Mitt Romney on hidden camera

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/20/beyond_guns_and_god/

THURSDAY, SEP 20, 2012 11:45 AM UTC[h1]Beyond guns and God[/h1]
[h2]A new study finds the white working class is less conservative than we think, if you leave out the South[/h2]
BY JOAN WALSH

beyond_guns_and_god_rect-460x307.jpg

 (Credit: Reuters/Salon)

What is “the white working class,” that much discussed, often criticized demographic group that many say will decide this election? You know them: They’re “bitter” and “cling” to “guns and religion,” in the (otherwise sympathetic) words of 2008 candidate Barack Obama. Many are members of “the 47 percent” of Americans dependent on government derided by Mitt Romney, who the Republican insists will vote for Obama – except many don’t know they’re in that moocher class, and plan to vote for Romney.

Just in time comes a study by the Public Religion Research Institute, which confounds most stereotypes of the white working class, while confirming a couple. It may force us to give up our caricature of the last group of Americans it’s still politically safe to caricature. They’re less conservative than most political analysts give them credit for – if you leave out the South.

First, a few definitional ground rules. As someone  whose book  is often described as being “about” the white working class, and why it left the Democratic Party, I’m painfully aware of the limitations of data and definitions of that much-discussed group. This study defines them as “non-Hispanic white Americans without a four-year college degree who hold non-salaried jobs.” Some polls define the white working class by income, but increasingly the more politically unique group – and the most politically troublesome for Democrats — is those without college degrees. Also: This is a new study and it doesn’t track the same group over election cycles, so we can’t know if their opinions have changed in the age of Obama, but it’s fascinating and useful nonetheless.

As most analysts have asserted, they are, as a group, trouble for Obama — in mid-August Romney led 48-35 — but there were interesting regional differences. Romney led Obama by a staggering 40 points in the South (62-22) while Obama actually led Romney 44-38 in the Midwest (hello, auto industry rescue?), and the two candidates were nearly tied in the West and Northeast. White working-class Protestants favor Romney 2-1, while Catholics are evenly split. Likewise, Romney clobbers Obama with men, but the candidates are tied for the votes of women. And younger white working-class voters support Obama.

A pattern emerges: Obama is doing surprisingly well with white working-class voters — but he may have to write off most older, Southern, white working-class Protestant men.

Overall, the study debunks lots of stereotypes: These non-college-educated whites are just about as likely as the college-educated to strongly identify with the Tea Party (13 vs. 10 percent), or to say the group shares their goals (34-31). Only one in 20 say abortion or same-sex marriage is the most important issue deciding their vote. More (50 percent) say abortion should be legal in all or most cases than illegal (45 percent.) Maybe surprisingly (at least to the Catholic bishops), a solid majority (56 percent) of white working-class Catholics think abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 53 percent of Protestants think it should be illegal in all or most cases. They are just about as religiously observant as college-educated whites, although they are much more likely to identify as evangelical Protestants.

The study also confounds those who believe white working-class voters consistently vote against their own economic interests: Those who received food stamps in the last two years preferred Obama to Romney 48 to 36 percent, while two-thirds of those who hadn’t preferred Romney.

Oh, and this is fun: “Equal numbers of white working-class Americans (28 percent) and white college-educated Americans (27 percent) identify Fox News as their most trusted media source.”

The study finds, however, that a few of our political stereotypes are true: They are more likely than college-educated whites to say the government does too much for minorities and that discrimination against whites is as big a problem as discrimination against blacks, although, again, if you take out the South, the percentages drop. They are more likely than white college-educated voters to blame illegal immigration for their economic problems. They oppose same-sex marriage, but not overwhelmingly, 50 to 43 percent, and there again, there are huge differences by region, religion age and gender: Women, non-Southerners, Catholics and younger white working-class people favor same-sex marriage, while older Southern male Protestants oppose it.

