This morning on CNN, fresh off his win in Florida, Mitt Romney discussed where the focus of his campaign lies. He said,
“I’m in this race because I care about Americans. I’m not concerned about the very poor, we have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich, they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95% of Americans that are struggling.”
Soledad O’Brien incredulously asked Romney to explain why he wasn’t concerned about the very poor and Romney repeated that they fall within a safety net that provides food stamps, housing subsidies and Medicaid.
How big, exactly, is the safety net that the government provides? In a report last year, The Heritage Foundation explains:
Means-tested programs are limited to those at or below the poverty line. However, many welfare benefits go beyond this threshold to include persons who have incomes below 200 percent the poverty level, or about $44,000 per year for a family of four. Close to one-third of the U.S. population falls within this income range. A family of four at this income level would be eligible for approximately $28,000 worth of federal and state welfare benefits per year.
Compare this $28,000 to what the average middle class American receives from the government in comparable subsidies, $0. While he’s right that the government provides an enormous safety net for the poor (99.4% of whom own at least one television), the explanation he provides on welfare in this country leaves everyone to the left and right of his campaign on edge. To the left, it verifies the long held suspicion Republicans only care about people with money, callously disregarding the plight of the poor. This verification will be played over and over during a general election if Romney clinches the nomination. To the right, it verifies that Romney is as liberal as they fear, complacent with the welfare state as it currently stands.
Romney stated a truth about the welfare state that too often goes unsaid. The problem is he’s now glorified a system Americans find either insufficient or too far-reaching.
What it comes down to is what demographic one is more "concerned" about, and the systemic fraud that has stolen from ALL taxpayers he is not going to address. Audit the Bailout and Get Rid of Goldman Sachs' Money Power over Government.
For Romney to say that and then double down is beyond belief. He just handed the election to Obama. With a sound bite like that, who is the most electable now? Can we PLEASE have a brokered convention and draft someone who represents conservatives!
It was a gaffe but he didn't hand the election to Obama. What he meant by " not concerned " was not that he didn't care, but that he wasn't concerned with talking about the very poor in that context. He's going after moderates and independents, and wanted to discuss what his plans are viz-a-viz their economic situation. It's clear to anyone who watches the entire clip. Didn't he also say he wasn't concerned about the "very rich?" It's obvious he is concerned about the middle, which is where this election will be decided.
Unfortunately it doesn't matter what he meant. What matters is that after years of running for president, Romney does not know how to present conservative positions in a palatable and persuasive way. That does not bode well for his election chances.
What he said was accurate. In this country the very poor , in some states have more disposable than those who actually work. You sound very naive Do you think the misnamed very poor and their bleeding heart supporters were going to vote republican?
Its our fault, not his. A person cannot make a perfectly reasonable comment without having to worry about how the whole country will misconstrue it. If people are so stupid to believe the spin of every sound bite, then they deserve 4 more years of the worst president in history.
Ahem…apparently someone has conveniently forgotten about the 8-year fiscal nightmare that was G W Bush & Company … wherein a gigantic deeep pit was dug and because it's taking time, energy, and money to shore up the pit–even deeper than anyone imagined, so it keeps collapsing on itself–there are those who are blaming the ones doing the shoring and not those who did the digging.
As Reagan would say, "There you go again". Invoking GWB to smear conservatives doesn't work. Bush was not a conservative.
This is class warfare. He's going after the middle-class's vote and trying to get them to be resentful of the poor people.
Class warfare???? Rolling over Laughing….the biggest class warmongerer is sitting in the Oval office right now. Romney said the truth. The poor have a real safety net. Their houses are not being foreclosed upon nor are their jobs disappearing. What is disappearing is the middle class and he is 100 % right that it is they who need looking after. Plus, of course, they will decide the election!
Yes of course. But one does say these things aloud in America. My God, Chris Matthews will be standing on his desk tonight, literally screaming.
There are two benefits that middle class families get that the poor might not: mortgage interest deduction and the non-taxability of employer contributed health insurance premiums. Those don't come anywhere near $28000 though. n nWe didn't have a frank discussion about race in 2008, maybe this could spur an honest debate about poverty.
But you Neocons at Commentary, are one of the main forces who trashed on Palin, trashed on Cain and promote, effeminate, "elites" like Mittens that you New York/Boston types worship. n n2008 Redux. Low GOP turnout gives the nation Barry for five more years.
Wait — what exactly is the concern one might have for the middle class? If their houses are being foreclosed on and they're losing their jobs, well, then they'll just fall into the "very poor" category, and be handsomely taken care of! Simple. n nI say Romney should worry only about the very rich. They have the most to lose. Literally.
True but artless. Romney has to be better at extemporizing. The fight to win the prize Mitt aspires to is unforgiving of such otherwise trivial mistakes..
Wait, I thought the GOP shared the view of Ms. Mandel that the safety net didn't need to be fixed to help po' folks but that it was a bloated redistributionist machine showering the undeserving with largess to be reformed/trimmed/returned to the states. ???? So now he's down with entitlements? This guy gets his talking points from fortune cookies.
It must be exhausting for Commentary to have to carry Mitt's water each and every day.
I can't remember having read better spin. These Commentary/Contentions people are unbelievable!
The first benefit to go should be unemployment insurance. Paying people a salary to do jackcrap makes zero sense.