no effect.

Time will tell.

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If the Obama campaign doesn't exploit this I'd be stunned. Romney is well on his way to making this election about him, and not in a good way.
Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
In case anyone cares anymore (this thread is so last Monday! [Smile] ), here's the full tape of the speech (with an unavoidable 2 minute or so omission in the middle).

And the link to the full transcript for those who don't want to sit through it all, or are working with an audio-visually impared computer like mine. [Smile]

[ September 19, 2012, 02:31 PM: Message edited by: Wayward Son ]

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JWatts
Member
Member # 6523

 - posted      Profile for JWatts   Email JWatts   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TCB:
JWatts said:
quote:
I think that's pretty much rose colored glasses. Liberals are going to assume Obama meant the best and conservatives are going to assume the worst. The truth is somewhere in the middle, but the comments were despicable.

And the statement Romney made will be interpreted in the opposite manner. But I think in any neutral manner, Obama's statement is far harsher.

I love this. People will evaluate these remarks differently based on their subjective points of view. But, ojectively, my point of view is correct. [Smile]
That's a rather poor interpretation of my remarks.

You'll note my phrasing:
"I think in any neutral manner, Obama's statement is far harsher." I made no claim that objectively my POV is correct. I speculated it might be.

'I think' (subjective claim) is completely different than 'I know' (objective claim).

[ September 19, 2012, 04:01 PM: Message edited by: JWatts ]

Posts: 4700 | Registered: Oct 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If that's what you meant, shouldn't you have written "[That's why] I think [from my perspective], Obama's statement is far harsher" as opposed to "But I think in any neutral manner, Obama's statement is far harsher"?

Your wording in fact did suggest that you not just believe but think that Obama's statement was objectively far harsher.

Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aris Katsaris:
quote:
How can anyone honestly defend that as even remotely accurate or honest? Just turnout numbers alone debunk that, since that would amount to 75-80% of the total turnout from the 2008 election
Well, the Principle of Charity would suggest that if he said "47% of the people will vote for the president no matter what." he most likely meant either
"47% of the people that will actually bother to vote will vote for the president, no matter what"
or alternately
"47% of the population, if they actually bothered to vote, would vote for the president, no matter what".

There, that's two easy ways to defend the statement as honest.

It's really tempting to interpret your opponent's words in the stupidest way possible, but it only dulls your own intelligence to do so.

Amen to that. US elections have often been a mind-numbing experience for that very reason.

[ September 19, 2012, 04:43 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Viking_Longship:
If the Obama campaign doesn't exploit this I'd be stunned. Romney is well on his way to making this election about him, and not in a good way.

I've never seen an election where the candidates tried so hard to lose. It's even worse than last one. Romney's throwing away his candidacy with both hands, but Obama may have him topped, with this willful hanging out the Lybian Consulate to dry, and then blaming a moviemaker.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow. Obama did nothing wrong here. If the attack was premeditated and there was inside security participation, this was very likely unpreventable. I totally don't understand the blaming the moviemaker knock, since it was obviously an additional factor.

Romney's got him beat by a country mile by invoking classism with his condescension of a fictitious entitlement class and ruling out any chance for Mideast peace, and that all came to light in a single day.

[ September 19, 2012, 05:01 PM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't see how, even with the worst interpretation of events, Obama is going to take a hit from the Lybian events. Romney and the Republicans in general can't mention it anymore without digging his hole even deeper. Absent their keeping it in the spotlight, only the internet chattering class will keep the meme active, and that will just be preaching to the choir and possibly pushing independents further towards Obama.
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
From what the polls I've seen so far are showing the Libyan crises so far hurt Romney more than Obama.

This looks like 2004 all over again except with the parties reversed.

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There's "so far" and then there's when the proverbial poop hits the fan.

That will be when the American people catch up to the big lie.

Any Foxwatchers in the house? Are they doing anything with this stuff about the Lybian government saying that the US had a 3 day warning?

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't know Pete, you live somewhere where the votes still matter. Keep the rest of us posted.
Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A real sign of an impending landslide wwould be if Gary Johnson starts to gain traction. If a subset of committed Republicans see Gov Romney are both a sure loser as well as a poor messenger, they may be motivated to cast a protest vote. And the would have the adverse effect (for Republicans) of increasing the size of a potential Obama win.
Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1