I’m going to be honest: I like this study because it confirms all of my instincts (which, to be fair to me, are based on research and familiarity with actual white working-class people). It completely contradicts Charles Murray and the rest of the conservatives who define struggling white workers as part of the moocher class, people who’ve traded hard work, marriage and religious devotion for the dole: They work more hours (an average of 51 hours to 46 for the college educated). They are just as likely as college grads to call themselves religious.  They are more likely to be divorced or to have children “out of wedlock,” but the study concludes (as I do) that’s because of economic distress, rather than the other way around, as Murray asserts.

And rather than believe they can depend on government, they are alienated from government: Interestingly, more college-educated whites than working-class whites refer to the government as “our” government than “the” government. Yet they are overwhelmingly open to a Democratic message. From the study:
Seven-in-ten (70 percent) white working-class Americans believe the economic system in this country unfairly favors the wealthy, and a majority (53 percent) say that one of the biggest problems in this country is that we don’t give everyone an equal chance in life. Over 6-in-10 (62 percent) white working-class Americans favor raising the tax rate on Americans with household incomes of over $1 million per year.
There is some good news for Romney hidden in the tabs and back pages of the survey. For one thing, it’s possible that his disdain for “the 47 percent” of Americans who pay no federal income taxes, or who rely on some sort of government support, may not hurt him (although I believe it will). PRRI finds that even Americans who rely on government services still believe that people are too dependent on government: 71 percemt who’ve received unemployment benefits  and 63 percent of those who’ve received food stamps in the last two years say poor people have become too dependent on government assistance programs.  It’s certainly possible that in November, many will vote for the candidate who agrees.

I’m not quite sure what to do with the data saying they are more likely to believe the government favors minorities, or that discrimination against whites is as big a problem as against blacks today. The latter is simply not borne out by any study anywhere. (Again, answers to those questions differ hugely by region, age and gender.)  And yet I think, given the rest of the survey results, maybe we can treat that attitude with some empathy, whether or not it’s born out by facts. As other surveys have shown, PRRI finds that working-class whites are more pessimistic about the future than any other economic or racial group.

Yet as I’ve said before, non-college-educated whites are more open to the Democratic message than they’ve been for a while. Barack Obama got a higher share of their votes than white Democrats John Kerry, Al Gore, Michael Dukakis, Walter Mondale or Southerner Jimmy Carter (in his second term), according to exit poll information provided to me by the study’s sponsors, Robert Jones and Dan Cox (admittedly this is not exactly the same demographic they studied in 2012). Just as Republicans need to learn not to stereotype and write off vast swaths of the electorate, Democrats might need to think differently about the white middle class.
 
Joan Walsh is Salon's editor at large and the author of "What's the Matter with White People: Why We Long for a Golden Age That Never Was."
 
Last edited:
But you can't leave out the South since it's a big part of the conservative/american taliban base...It's like saying let's take a closer look at chocolate chip cookies without the chocolate chips....That data mentioned in the article isn't something new...
 
But you can't leave out the South since it's a big part of the conservative/american taliban base...It's like saying let's take a closer look at chocolate chip cookies without the chocolate chips....That data mentioned in the article isn't something new...
 This, I was just about to post this. Of course you're going to find a group of people less conservative if you intentionally omit a large group of people who are conservative in your study
 
I still don't think it's a wrap yet...The republicans & their attack dogs the american taliban have raised a ton of money. They've pulled together by changing things like voter ID laws even though voter fraud (outside of what the Bush camp did in Florida) isn't a big issue & making it a point by not working together in the house or senate that would remotely help Obama in any way. They've even gotten a few longtime republican reps & senators out of office for working with the dems...Scary stuff...
 
All money is technically "already taxed" unless that money is coming directly from a bank loan, so that doesn't fly.
So ninjahood, if you take the money that you saved up after tax, use that money to buy a business, you should never pay tax on the profits from that business, ever? It's the same concept.
The tax arguments, especially from the conservative point of view are very easily debunked.
I wholeheartedly agree with this.  The preferential treatment for dividend and capital gain income is atrocious.

