Last updated on 2013.02.01
Mitt Romney makes some remarkably candid and potentially damaging comments in the secret video Mother Jones has posted from a private high-rollers' fundraising event. I would like to focus on one fantastic—i.e., rooted in fantasy—comment the GOP nominee made about how his merely winning the election will immediately stimulate stock market investors and the economy:
They'll probably be looking at what the polls are saying. If it looks like I'm going to win, the markets will be happy. If it looks like the president's going to win, the markets should not be terribly happy. It depends of course which markets you're talking about, which types of commodities and so forth, but my own view is that if we win on November 6th, there will be a great deal of optimism about the future of this country. We'll see capital come back and we'll see—without actually doing anything—we'll actually get a boost in the economy. If the president gets reelected, I don't know what will happen. I can—I can never predict what the markets will do. Sometimes it does the exact opposite of what I would have expected. But my own view is that if we get a "Taxageddon," as they call it, January 1st, with this president, and with a Congress that can't work together, it's—it really is frightening [Mitt Romney, quoted by David Corn, "Secret Video: Romney Tells Millionaire Donors What He REALLY Thinks of Obama Voters, Mother Jones, September 17, 2012].
The next time I interview for a job, I may try that line: "Just by offering me the job, you'll make your workers want to work more. You'll make you're customers want to buy more. I will make you more money before I punch the clock on Day One. I'm that good."
But we can test Mr. Romney's confidence in himself as a market booster. We have a year of polling data indicating his likeliness to win the election. We have stock market data. How well do those data align?
Let's look at the Real Clear Politics polling average for President Barack Obama versus Mitt Romney and the Dow Jones Industrials average (as posted by Google Finance) over the past year:
Same graphs overlaid:
Eyeballing trend lines is a statistical accident waiting to happen. (Feel free to send me nice juicy tables of numbers that I can dump into my spreadsheet and run correlations on!) But look at the skinny blue line (the Dow), the fat blue line (Obama), and the fat red line (Romney).
- In October 2012, Romney drops amidst Herman Cainysteria, Obama's margin over Romney widens, and the Dow rises.
- From mid-February to mid-April 2012, Obama's margin over Romney reaches its highest sustained level, often crossing 5 percentage points. At the same time, the Dow climbs over 13,000.
- In May, Obama's margin drops. That month, the Dow sheds 1100 points.
- From August to now, Romney's stock rises until the Dems open their convention, then drops. The Dow does, very roughly, the opposite.
Now of course, numerous other factors (unemployment, the Fed, Greece, hurricanes) affect the stock market. But Romney's hypothesis is that "If it looks like I'm going to win, the markets will be happy. If it looks like the president's going to win, the markets should not be terribly happy." And if you just elect him, on November 7, your IRA will fart bunnies and rainbows.
If Romney's hypothesis bore any weight, it wouldn't be this easy to look at the polls and the Dow trendline and find clear counterexamples.
Easy now Cory...you know that the Romney campaign isn't going to let facts or fact checkers dictate their campaign ;^)
There is so much in that little video to work with. Like this part:
"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.
Romney went on: "[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."
Mitt is the gift that just keeps on giving!
Here's a great take on Romney's 47% that "pay no federal taxes" from on of my favorite policy wonks, Ezra Klein.
-snip-
"Part of the reason so many Americans don’t pay federal income taxes is that Republicans have passed a series of very large tax cuts that wiped out the income-tax liability for many Americans."
-snip-
"So whenever you hear that half of Americans don’t pay federal income taxes, remember: Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush helped build that. Some of those tax cuts for the poor were there to make the tax cuts for the rich more politically palatable."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/17/romneys-theory-of-the-taker-class-and-why-it-matters/
Wonder how many South Dakotans and SD GOP voters Mitt called the "taker class" and if he really wants to declare so many South Dakotans have no personal responsibility and can't take care of their lives?
Heck, that might be the reason Mitt won't release his taxes...could it be that some of those years he was in the "taker class" and paid no federal taxes.
Double heck...In his attack on the 47% who pay no federal tax...change 47% to 66% and then change the word "people" to "states" and then think about his statement and if it applies to the Republicans in Pierre who pride themselves in being a welfare state.
Mitt Romney says citizens who don't pay income tax will never vote for him. But eight of the top 10 states with the highest number of nonpayers are red states.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/where-are-the-47-of-americans-who-pay-no-income-taxes/262499/
He also thinks lower taxes increases tax receipts. Facts and numbers are both difficult for Mitt.
Wow: does this video encapsulate everything that is wrong with Romney?
Romney has demonstrated how dangerous he would be to our democracy and our economy. He's a dyed-in-the-wool plutocrat, according to his own words spoken to friends at a closed event. Makes me wonder what else he says at these "quiet room" discussions and how often he insults the ideals of our American society. Obviously, these slurs are what he truly believes.
The task in front of the Obama team is to divert funds to electing a Congress that will allow the President to pass legislation that supports the revival of our Middle Class and a free America.
Agreed, Dougal. Dems need to keep the Senate majority and change the filibuster rules. Two essentials in my opinion.
Cory, this video exposes the REAL Mitt Romney. We finally get a glimpse of what he really believes and that is why ol' Mittens has to change his spots in public so much. We now know why it seems Mitt will not stand firm on any principle in public appearances. It's because he has to hide what he truly believes and who he truly is and this video brings all that out. In response to the video, Mitt tried to explain himself at his press conference last night that he "didn't explain himself clearly enough" about the "off the cuff" remarks in the video. Ahhhh, Mitt: you "CLEARY" explained yourself and what you are all about, so, no need to explain anything to us because we better understand you now and what you stand for.
Until now, I trusted Mitt Romney about as far as I could hurl into a hurricane.
Now, however, I think he has reached a new low in my trustworthiness score: I can actually trust him to tell things that are not true.
In other words, my belief in the man correlates just about as well as the jagged red and blue graphs above correlate with each other.
Negatively.
Bravo, Mother Jones! Just pour the truth out on the ground and let nature take care of the rest.
About five minutes after tweeting, "Romney 47% video: ACORN's revenge," @jeremyscahill:
"I hope we discover that the secret Romney tape was filmed by someone dressed as a pimp"
I agree with Bill on keeping the Senate and rewriting the filibuster laws to prevent the abuse we have seen in the last several years.
What has John Thune said about the abuse of the filibuster and if he thinks that type of obstruction is good for America. Sure would be nice to get him on the record.
Florida is home to more felons: it's one state where The New Jim Crow is punctuated with a stand your ground law. What a surprise.
David Brooks doesn't have time to drop by the blog and comment himself, so I'll link to his column: "Thurston Howell Romney." Brooks is a conservative, and he comes up with a more apt nickname for Romney than any liberal agitator has. The whole column is good, but keep an eye out for the key phrases, in which Brooks says Romney doesn't understand America, has no Reaganesque sense of the social compact, and doesn't grasp how motivation and ambition really work. Brooks concludes, "He’s running a depressingly inept presidential campaign. Mr. Romney, your entitlement reform ideas are essential, but when will the incompetence stop?"
even better I heard today it was Jimmy Carter's grandson that found this on you tube and turned it over to Mother Jones.
Talk about revenge! WTG is all I have to say