Monday, September 17, 2012

Surprise: I don't hate "off the teleprompter" Romney

So today, there was an "embarrassing" leaked video, purportedly from a fund-raising event, in which Romney talks candidly about the campaign, how he sees the voting blocs, and how he hopes to prevail in the upcoming election. The most damaging revelation, per the mainstream media, was his statement that just under half of the population will vote for Obama regardless of policies or message, because they pay no effective taxes, are dependent on the government, and care more about feeding their handout dependency than whatever is good for the country. Also of note were some comments about how the "black vote" would certainly go to Obama (presumably due to racial bias), and how the Republicans will need to win some of the "Hispanic" vote in order to contend for the election.

The media, and liberal organizations in particular, pounced on this as an example of the candidate disparaging a large section of the population, which may well be accurate. You know what, though? He's absolutely correct. Moreover, it's shockingly refreshing to have someone running for office telling the unedited/raw truth, even if it was intended to be in a private conversation.

I mean, think about it objectively, without PC glasses for a moment. We know almost 50% of the country pays no [federal income] taxes, and of course that voting block will lean heavily toward the candidate promising more handouts and big government: it's [short-sighted, short-term, and self-destructive, but still] just self-interest. I applaud those who don't contribute to the tax base but still support limited government, but understand that you are vastly outnumbered by people heavily dependent on the government, by choice or by necessity, and that section of the population overwhelmingly votes Democrat. This is just one of the ways the government controls people: get them dependent, then they will let you rule them in exchange for more boons. For example, you can bet that the vast majority of union workers vote for Obama, and for good reason (he gave them GM as a reward for his first term).

As for the black vote, of course that's going to Obama. It may be the harsh truth which is verboten, but black people are often more racist than other races (in the sense of favoring race over other qualifications). For example, the NAACP is a racial-preference organization; the black equivalent of the KKK (minus the overt calls for violence against other races, but with a heck of a lot more political influence). It would be rare to hear a white person scolded for voting for Obama because that would be "turning his back on his people", yet that was a common refrain in the last election for black people speaking out against Obama. The harsh truth is that racism is alive and well in America, and as a result Obama will have 95%+ of the black vote, no matter what his policies or beliefs are.

The Hispanic vote will be a battleground, but if we're telling the truth, most of it will go to Obama as well. Why? Well, because lots of Hispanic voters have many friends and acquaintances who are in the US illegally (or are so themselves), breaking the laws of this country regularly and often with impunity. The fact is that the Democratic party is more accommodating to illegal aliens, more willing to ignore or subvert the laws of the United States, and more willing to give handouts to those who happen to be inside the borders, laws be damned. They will get the majority of the Hispanic votes, especially from those who do not pay taxes, do not run [legal] businesses, and/or take advantage of the social safety nets of the US. It may not be a pleasant thought, but it's the truth, and I kinda respect Romney for actually kinda saying it.

Will this leak cost Romney the election? I doubt it. As he observed, the election will come down to the 8% or so who are undecided, the small section of the population who don't vote purely based on either religious views, or [unenlightened] self-interest. Those people are less likely to recoil at admissions of the truth, or be swayed by the media's enthusiastic attempt to bash Romney with it. Will it help Romney? Perhaps a little; it's surprisingly refreshing to see a little beyond the polished, controlled, bland, and utterly uninteresting facade of Obama-lite and Obama-bashing which Romney's campaign managers carefully present at every appearance. At the end of the day, it's hard to see this swaying the election one way or the other, but it's interesting to get a glimpse of perhaps a little of the "real" Romney, and find myself less repulsed than from the candidate.

1 comment:

  1. I thought the comment was perfectly reasonable. Even considering honest hard-working people only, it makes sense that people who don't currently pay income taxes won't pay too much attention the issue of tax cuts. People have thousands of things to deal with in life, and most people don't have time for issues that don't affect them. So it makes sense to me that income taxes won't be a top issue for the half the population that doesn't pay them. Maybe some of them are poised to pay income taxes in future years, remember paying them before they retired, or have relatives who pay them; but I agree income taxes aren't logically a top issue for those who don't pay them.

    I don't think there's a plan to get people dependent on the gov't to control them, but it happens. Now that the gov't is more involved in healthcare, for example, all kinds of issues like contraception, mammograms, and the merits of complementary and alternative medicine that previously would have been personal choices are now legitimate topics for political debate.

    To my knowledge what you said about race is wrong. People with very dark skin tend to vote Democrat by a decent margin regardless of the candidates' skin color.

    I don't agree that Democrats are more accommodating to undocumented workers. It seems like both parties agree on just looking the other way on the issue b/c it's easier than taking a stand for either a) deporting them or b) creating a way for them to work here legally. I'm not talking about which option is better. I'm saying Dems and GOP are both in favor of option c: ignoring the issue.

    This issue of whether this hurts Romney is moot IMHO b/c his sleazy demeanor hurts him far worse. That's not at all a fair way to judge him. But just on appearance, Romney reminds me of some sales person selling insurance or debentures. Obama reminds me of a professor. People trust a professor more than a sleazy salesman, so the swing vote will go to Obama and reelect him.