Whelp, that's it for Mittens

http://swampland.time.com/2012/09/17/video-captures-uncensored-mitt-romney-at-fundraiser/

Video from a Mittens fundraiser earlier this year, leaked to Mother Jones and now all over the place. It's full of great nuggets, but this is the death blow:

There's no way to spin this. He out and out called half of the American people government-dependent leeches, and equated paying no income taxes with living off the handouts of the wealthy. It's shameful, insulting and portrays him as exactly what he is.

He's finished.

CRAP. Hate making typos. Shamefully fixed.

Having heard of some of the other things Brits eat, not sure if typo.

Meh. Seems pretty weak to me.

Anyway, he's already slit his own throat over the whole Ambassador Stevens situation.

And yet the reality still remains that hardly anyone that's voting Romney is actually voting for Romney, but rather against Obama.

Where was he wrong? They are leeches.

I don't think these statements will change much about the race, frankly.

A) A large amount of people probably agree that 47 percent of the American public are leeches.
B) Another large amount of people will think or say that Romney misspoke, or was exaggerating or that something else was going on
C) Another large amount of people won't hear about this at all.
D) And finally, there is a huge amount of people who would vote against Obama regardless of what Romney does (just as there are a large number of people who would vote against Romney regardless of what Obama might do.)

Meh, this is a tiny positive for the Romney effort. At least he's saying something for a change. Fuckin stealth campaign that he's running is for pussies. Not surprised that what he said might upset the pussies, just surprised that Romney actually said something other than 'I'm not Obama.'

Now see, NOW is the time for the sloganeers to churn out "we are the 47%!!!", merchandise.

That 99% shit was biting off too much.

It's all in the timing.

There are definitely people who are dependent on the government and entitled and all that.

I don't think that it's likely that they come anywhere close to 47 percent of the population.

Nor are they exclusively Obama voters. If you're defining "leech" as anyone who regularly gets a government subsidy of some sort, from unemployment to welfare, there are plenty of Republican voters in that camp.

Also, trying to convince someone to switch from supporting Obama to you might be a little tougher when you call most Obama voters leeches.

Bailout bankers make up 47% of the population, and are Democrats?
Well, this is news to me.
Tell me more.

This might hurt Romney with independents, but the Republicans themselves have no sense of shame, so they'll likely stand behind him.

They'll probably even like him more now.

Which is usually a terrible idea. If you vote for someone based on the idea that they're not the other guy, you're going to end up doing it again next election, because you didn't take the time to find out what that "lesser of two evils" really represented.

"John, why are you eating these tampered vicodin?"
"Because they're not broccoli, and I hate broccoli!"
"That's going to kill you!"
"You don't know for sure! At least it's not broccoli!"

It's just stupid.

If you think that nearly half of all Americans make their living off the government teat, you're insane.

I haven't seen any Mitt Romney bumper stickers. Granted, I live in California, but you'd figure he'd get 30-40 percent of the vote right?

What I do see are Obama bumper stickers and anti-Obama bumper stickers. This really does suggest people are voting for Obama or Not Obama.

And we all know how that worked for Not Bush in 2004.

Over 100 million US residents on welfare
http://rt.com/usa/news/million-us-residents-welfare-268/

ok so it's 30+ % not 47. You win.

Video's gone viral.

I would not be surprised if a majority of that 47% vote Republican this year IMHO. A large amount of those who pay no income tax are elderly, who tilt right.

I don't really think it will make a difference, to be honest.

Again, the whole election essentially comes down to moderates/independents in the swing states.

Everyone else already knows who they are gonna vote for, or their vote doesn't matter anyway.

Most moderates/independents ignore the soundbites and the back-and-forth attacks between the candidates and look more at which issues are more important to them and who stands where on those issues.

For example, I generally agree with his statement that a number of Obama voters are probably hoping for continued government welfare. In fact I know of people who admit that outright. On the other hand, I don't think the percentage is as high as Romney says it is... he is engaging in hyperbole, just like Obama.

This back-and-forth goes on with every election and it is always the same stuff. It isn't gonna really matter much.

Well, I hope they're comfortable with being called leeches.

It worked great for Not Bush in 2008 though!!

He even got a Nobel Prize for being Not Bush!

Let us not forget Obama behind closed doors spoke poorly of people who cling to their guns and religion and antipathy for people of different races. and he won handily.

Oh come on. It was a big thing when it happened...but it wasn't behind closed doors:

[YT="Obama talks"]DTxXUufI3jA[/YT]

So it was right out there in the open, not "Nudge-nudge, wink-wink, this is what we really think of the constituency, bwahahahahaha!"

Skrain made it sound as if he had some Super Secret Information. Should have known better...

Where's the outrage again?..they are freeloaders Romney told the truth...I mean we have a dead Ambassador killed in the Middle East because of Obama's blunders..but let's forget about that and worry about Romney's remarks.

Well, at least you went back and edited the "drug around" part.

I thought Not Bush lost in 2008 for bringing in a crazy uneducated woman as his running mate.