Yea, you've already paid taxes on the money you invested...so what.  Nobody is trying to tax you on that money again, only the profit that you make from investing that money.  It's not double taxation.

That's just a weak argument the wealthy make to keep their favorite tax breaks.
 
I still don't think it's a wrap yet...The republicans & their attack dogs the american taliban have raised a ton of money. They've pulled together by changing things like voter ID laws even though voter fraud (outside of what the Bush camp did in Florida) isn't a big issue & making it a point by not working together in the house or senate that would remotely help Obama in any way. They've even gotten a few longtime republican reps & senators out of office for working with the dems...Scary stuff...
 I personally think Obama had a good chance of winning after the DNC but he doesn't have it in the bag YET. But this 47% tape isn't helping Romney's case one bit.

My thoughts (very very little knowledge on politics):

-A good portion of people voting for Romney are voting for him because they can't stand to see Obama in office because...you know why. It doesn't mean they are racist at all but it just irritates them to see a black man as president.  I'm not saying all Romney supporters are like this, but a lot of people in my area (Western Maryland//Rednecks/Hicks) just hate Obama plain and simple. I apologize if it seems like I'm reaching, Trying not to generalize too much here. And i've probably opened up a can of worms with that but these are just my observations from personal experience, probably not fair to generalize all Romney supporters like that.

-One of the reasons I'm voting for Obama is because I just do not trust the Republicans. In this day and age, you're not voting for a candidate, rather for a party. Both Bush's left our economy in shambles (Moreso George W) and it has been a Democrat who has been left to clean up their mess. Granted George HW had to do some cleaning up to do after Reagans tax cuts and military spending. But thats beside the point. I just don't understand how someone can vote for the party that was associated with the administration that this mess happened under.

-4 years isn't enough to fix this economy. It's going to take much longer than that, it's a process. Granted he got a lot of his legislation passed but it's going to take time to see results. The Great Depression wasn't fixed in 4 years. Give him 4 more years to finish his work and see how this plays out

Those are just the thoughts running through my head in the last couple weeks. I don't know anything about politics but I'm definitely trying to learn more as this will be my first election I can actually vote in (20 years old) Feel free to call me out, criticize me, whatever. I'd rather get called out on something (and get my facts straight/a bigger and better persepctive on things) then to be oblivious on what's really going on in this world.

My goal here is not to be able to argue with people about who's the better candidate, but rather to be informed. I feel like it is irresponsible for someone (who is voting) to not be probably informed on the candidates, parties, issues, and policies at hand. No one should vote without being educated
 
Last edited:
QUE? Lol
I ask for chopsticks and I'm Latino, problem?
 
laugh.gif
 I think he was pointing out the fact that Romney was trying to seem more Latino and blend in with the crowd to get votes. Like at a Chinese resturaunt if he asked for chopsticks, he would do it to try and blend in with the Chinese
 
Romney is the type of guy to ASK fo chop-sticks at the chinese restaurant instead of using the fork that was given to him. 
QUE? Lol

I ask for chopsticks and I'm Latino, problem?
Have you ever been around those stuffy business types who are always trying to impress other people?

They like to bow in front of their asian clients or throw in a few bits of slang at the NAACP meeting. 

Its like they treat everyone else as agents to some greater mean and not just people. 

He is basically a mirror. 
 
The bottom line on Romney is like what Matt Taibbi from Rolling Stone wrote, "Romney the businessman built his career on two things that Romney the candidate decries: massive debt and dumb federal giveaways."

