In an interview with Fox News on Thursday night, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney told Fox News correspondent, Sean Hannity, how he would have responded to some topics that weren’t brought up during the first presidential debate on Wednesday. After doubling down on his statements made during leaked video footage of a private fundraiser on the 47 percent of the United States population, who from Mr. Romney’s perspective, pay no taxes and rely on government dependence, here is a transcript of what Mr. Romney stated he would have said when asked of his remarks:
Well, clearly in a campaign with hundreds if not thousands of speeches and question and answer sessions, now and then you’re going to say something that doesn’t come out right. In this case, I said something that’s just completely wrong.
So one week he stands behind it, and now he back away from it…
Why are we still surprised by this? What has he *not* contradicted himself about yet? OH! I know… how he plans to help the rich. That’s been consistent.
stand up to cowardly liberal faggots: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5OdQGbVNa4
Cowardly people throw insults around when they are behind a computer screen.
cool story bro.
So, if it was completely wrong and he spent a long time making his point on the subject to his audience. guess what?
HE MEANT EVERY WORD OF IT!!
ROMNEY makes no sense in anything he does.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=av3q7-a-ayc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
This is so horrible, the libral media has distorted this to the point where it’s somthing bad for romney. Now, I’m voting for obama this november, but it is horrifying to me how the media is so totally controlled by the left. All that romney was saying is that 47% of the country isn’t going to vote for him for sure, so he isn’t going to spend time and money trying to!
if that was the case then why didn’t he simply back that up when asked about it rather than weaseling his way out of the question?
no he said that 47% of the US survives off welfare and are lazy so they won’t vote for him… he insulted a majority of the population and will most likely lose because of it. Romney is just incompetent and has not presented any real plan. his past incidents like dressing like a cop, refusing to show taxes, lying 616 times in 33 weeks (not sure if i got the amount right) also discredits.
he is just incompetent. the republicans had a better chance with ron paul but cheated him out of it because they didn’t like his views.
I have never voted Republican in my life, and I would have voted for Ron Paul. True story.
Since when is 47% a majority? Think you need to go back to school…
He was speaking figuratively–did you learn that word in school?
Actually, I think he was speaking literally. When Romney belittled 47% of the country, he insulted far more than just 47%.
becuase the “rest of the country” is not grouped together in the remaining 53%, there is middle ground. YOU go back to school.
This implies that people will vote only for Democrats or Republicans. I’m voting Gary Johnson, and not wasting my vote in the least.
If I vote for either of the two major parties, they won’t know that I’m a libertarian and hold political views that are intended to increase freedoms and liberty for all Americans, not just the most wealthy or multi-million-dollar corporation/persons.
Letting the two parties know how many Libertarians there really are out there may get them to adjust their policies, if enough of us vote to make a difference in the election.
If I vote Obama, the GOP believes that I’m just a liberal socialist. If I vote Romney, the GOP knows they can get away with going so far as to refuse to let their most prominent libertarian member speak at their convention and it won’t matter because they can count on the Libertarian vote regardless of whether they actually enact and enforce libertarian ideas beyond second Amendment rights.
isidewith.com tells me that I agree with Johnson 98% of the time, Obama 44% of the time, and Romney 39% of the time. I’m in a lose/lose position if I vote for either of the two dominant parties. I have to vote third party if they are going to pay attention to me at all.
Most of these 47% have families that do have jobs but are unable to help. How do you feel knowing your grandparents are too old or sick to work, that your best friends or siblings came back from war unfit to work? So you’re OK if Romney claims your disabled veteran brother is too lazy to work because of a wartime injury?
When only about 40% of the U.S population that is of age voted in the last election. Pissing off 47% of the entire population might drive more of that 47% to actually vote and would give obama a clear advantage.
I’m not in the 47%, and I felt insulted. His remarks insulted those of us who do pay income tax, but are happy to support social security recipients and combat warriors who risk their lives every day for our freedoms.
No way in hell would I vote for him. He changes his story depending on his audience – whatever sells. The man has no core values that I can relate to.
..and that ” … who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it.”
– the victims part that was harsh, calling 47% of Americans self-proclaimed victims, among these are pensioners, war vets, school teachers, and citizens struggling through the worst financial depression since ’29 caused by de-regulated financial speculation and corruption.
