"47% in US are 'takers'/see selves as victims" What does this say about Mitt?

The problem with his comments is, he is pretty much making it sound like if he gets elected, he will only be looking out for the people that voted for him. The the other problem with that comment is there are many people on both sides of the political spectrum that are in than 47 percent. One more thing is, since when is it bad for people to want their government to make sure food, housing, and healthcare are affordable. NOT FREE, just affordable for everyone who works. Romney just comes off as spoiled rich guy that has never had to struggle a day in is life. Then he blames Americans for being dependent, when he is the one that has been gaming the system. Still haven't seen your taxes Mr Romney and why do you have so many off shore bank accounts? Who is the Hypocrite here? Lead by example Mr. Romney.

It's no surprise to me as this is what I expect from a Conservative Republican as they all think of this about black people and immigrants to the U.S, I respect Obama because he actually understands people and where they come from. You also gotta understand Romney comes from a rich background and doesn't know what it's like to be poor, his wife never worked a day in her life. and for him to say that Americans depends on the Government, well who doesn't ?, times are hard. During the Great Depression, you saw long lines of people standing outside of religious places just to get something to eat. So I don't quite understand Romney, if he truly believes that if he was poor he would not be able to depend on anyone is just not connecting with the regular American.

His campaign is imploding. He has done a great job alienating huge blocks of voters over the past couple of months. I wonder if he truly is trying to win the election. doesn't look like it to me.

There is no way that 47% of Americans are victims or want things for free. There are too many people working or looking for a decent job that want to accomplish the American dream of owning their own home and being able to pay the bills. This is the way he feels and he is totally wrong. I worked all my life and am considered middle class. I worked for 32 years raising two girls on my own. The only time I collected unemployment was when I lost my job all due to 9/11. I was a survior of that horrific day. I found a job within a year and proceeded to work never going on welfare or collecting food stamps. I never wanted a handout. Now I'm retired living a great life with money in the bank and thankfully good health. Mitt Romney has no real clue of the working class people of America. Mainly because he is too rich and could care less about the poor or middle class. He is only interested in the rich people and how he can get them richer.

I say that being rich, Mitt doesn't have a clue what the middle class and poor see themselves as. Of these 47 percent, some are poor and takers, some are poor and fighters, some are poor and "victims", some are poor and not victims, some are middle class and victims, some are rich and 'takers', etc. There are also those who are not 'takers' and victims who will feel upset by what Mitt says since they hadn't planned on voting for him, be they women who don't agree with him or people who are doing well financially and see that Obama has governed well. That was a desperate act on his part.

He is using reverse psychology from how i see it. He knows humans don't like to admit that they are freeloaders or want free stuffs, even if it means lying to oneself. That is why he may succeed in turning some of the votes in his favor. Just one of my conspiracy theory here not necessary true.

If someone wants to make t easier for you to collect welfare, to get free medical care, for others to pay for you, and if you use your colour or your ethnic group, or what happened to your ancestors in order to get free things, you are making yourself a victim. The true victim are those who are helpless or those who have tried the hardest to improve their lot and because of circumstances beyond their control. Romney would be better leading America then the present Obama who wants to increase the government influence over the people and to start a race war and a class war.

It shows that he was too stupid to realize that not every member of that 47% supports Obama. There are certainly people in this country that are takers and see themselves as victims. I'd say the number though is closer to 25-30%. He's not going to win their votes because he's not offering free stuff. That moron at his rally who yelled "I want free birth control!" is one of them. He was absolutely right to tell her that if she wants free stuff to vote for the other guy. The girl's a moron and she's not going to vote for anyone who doesn't promise her free stuff. Basically, his numbers were off, but he has a good point. As a politician though, he was being too blunt and we know that any level of straight talk is just unacceptable in politics. If people really wanted straight talk we wouldn't have these two morons as the primary choices for president.

The inference from his comments is that almost half of America are free loading parasites dependant on Government to live. My question is if this is the case how did America find itself in such a position? It has to pre-date the current Government and the previous one was....Republican I think so they are culpable too. Rather than attack a group that clearly cannot respond, why not produce some practical solutions to get the 47% off "handouts" and into work and better able to "take responsibility for their lives." Words are cheap and plentiful...unlike work opportunities.

hi valentinesdiner okay thats your opinion and I think Mr.Romneyhad never had to go hungary or been out of w o rk for months. a pox of him and the Republicans I will again vote for Obama as he knows a bit more about the common mand and ' people out of work.now if you dis me I will report you so do not bother. this is my own opinion and I have a right to haveit and e x press it. I think Mr.Romney is not going to win thats what I think.

I see this purely for what it is - just another arrogant politician who thinks he's better than the whole world and that he knows what hardship is when he has thousands, probably millions of dollars. I am obviously not a taker or a victim, nor would I ever describe myself that way. The only 'takers' and 'victims' I see here are people who are not Americans but are hiding out in America, using everything. The 'victims' here, if you want to be honest - are the middle class working Americans. We don't have political power and we aren't celebrities, movie stars, or Steve Jobs. We don't own Microsoft, Apple, Sony, or make money by breathing. We pay for EVERYTHING for OURSELVES and then through taxes for EVERYBODY ELSE. I'm not exactly sure WHO Romney is including in his little speech but he doesn't consider HIMSELF to be in that group of people. Doesn't look like he will be doing anything to make anything better for that group of people either. I don't think the government should be giving free stuff... BUT... anything it takes from us in taxes should go directly into things that benefit Americans in a measurable way. If it doesn't - I should say SINCE it doesn't, either we shouldn't pay any taxes or we should be able to personally choose where our tax dollars go ourselves in order to not have them wasted on things WE don't care about. I think this little mistake that was overheard is how every politician is underneath - when we can't see or hear them, and it's just one more example of how evil and corrupt people can be when they think they will have some power over others.

