Headlines

Higgins, Cortes

The phrase that lost Romney the election

Many voters bought into this early portrayal of Romney as one who does not care for people. Others, who did not quite buy into it, still held it as a potential lens through which to consider his future actions and statements. Thus, when Romney essentially proclaimed that the 47% of Americans who receive government assistance were a lost cause, the statement confirmed, to the others, the narrative that he does not care for people.

You might ask, could not a rational voter get beyond whether they felt a candidate cared for them, and ask which candidate’s policies would best care for them and future generations? Such a purely rational decision-maker, often referred to as homo economicus, is rare among human beings that are first driven by their moral intuitions, like compassion, before their strategic reasoning.

In The Righteous Mind, moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt presents volumes of research demonstrating the primacy of moral intuitions which “reason” is then used to buttress. It includes his in-person interviews where, of the 1,620 times that the interviewees were told of a repulsive story that explicitly stated no one was harmed, 38%, tojustify their revulsion at the outcome, nonetheless said that someone was harmed. The interviewees’ moral intuitions immediately led them to condemn the repulsive story, claim there was a victim, and then use their strategic reasoning to support their position rather than truly consider whether there was a victim.

If you do not meet people’s moral needs, their strategic reasoning will not be unlocked to consider your arguments, but instead used to search for reasons to reject your arguments.

Read the Article

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

“Free stuff”

davidk on November 23, 2012 at 4:47 PM

Aww, poor widdle babies. How about we call them freeloaders?

We have the party of the industrious, and the party of freeloaders. Take that, Alinsky.

John the Libertarian on November 23, 2012 at 4:48 PM

It includes his in-person interviews where, of the 1,620 times that the interviewees were told of a repulsive story that explicitly stated no one was harmed, 38%, tojustify their revulsion at the outcome, nonetheless said that someone was harmed.

That was experimental error. It was really 47% who lied about the story to make themselves feel better.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Aww, poor widdle babies. How about we call them freeloaders?

We have the party of the industrious, and the party of freeloaders. Take that, Alinsky.

John the Libertarian on November 23, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Some people are in an ambiguous situation between those two, who is industrious, but they or someone in their family is on assistance. Such stupid rhetoric turns them away from the rest of your message. Nobody likes to be insulted.

thebrokenrattle on November 23, 2012 at 4:52 PM

The free land is inhabited by a majority of foolish babies.

Let them starve.

Schadenfreude on November 23, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Such stupid rhetoric turns them away from the rest of your message. Nobody likes to be insulted.

thebrokenrattle on November 23, 2012 at 4:52 PM

People used to, rightly, be ashamed of having to be living off of the government and not making their own way in the world. They still should be. Very much so. Instead, we have people who want to be proud of being leeches and others who think they are entitled to pride in their burdensome existences. And these same pathetic people want to use the same government they sponge off of in order to force independent, self-sustaining people to act and think the way the leeches deem appropriate. To call this twisted and demented is a massive understatement. This is nothing but pure sickness.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Many voters bought into this early portrayal of Romney as one who does not care for people.

Because he refused to fight back all summer, no doubt his “consultants” told him no one was waching TV in the summer. Even if he was out of his primary funds, he was supposed to be worth $250 million, and could have legally spent his own money on ads in swing states to fight back.

Wethal on November 23, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Romney didn’t say he didn’t care for them. He said they didn’t care for him. He said they would never vote for him because he was a republican, and thus, he couldn’t hope to get their vote. All of which is true.

keep the change on November 23, 2012 at 5:00 PM

If you do not meet people’s moral needs, their strategic reasoning will not be unlocked to consider your arguments, but instead used to search for reasons to reject your arguments.

Wanting other people to pay for your needs is not moral.

Basilsbest on November 23, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Too bad ALL the krappy things bho has said didn’t make to the bhopress for the little darlings that only watch, listen, read? I bet it would make your hair stand on ends if it got out?
L

letget on November 23, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Wanting other people to pay for your needs is not moral.

Basilsbest on November 23, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Tell that to a person who lost a job who has a family, and even though they started with saving and a retirement account, the ended up running out of money.

I am not saying the government should be there helping that person, but that person has a moral obligation to ensure his family is taken care of and might actually ask some people to voluntarily assist them with their needs. That is a moral position.

Maybe you meant to say, Wanting to use the force of government to force other people to pay for your needs is not moral.

astonerii on November 23, 2012 at 5:05 PM

People used to, rightly, be ashamed of having to be living off of the government and not making their own way in the world. They still should be. Very much so. Instead, we have people who want to be proud of being leeches and others who think they are entitled to pride in their burdensome existences. And these same pathetic people want to use the same government they sponge off of in order to force independent, self-sustaining people to act and think the way the leeches deem appropriate. To call this twisted and demented is a massive understatement. This is nothing but pure sickness.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Some people, more people than ever, survive with government help, and are not proud of it, hate it. Some people are hardworking but have parents, siblings, children in such situations.The namecalling,(leeches, freeloaders, moochers, parasites) hardens their hearts to your argument and will become that much less likely to vote your way. Nobody thinks highly of anyone who lives proudly off the government but if they are humble and ashamed about it, are you still gonna call them names?

thebrokenrattle on November 23, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Too bad ALL the krappy things bho has said didn’t make to the bhopress for the little darlings that only watch, listen, read? I bet it would make your hair stand on ends if it got out?
L

letget on November 23, 2012 at 5:02 PM

I’d be satisfied if they’d show half as much interest in Benghazi.

To you point, didn’t you love the psychotic attempt to minimize and downplay the “you didn’t build that” comment? Even Tapper, who some seem to think isn’t a hack (I think his clock stops maybe once or twice more than others) tried to smear the guy in the Romney ad who said he did build it.

With all the other noise out there and the louder “class warfare” crud I think this just became part of the background.

kim roy on November 23, 2012 at 5:13 PM

The namecalling,(leeches, freeloaders, moochers, parasites) hardens their hearts to your argument and will become that much less likely to vote your way.

So, noit only do they live off of me but I have to bend to their opinions? Great. How long do you think such a society could last?

Nobody thinks highly of anyone who lives proudly off the government but if they are humble and ashamed about it, are you still gonna call them names?

thebrokenrattle on November 23, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Those who are rightly ashamed of living off of others don’t go around voting for government to steal more money for themselves. It takes a certain type of despicable person to live off of the generosity of others and then DEMAND even more, at the point of a gun of government. There is no description that is low enough to truly describe such people. If they don’t like the truth of that, tough. Someone ought to instill them with the shame that a decent human being would have if he lived off of handouts. But we get exactly the opposite in this decaying society and the left pushes the opposite – that those living off of others are “entitled” to be proud of their situations – and we have too many people willing to bow to the pressure of the insane left. Fine. That’s how societies die. That’s how America was killed. I hope you like the AMerican Socialist Superstate because that’s what we live in, now. No law. No Constitution. No federalism. No nothing. Just tribalism and the force of the central government to force tribute from the productive people and working to enslave their thoughts and every single action, too. It is beyond offensive.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 5:22 PM

We’re offering opportunity, they’re offering a handout. Once was a time when Americans were too proud to accept the handout. I still can’t believe a key part of an American president’s reelection platform was free birth control.

The Count on November 23, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Some people, more people than ever, survive with government help, and are not proud of it, hate it. Some people are hardworking but have parents, siblings, children in such situations.The namecalling,(leeches, freeloaders, moochers, parasites) hardens their hearts to your argument and will become that much less likely to vote your way. Nobody thinks highly of anyone who lives proudly off the government but if they are humble and ashamed about it, are you still gonna call them names?

thebrokenrattle on November 23, 2012 at 5:13 PM

But they are true words. The reason it hardens their hearts is because they are doing evil and do not want to be called out and will refuse to their dying breaths they are doing so.

Those people are responsible to care for their own families. I should not be required to pay for their family’s needs. If I choose to donate money, goods or time to help them, it is my choice. If I am forced to hand over money I need to care for my own family, that is immoral.

astonerii on November 23, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Yeah, all those 90 year-old grandmothers on Medicaid, mooching off us makers to pay for their nursing home care. What a bunch of parasitic leeches. Makes me sick.

cam2 on November 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM

If you do not meet people’s moral needs, their strategic reasoning will not be unlocked to consider your arguments, but instead used to search for reasons to reject your arguments. This reality led Jack Kemp to say “They don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.

Hot Air is lovin’ them some Jack Kemp today!

;)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on November 23, 2012 at 5:40 PM

No, the problem was that the Obama-adoring media persisted in pushing the false narrative that what Mitt said meant he didn’t care about 47% of the country. Many of them–though not all–ARE takers and looking to keep the goodies coming and they weren’t going to vote for anyone who might upset the apple cart.

Meanwhile, of course, the MSM ignored the fact that Barry dissed every person who has ever busted his/her butt to start a successful business. All of whom are makers, who fund the goodies.

If I had to point to one thing that turned the tide against Romney (no pun intended), it would be the hurricane and that dolt Christie’s over-the-top embrace of Obama. It stopped the momentum for the Republicans, and hurt Mitt with voters who were sour on an incompetent and unpresidential Obama but wary of making a change. They were looking for a reason to stick with Barry, and Christie gave them one.

Meredith on November 23, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Yeah, all those 90 year-old grandmothers on Medicaid, mooching off us makers to pay for their nursing home care. What a bunch of parasitic leeches. Makes me sick.

cam2 on November 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Actually they are if they are not mothers with children to care for them.

If they do have children that could care for them, then those children are the moochers, passing off to other’s their responsibility.

In the end though, that 90 year old grandmother should have roots in a community where she would have family to help her, friends to help her, a close community that feels somewhat obligated to help her and charities that are willing to help her.