He also points out which some NTers have mentioned about Romney's off shore accounts-
"In addition, reporters have uncovered plenty of evidence that Romney takes full advantage of offshore tax havens: He has an interest in at least 12 Bain funds, worth a total of $30 million, that are based in the Cayman Islands; he has reportedly used a squirrelly tax shelter known as a "blocker corporation" that cheats taxpayers out of some $100 million a year; and his wife, Ann, had a Swiss bank account worth $3 million. As a private equity pirate, Romney pays less than half the tax rate of most American executives – less, even, than teachers, firefighters, cops and nurses. Asked about the fact that he paid a tax rate of only 13.9 percent on income of $21.7 million in 2010, Romney responded testily that the massive windfall he enjoys from exploiting the tax code is "entirely legal and fair."
 
Asked about the fact that he paid a tax rate of only 13.9 percent on income of $21.7 million in 2010, Romney responded testily that the massive windfall he enjoys from exploiting the tax code is "entirely legal and fair."
"Entirely legal and fair"

That's only half-true.

Here's another problem with Romney and his ilk.  It's not that they pay little taxes.  Hell, Obama and Buffet pay little taxes too.  They all play the game to maximize their potential benefit.  The difference lies in the fact that Romney and other people like him won't acknowledge that the game is rigged against the little guy.  And in their self-interest, they just keep trying to manipulate the rules to better serve themselves, while the democratic wealthy are interested in creating a more equitable tax scenario in which the masses aren't seemingly hung out to dry.

So yea, his 13.9 % tax rate is legal, but I'd dispute the fact that it is fair.
 
Last edited:
Have you ever been around those stuffy business types who are always trying to impress other people?


They like to bow in front of their asian clients or throw in a few bits of slang at the NAACP meeting. 


Its like they treat everyone else as agents to some greater mean and not just people. 

He is basically a mirror. 

Ah got cha.
 

...*sigh*
laugh.gif
Dude can't be serious.
Watch this entire Jon Stewart bit from last night. He went ALL the way in.

The pic is from the third video
 
The last part of the 3rd link, "if they have success, they built it. If they have failed, the government ruined it for them. If they get a break, they deserve it. If you get a break, it's a hand out or entitlement". Classic republican thought process of the last 20-30 years...
 
Before anyone claims "who wins" let's wait to see what happens in October. Politics is a dirty game.
 
I agree that the American Dream has definitely changed, you can't make as much money as you used to. Although I'm a believer in hard work and education. If you start off young and take school seriously and work hard you will be fine. 
I know you won't do it...but I feel compelled to recommend that you read a very good book that might give you something to think about.

Twilight of the Elites: America after Meritocracy....Author: Chris Hayes

It pretty much says the concept of Meritocracy (work hard, get ahead) is far from the reality here in America.  The reason being, that America's meritocracy isn't meritocractic enough...i.e. its not always the best and the brightest who get ahead, especially once those at the top selectively choose those who follow them up the ladder.

Its a really good read, and if I remember correctly...is under 250 pages.
 
Last edited:
I agree that the American Dream has definitely changed, you can't make as much money as you used to. Although I'm a believer in hard work and education. If you start off young and take school seriously and work hard you will be fine. 
I know you won't do it...but I feel compelled to recommend that you read a very good book that might give you something to think about.

Twilight of the Elites: The End of Meritocracy....Author: Chris Hayes

It pretty much says the concept of Meritocracy (work hard, get ahead) is far from the reality here in America.  The reason being, that America's meritocracy isn't meritocractic enough...i.e. its not always the best and the brightest who get ahead, especially once those at the top selectively choose those who follow them up the ladder.

Its a really good read, and if I remember correctly...is under 250 pages.
Chris Hayes?
 

Instacop. 
 
This is how i know ya dunno what ya talkin bout...
Capital gains tax is fees on profit you've made from profits of assets.
If i bought some yeezys for 1000 & i paid da sales tax on it, i sold em for
2000 (my capital gain) why should da tax on my capital gains be just as high
As da initial purchase price tax?
Mit romney makes his money off dividends from mutual fund investments, which
Were already taxed when purchased & taxed from his income revenue @ da 37% rate.
Mutual funds shouldn't be taxed at da same rate.

Sneakers can be considered a collectible and taxed at the collectibles rate of 28%. :tongue:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom