@ Camaro, Elfer 7 and Feoric
Here's the thing, the data doesn't really indicate that Romney's 47% remark is going to get any real traction for the Obama campaign or loose Romney many votes. The reason is if you break down the numbers of the amount of Americans who do not pay taxes...they don't lean towards Romney whatsoever. Furthermore, for the most part the people who are honestly offended (or at least upset) by his comments are not in the 3% that is going to decide this election. The 3% are the honest-to-god independents who have yet to make-up their minds. (More on them later.)
Furthermore, early polling by Gallup doesn't really spell doom for Romney.
Of independent voters:
53%: Does not change how they plan on voting.
29%: Less likely to vote for Romney.
15%: More likely to vote for Romney.
Now it is always difficult divining how independents are leaning especially in this gallup poll b/c I did not see poll data showing where the independents are leaning to know how the 53% who this does not change their votes are leaning. That's important to tell us how big of a difference the 14% gap between the 'Less likelies' and the 'More likelies' really is.
Most likely the majority of the 29% 'less likelies' were already going to vote Obama and the 15% 'more likelies' were going to vote for Romney.
Furthermore, as the campaign progresses this will get coverage and messages will get out there and things clarified. Afterall, Aiken in Mo has already recoverd 4-5% points (in the Democratic run PPP poll he closed a 10% gap to 1%) after a far, far, far more stupid comment. So with this...it didn't really hurt Romney all that much to begin with so this won't be what sinks him (if Obama wins).
In every race there are only about 3% of voters who truly do not know who they are going to vote for this close to the election. Most have really made up their minds around the conventions. Most years, the 3% don't really matter all that much since one party or the other has things locked up around this time. But not this year. This year it is going to be a photo-finish. Neither candidate has sealed the deal...neither candidate is winning. Most likely the state of the race is both are tied around 47.5-48% of the vote.
This year the 3% are going to be the deciders.
From the demographical breakdown I've seen, the 3% are not in the '47%' Romney allegedly attacked. Socio-economically speaking they tend to be middle and upper-middle class. And if you look at the Gallup poll about this subject...this is the socio-economic strata where the 'less likelies' start decreasing and the 'more likelies' start increasing.
Romney w/'Brown Face'. Seriously, you're going to post something filtered through a Manhattan arts & intelligentsia gossip rag like Gawker? They of all ppl should know that is make-up for TV and not an idiotic ploy to wear Latino 'black face'. That was just someone with a regular camera being an ass.
As for the flag and pledge of allegience misstep. A few things:
* It's not a gaffe, but a poor and incompetent decision by the campaign.
* I'm not fishing. This is called polioptics, how visuals and the use of symbols can effect a campaign. To plaster something so obviously partisan onto the American flag is just stupid. It's only really going to appeal to Obama's base, it also energizes his opposition and turns-off potential swing voters in the 3%.
* I've heard the term 'faux outrage', and that makes me sad. It's a made-up concept used by political shills to convince one's side that the other side is heartless, manipulative machines that are hell-bent on winning through whatever loathsome means necessary. Basically anyone who then goes on to repeat it, is most likely veiwing everything through heavily partisan lenses.
* The thing with my WTF moment about the tweet is this: how can a supposedly brilliant campaign (the best one in recent history according to Feoric) be so incredibly...
I've got to pause here, there is no word to describe the tweet. It is like stupidity & absurdity fucked and had a cognitively handicapped baby. So yeah...whatever word that would be...
...be so incredibly cognitively-handicapped-lovechild-of-stupidity-&-absurdity to think that putting the on the American flag is a symbol of that erases the red state/blue state divide.
With a race that is so close...why imprint yourself on national symbols that will illicit emotional responses? The 2008 'Hope' poster: iconic and a brilliant work of political art (also not made by the Obama campaign but a supporter). This flag? An unnecessary kicking of a sleeping animal in such a close race.
And since they are plastering these all over social media, bumper stickers, t-shirts, etc...if they don't pull them they are going to be everywhere as a constant reminder and generating emotional responses from supporters, opponents and undecideds all the way to the election.
Long after Romney's 47% gaffe has faded.