And to top all this hypocrisy Romeny’s own father was on welfare, here’s the link:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/09/19/161409916/welfare-wasnt-always-a-dirty-word-in-the-romney-family
He actually said more than that. His actual words, in context, were that 47% of americans did not want to take responsibility for their lives. Thats why it’s a big deal.
Do you even understand the definition of context?
Guess you missed the part where he called them lazy and moochers.
Right after he said that, he then went on to describe the 47% as not paying income taxes and thinking they deserve things like “food.”
That’s not all he said, if he had said just that 47% of the country isn’t going to vote for him for sure, so he isn’t going to spend time and money trying to convince them, then it would have been fine. But he said these 47% of people will not vote for him because those people don’t support themselves and are dependent on the government because they think they are victims. This is not only a complete lie but has in no way been distorted by the “liberal media” because THERE IS A VIDEO OF HIM SAYING IT. The point may have been that he was saying he can’t win these people because they support Obama, but he chose the worst words to say it, by basically calling half of America freeloaders. More people watch Fox news then any other news outlet and they are the embodiment of conservative media so why is the “liberal media” the problem when they are releasing news that’s extremely relevant to election, you may call it “liberal” because they show both sides of the stories instead of just what conservatives want to hear, but i just call that journalism. You seem to think that because people find it offensive, when the person running for leader of the country, has written off almost 50% of the nation, that the news sources are pandering to the left, when in fact they are just reporting some pretty big news from a presidential candidate that a lot of people should know about before voting
.
Wrong, wrong, wrong mat. The most important thing he said (about the 47%, anyway), when he didn’t realize the camera was on him, the very essence of his argument, was that ‘those’ people will never take responsibility for their own lives. It wasn’t that they don’y pay taxes (BS), or that they won’t vote for him (more BS, because in that group he considers irresponsible moochers are veterans, seniors, and the disabled there are PLENTY of Romney supporters), but that if he were fortunate enough to be chosen to run the free world he wouldn’t even be able to reach those people, to inspire them, to LEAD them…no matter what. They were a lost cause, and that it wouldn’t be his job to worry about them. And he was just fine with that. And then he doubled down on it.
The ‘libral media’ distorted his own words by playing them back in their entirety, in context? Wrong, wrong, wrong.
He also mentioned something about not being able to do anything in the Middle East, that he could just ‘kick it on down the road,’ but that’s an entirely different matter.
perfectly said.
Please read this in full. Then reread your response. If you still feel the same way, maybe I’m not understanding you, please reply and explain further. I won’t even say you’re wrong, yet.
Audience member: For the last three years, all everybody’s been told is, “Don’t worry, we’ll take care of you.” How are you going to do it, in two months before the elections, to convince everybody you’ve got to take care of yourself?
Romney: There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. And I mean, the president starts off with 48, 49, 48—he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn’t connect. And he’ll be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich. I mean that’s what they sell every four years. And so my job is not to worry about those people—I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives. What I have to do is convince the 5 to 10 percent in the center that are independents that are thoughtful, that look at voting one way or the other depending upon in some cases emotion, whether they like the guy or not, what it looks like.
That’s not all he’s saying. Romney said that those 47% don’t pay taxes and are dependent on the government. That’s first of all not true and second of all really insulting to the bottom 47%. That’s why it’s so bad. It’s a logical point, but you never say that when you’re running for president.
Where the hell do you live? Liberal media? Every major media outlet in the US is owned, operated, and controlled by big business. The US has turned so hard to right that if Ronald Reagen was alive today he we be considered a pinko left-wing socialist. It is amazing how the right-media has slowly brainwashed Americans over the last 15 or so years..
“All he was saying was…” C’mon Mat… surely you can see that it was more than that. He wasn’t just stating that some people had their minds made up about him and he couldn’t worry about that…. he went a whole lot further by stating that all people who don’t pay income taxes are by default liberal democratic voters who are lazy, entitled and irresponsible. It’s flat out false for one thing given that a large proportion of people in the group that don’t pay income taxes are likely voting for him in November. It shows a callous lack of regard for those of our fellow citizens who work very hard just to get by each day. I think that is news worthy and I also think the media has treated it appropriately insofar as I have witnessed (though I do consume 95% of my news via the internet).
