Romney's "poor" comment wasn't a gaffe

[Enrique]

he's going for middle class voters, trying to get them to resent the poor, and he will be trying to paint Obama as the one that's going to give the poor all their money.

This is the definition of class warfare.

[baldguy]

1. Compared to Willard, everyone making less than $1M/yr is poor.

[TwilightGardener]

2. I agree with this--the fact that he said the "Democrat Party" would champion the poor

isn't an accident. The fact that he said the poor were all taken care of wasn't an accident.

[tridim]

3. It is certainly proof that he is an idiot.

[TwilightGardener]

4. I think he figures the poor aren't his voting bloc, and the middle class don't want to be

associated with the poor, however close they may be to being poor themselves (like, one or two paychecks or a lengthy hospitalization).

[gratuitous]

5. Yep, it's a class envy thing

He's talking to people who are shut out of the notoriously stingy "safety net" that Romney and his Republican pals have been dismantling for the last 30 years. "Hey, I don't get any of that 'safety net' stuff! Someone else is living high on the hog, and my meager tax dollars are supporting those shiftless, lazy people!" And you can bet that the mental image of those shiftless, lazy people doesn't look like Mitt or anyone in Mitt's country club bracket.

[Scootaloo]

6. While I get your point, don't use the term "class warfare."

That's their talking point, that any argument or conflict between the economic strata - or talk of economic strata at all - is "class warfare."

Actual economic warfare is, well, warfare. Blood-and-guillotines. dead bodies, fires in downtown, that sort of thing.

All we're doing is discussing - including Romney. He might be trying to use booga-booga-boo tactics. But it's not class warfare.

For one, the poor tend to win such wars. Superior numbers and greater experience, you see.

[ljm2002]

7. Au contraire...

...we need to not let them control the terms of debate. Class warfare is exactly what is going on: the wealthy are waging a successful effort against the working class. No, there does not need to be blood in the streets for class warfare to occur. The wealthy are preemptively using the term because they, like the republicans, know that in general the best defense is a good offense. Therefore they go on the offensive by using the term, thereby deflecting its use against them.

I say, don't let the assholes get away with it. We know what's happening, let's not be afraid to use the correct term for it.

Also, re: the poor tending to win such wars. Not really, not in my opinion. Although once it does get to actual physical warfare, then yes, those with the greater numbers tend to win. Let's hope it does not come to that.

[applegrove]

8. Romney looked at Gingrinch's campaign and took from it Gingrinches attack on the poor, and made

it his own. Trying to curry favour with the conservative tea partiers no doubt.

[rustydog]

9. divide and conquer

I should add, Mitt's idea of middle class are those making 100 million or more a year, middle class to him...

[lonestarnot]

10. Rat bastard doesn't give a rat's ass about his dog, why would anyone of the 99% ever think he would

give a rat's ass about us?