Romney recognizes the hardship it is on all Americans who have to pay the way, not just for themselves and their family, but also for the takers and victims. It is his desire that these people contribute to the economy just as the rest of us are doing. Many think Mitt Romney, because he's so rich, is a selfish greedy person. He worked hard for his money and paid his taxes. The greedy ones are those who leach off the rest of us. I'd say Mitt Romney wants to stop giving lip service to the middle class, the way so many in government do, by getting these takers and victims into jobs rather than on welfare lines.

I think Mitt is absolutely right. People are generally full of excuses as to why they are victims, and should not be held to the same standard as everyone else. Our country was built on people taking care of their own needs. If you need food, get a job and earn it. If you need a home, get a job and earn it. If you need clothing, get a job and earn it. Our country was built on everyone producing. Not making excuses, and sitting on their butts, collecting government hand outs, stolen from the people who are working. We have charity for charitable causes. Yes they are limited, and they are supposed to be. You are not supposed to live a life of luxury on charity. You are not supposed to have free homes, free food, free spending money, free cell phones, free internet, all paid for by the struggling working people. In case you missed it, socialism doesn't work. It never has, it never will. This idea that government can take money from working people, and give it to non-working people, and yet somehow have a good economy, has been prove false for hundreds of years. Look at Europe! That's our future under this system of "appreciating the needs of his fellow Americans". It's about time we let the working people keep their own money, and let the non-working people know they choose to work, or choose to starve. Obama's plan is to flush America down the drain, for the purpose of "appreciating the needs of his fellow Americans". Hasn't that ideology done enough damage?

I think the man is delusional. This definitely isn't a good candidate for president. When I think of a president I think of someone who works for the people, and someone like that needs to understand the needs of the people including the "takers". Mitt needs to understand that these people don't want to be takers, and be dependent on handouts. The average american is proud and finds things like food stamps something embarrassing but he or she will turn to the government for help because it's what they need to do to put food on the table. If the economy allowed them to depend on themselves they would, America has been known for people who have made everything they have on their own and have gone from nothing to everything. Romney doesn't appreciate the needs of the common American because he himself was born into money and has never really had to go from the ground up.

No,I do not see where that many people are takers except for the illegals in this country.The "other guy" (as he put it) has made some great changes that have helped our country and there were many things that he has tried to do,but has been blocked by mostly republican members of congress.Then they are the same ones that are complaining that he has not done anything to succeed.Well,get out of his way! The ones that are the "takers" are those rich people that Romney wants to pay less taxes.I suppose Romney is considering the woman who want their health care rights as "takers"?

I think he is right and just saying what others had no cajones to say in public. There are far too many instances when Obama was elected of people talking about getting their "obama money". How can you ignore that? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOZ-Etb0k0Q this is only a minute and a half, and only two people, but look at the other videos....

Quite simply, it says to me that Mitt wouldn't be the President of all of us in the United States but that he'd only "worry" about the other 53% who don't include "those people". It's really telling that he said those words when he didn't know the public would ever hear them. That says to me that he was, for maybe once in his life, telling the total truth about how he feels. Basically, he holds most of us in contempt. I sure don't want him as MY President, not that HE'D want to be my President since to him I'm surely one of "those people" despite the fact that I worked for over 35 years and have taken responsibility for myself my entire adult life. Annie

"According to the Census Bureau, 49% of Americans in the second quarter of 2011 lived in a household where at least one member received a government benefit. (The total population at the time was 305 million)." http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/09/18/the-data-behind-romneys-47-comments/ Think about it: why would the half of the population not paying any income taxes care about someone who's talking about cutting taxes? They don't pay any now, they don't need a tax cut. Incidentally, a Gallup poll today shows Obama with 47% of the vote.

What it says is that, just like Obama, when answers are not written, they both stumble over what they are trying to say. That's all it says. It is true that aside from payroll taxes, 47% pay no further income tax. However, that does not mean that they are all victims. What it means is that some have paid taxes all their lives and now as retirees they may no longer have to do so. It means that some take all tax loopholes they can find and use them, which is totally legal. Others have lost their jobs during this recession and would love nothing better than to get to work. However, there ARE professional victims in the world and they DO see how much they can get with as little effort as possible. If I took everything the media says these politicians say without really looking and listening for myself, I would figure that Obama hates Down's syndrome children and others without full mental faculties. How would I figure this? Because when he was bowling, he pretty much said he bowled like a retarded person. However, he seems unaware that some mentally disabled can bowl exceptionally well. He was making an assumption - a dumb one - and opened his mouth and inserted his foot. I may have thought him insensitive, but I didn't think he hated the mentally disabled. The media cuts out part of anything they show for shock effect and it works every time. With Romney's charitable record, I doubt very seriously that he truly meant that 47% of the population were victims. I really don't care what either of these men says on the campaign trail or how much they try to destroy each other (although frankly, I'm disgusted by it). What I want is an economy that opens up and right now we do not have that. What I DO see is that instead of discussing serious matters such as the economy and huge number of jobless, we are constantly being diverted by "He said/He said" garbage that tells us nothing about how either will turn our country's fortunes around. When I hear something like this latched onto by the media, I stop watching television news of any kind for a week because after the first two hours all has been said and they rehash the mess for about a week until they find another 'I gotcha moment." I wish the people would stop listening to all the offsides stuff and demand to know the candidates real positions. This close to election, we should know for certain where and for what each stands, and we do not.

Hi and thanks for starting this. :-) To me it shows two things; that he's a fool for saying what he did and should have been more prudent in what he said. The other is that he should have known that once your in the political arena EVERYTHING is noted whether it is off the cuff or not.