Actually he said that 47% of Americans are freeloaders who pay no taxes and won’t vote for him because of it.
He didn’t just say that 47% of people aren’t going to vote for him. He insulted the 47% of American’s who he claims don’t pay taxes and feel they aren’t entitled to health care, to food, to housing. He said people aren’t entitled to eating food. Poor people who want food are just lazy people looking for handouts according to Mitt.
Dear Mat,
If you think the media is controlled by the “left” then you are sorely mistaken. Go look at where the terms political left and right come from, trace their history and you will surely find that we live in a society that is so heavily biased towards liberal thinking that to claim any mainstream media is leftist is incorrect. They may be more to the left than you personally but they are not left. Liberalism is not to the left. The terms conservatism (the right) and liberalism come from the competing parties in Britain before the complete removal of the Monarchy from British parliament and before the advent of the Labour (left) movement. Conservative’s wanted to conserve the monarchy, and the Liberal Democrats wanted individual liberty and full democratic control over the Parliament. But the Liberal’s did not introduce any socialist policies i.e. a welfare state or national health service. When I learned the true history of political terminology and its root it gave me a greater understanding of politics today. I would recommend having brief look at 2 historical wiki’s about British politics that will forever give any reader a greater understanding of the root of modern, western political thought through its terminology. These are “The Separation of Powers” and the “History of the Conservative Party” in Britain.
Romney said that 47% of the country won’t vote for him because they are dependent on the government. He said that with an amount of distain and contempt for roughly 50% of the population that he wants to be CEO of.
Learn how to spell the word “liberal”. You’ll sound smarter.
watch Fox News, you’ll get the right wing communist news media you’re searching for.
Media controlled by the left? You realize that Fox news is a mouthpiece for the right, right?
No, that was not ALL that he said! He said that, and in addition: “Alright, there are 47% who are with him, who are dependent on government, who believe that they are victims, who believe government has the responsibility to care for them, who believe they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing!”
This is quite a statement, saying that people in your great country are should NOT be entitled to housing! I have not been following your “liberal media” (except for the daily show), but have informed myself about both your candidates. And I have seen the presidential debate, and, frankly, I am terrified that in the – unquestionably – most powerfull and important country in the world, a person with an opinion like Romney even has a chance to be elected president. For a moment there I thought the german people were stupid, thank you America for teaching me that we could do worse.
I agree. The issue is contorted even in this interview. My only disagreement is the control of the media issue. All media outlets are going have biases. However, the most watched, with the most satellite media companies that are also watched by millions, is FOX which was made, by Murdoch, into a voice for the conservative side. Still, I am on your side. News in general is contorted on both sides, liberal and conservative, to the extent that one must question if they really know the truth on anything.
I’m sorry but that’s not ALL of what he said.
He said 47% will vote for Obama, guaranteed, that much is true. Then he went on to say that those SAME 47% are the ones that don’t pay income taxes. He’s equating Obama voters with people that don’t pay income tax, and that’s just not true. I know people that don’t make enough to pay income tax who are going to vote for Mitt Romney, that’s anecdotal sure but I would be willing to guess that many people can think of someone in that situation.
Romney also said that these same 47% of non-income tax paying Obama voters think that they are victims, and are dependent on the government. Let’s be clear, 2/3rds of the 47% not paying income tax ARE paying payroll taxes, meaning that they ARE chipping in taxes for their own social security and medicare, which means they’re not just depending on the government, they’re chipping in for their share. They don’t pay income tax because they can’t afford too.
It also includes a number of people who just have no income! What if you’re one of those fresh out of college students that can’t find work right now, you have no income and you’re not paying income taxes, but that doesn’t mean your voting for Obama and it doesn’t mean you think you’re a victim, it just means you’re having a hard time finding a job in a tough job market.
And when he said “my job is not to worry about them”, sure you can say that he was just talking about it from the perspective of “I can’t change their minds in the election so why bother”. But for someone that is giving the President a hard time about being too partisan, to just come right out and say, “the hell with em they don’t want my help anyway” is about as partisan as it gets, even if he is just talking about getting the votes and not the policy.
