Um... Ok. Certainly possible.

Post #353,904 by hnick 2/2/12 7:02:37 AM 2/2/12 7:36:03 AM Reply	Um... Ok. Certainly possible. I've been trying to work on my general outlook and this is probably not the place to start... :-/ Edit: Gail Collins of the NYT seems to share your view. Ok, screw the Pollyanna bit. Let there be unbridled cynicism! Edited by hnick Feb. 2, 2012, 07:36:03 AM EST Expand All History
Post #353,905 by Another Scott 2/2/12 7:56:46 AM Reply	GMTA. I was just about to post Gail's piece. In fact, here it is: http://www.nytimes.c...speaks-oh-no.html :-) Of course, she's paid to write a column that often feeds controversies, so she might not be an unbiased observer. That said, I think she nails it. Cheers, Scott.
Post #353,906 by crazy 2/2/12 7:58:55 AM Reply	I read it as an attempt to "be" the 95% The "poor" aren't voting for him. The top X% (who the fuck knows the exact numbers, but you understand) will vote for him even when he says he does not care about them. They KNOW better. So, he needs to get everyone in the middle who does not think they are poor to think he will give them more (or let them keep more, depending on your point of view), not taking their stuff away and giving it to the leaches on the bottom. He's gunning for Box. Actually, no, Box doesn't mind the "true" poor getting his money, just that Box has the ability to live on shit that will make a billy goat puke (Box == Rambo, yes), so he expects everyone else to as well, at least if he is paying for it. But that 5-30% "underclass"? F'em. Let'em suffer a bit and work harder to avoid the suffering. Incentives. That seems to be the direction. So anyway, Romney wants that middle ground since they MIGHT vote for him, and they are antagonistic to the next level down.

Welcome to IWETHEY!