Play the tape again, listen closely. He said a lot more about 47% of the population than they weren’t going to vote for him. I don’t need to repeat it, you need to re-listen to what he said.
So Romney had an apology prepared for the debate, but since it didn’t come up, he had to have Hannity give him the cue. Got it.
you know what he said. don’t misrepresent it to fit your agenda. he said it ” came a across” completely wrong. i agree it sounds cruel and uncaring.. but listen to what he actually meant. there are 47% who don’t pay taxes after filing a return because their income is so low. he wants to change that so these folks make more income so at some point they would pay taxes above what they pay now.. which is a good thing if we all made more. just like dramas infamous you didn’t make that speech.. if you listen to more than just a soundbite then you hear what he really meant. both sides spew this soundbite gotchas which are not representative of anything.
This is a joke, right? “If you listen to more than just a soundbite?” There was an entire video with Romney stating that he will never convince “these people” to take personal responsibility for their lives and it’s not his duty to care about them! Oh, you’re right, what he REALLY meant was that he cares about the middle and lower class and wants to increase taxes on the rich to help them. Got it.
“And so my job is not to worry about [the 47%] people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” explain again to me how he is trying to better them? how he ‘cares’ about them? stop drinking the coolaid dude.
Wrong. “I’ll never convince these people to take responsibility for their own lives.”
Not leadership material, any way you slice it. He simply doesn’t care about half the country, and he’s okay with that.
Are you?
I think you’re the one spinning here dsyll… he and his campaign have surely gone back to try to make the statement one about lifting all boats, but what he actually said was: I am not going to worry about reaching out to that group of people because they won’t listen to reason and can’t be convinced to take personal responsibility. That is representative of something quite real to me, i.e., his general lack of compassion for people who have it quite hard in our country. I want a leader who is truly committed to policies that work toward lifting all of us up – not one who thinks that all people have to do is follow his example and they will prosper (especially given the silver spoon nature of his personal life story).
No, Mr. Romney, you said exactly what you thought because you were speaking to a bunch of rich assholes (like yourself) behind closed doors. Too bad you got caught. It should come to no surprise to anyone that you now try to lie your way out of it. You lied your ass off before the debate, you lied your ass off during the debate, and now you’ll continue your streak until you run America into the ground.
Hope everyone has their BOB ready for when SHTF.
He said “There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it — that that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. … These are people who pay no income tax. … [M]y job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”
He said they believe they are victims — and that they don’t take personal responsibility, that they are dependent on the government — 47%.
They’re just all playing mind games with us….and it works.
This man makes my skin crawl, he changes stories and lies so much it makes me physically ill. Please cast your vote wisely next month and make sure this monster doesn’t win.
It’s a step in the right direction for Romney to say that it was wrong. But I was hoping (silly me!) for an explanation of *why* Romney thinks it’s wrong. This sounds more like “I’m sorry I got caught”. What, exactly, was wrong about that statement in Mitt’s view? Given that his new Karl Rove-style tack of flipping “trickle down” on its head – apparently referencing the “people are lazy and mooch off taxpayers money” attitude that underpinned his “47%” comments – it doesn’t sound like he understands *why* his and Ryan’s comments actually were wrong. As it stands, many “red” states like Alabama get more in Federal spending in their state than they pay in federal taxes, making them “welfare” or “moocher” states, while many “blue” states like New York and Illinois are the ones footing the bill. Would Romney actually propose to cut off the “trickle down” flow from productive “blue” America to messed up “red” America?
I think all these leaked videos, including Obama’s “You didn’t build that” and “Where’s your Stafford money” and Romney’s “47%” just illustrate the difference between liberal and conservative. You either take the side that the system is unfair, you didn’t get your Stafford money because of racism or classism, that hard work won’t necessarily pay off in this unfair system, or you believe that this is a great country with lots of opportunity for anyone who works hard (and the opposite if they don’t), and people should be encouraged, not thwarted. If you believe the former you’ll vote for Obama, if you believe the latter you’ll vote for Romney. Each candidate had these unguarded lapses where they simply articulated these differences in simple, graphic terms.