Because we remove these community roots from the equation of having a safety net, it damages the communities and destroys the moral fabric of the nation.

astonerii on November 23, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Nobody thinks highly of anyone who lives proudly off the government but if they are humble and ashamed about it, are you still gonna call them names?

thebrokenrattle on November 23, 2012 at 5:13 PM

But what do we do about the portion of those living off the government who are not bothered by it at all, who live proudly on the dole. They see the freebies as their right. They are not your 90 year old grammie, not your neighbor who has lost his job, not your disabled sister who can’t work.

katiejane on November 23, 2012 at 5:45 PM

cam2 on November 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM

MediCAID are un-Constitutional handouts to poor people. MediCare is what old people get and they paid taxes into the system (even though the system was un-Constitutional and a Ponzi-scheme, essentially).

You should know a little about the programs you are stupidly trying to defend.

Further, if she’s a 90 year old grandmother then where is her family to help her? I guess they all died, already. Or they don’t think they have any responsibilities to helping their own friggin family.

She’s living off of MediCare, or MediCAID as you claim? That’s only health insurance, genius. People don’t “live off of” MediCAID nor MediCare. But, you’re too slow to understand that.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Hot Air is lovin’ them some Jack Kemp today!

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on November 23, 2012 at 5:40 PM

The editors maybe; the readers, not so much, judging by their responses.

cam2 on November 23, 2012 at 5:49 PM

But what do we do about the portion of those living off the government who are not bothered by it at all, who live proudly on the dole. They see the freebies as their right. They are not your 90 year old grammie, not your neighbor who has lost his job, not your disabled sister who can’t work.

katiejane on November 23, 2012 at 5:45 PM

You can’t reach those people. But you CAN reach those people in your last sentence.

thebrokenrattle on November 23, 2012 at 5:50 PM

But what do we do about the portion of those living off the government who are not bothered by it at all, who live proudly on the dole. They see the freebies as their right. They are not your 90 year old grammie, not your neighbor who has lost his job, not your disabled sister who can’t work.

katiejane on November 23, 2012 at 5:45 PM

You cannot do anything about those living large off other people’s money taken by force and living proudly on the dole. The person paying for the stuff is too far removed from the person receiving to institute any changes or even know where the money went.

If she is a grandmother, she has family to care for her, they should be doing it.

If he lost his job, his family should help him, and to the extent needed the community could help him with food and a search for a job.

The disabled sister also is a disabled child of someone and has parents that can care for her, the siblings can if they are old enough, and if that is not enough, community and charity.

NONE of them need government help. Government help destroys the community and leaves them DEPENDENT on the government as there is no community resources left to help.

astonerii on November 23, 2012 at 5:51 PM

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Actually under the umbrella of Medicaid the really poor & the disabled are provided money to live off of – it’s called SSI – at least in NJ.

katiejane on November 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Hot Air is lovin’ them some Jack Kemp today!

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on November 23, 2012 at 5:40 PM

The editors maybe; the readers, not so much, judging by their responses.

cam2 on November 23, 2012 at 5:49 PM

That’s okay. I’m KempFan enough for everyone.

;)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on November 23, 2012 at 5:57 PM

MediCAID are un-Constitutional handouts to poor people. MediCare is what old people get and they paid taxes into the system (even though the system was un-Constitutional and a Ponzi-scheme, essentially).

You should know a little about the programs you are stupidly trying to defend.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Medicare doesn’t cover long term care for seniors. Medicaid does.

The elderly and disabled account for the majority of Medicaid spending. In 2007, 10 percent, or 5.8 million enrollees, were elderly, accounting for 25 percent of annual Medicaid spending, or $75 billion. Since Medicare does not cover institutional care, Medicaid is the largest source of public assistance for nursing homes. In 2009, Medicaid paid for 40 percent of all nursing home spending in the US.

Read more: http://healthcarecostmonitor.thehastingscenter.org/brittanyrush/where-the-money-goes/#ixzz2D5bcX3Sh

You shouldn’t be so strident when you don’t know what you’re talking about. Makes you look like the stupid one.

cam2 on November 23, 2012 at 6:03 PM

katiejane on November 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM

SSI is under Social Security, not MediCAID. SSI is federal, not state.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Thus, when Romney essentially proclaimed that the 47% of Americans who receive government assistance were a lost cause

Except that isn’t ACTUALLY what he said, even in essence. He said a message of lower taxes is not going to gain any traction with the 47% of the people who don’t pay any to begin with and he was right.

crosspatch on November 23, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Obviously Romney was wrong to call 47% takers who would never vote for him. He should have said 52%.

jnelchef on November 23, 2012 at 6:07 PM

You shouldn’t be so strident when you don’t know what you’re talking about. Makes you look like the stupid one.

cam2 on November 23, 2012 at 6:03 PM

They have to be poor before any MediCAID kicks in – as I wrote. They don’t just move to MediCAID because MediCare doesn’t cover long-term care.

Again, you said this is a grandmother. Where’s the family? You know, being taken care of in your old age used to be one of the reasons to have children.

And what point are you trying to make about this 90 year old grandmother who is living off of the state and other people’s money? I’m supposed to support her life (which her kids and grandkids won’t) and then thank her for the privilege? WTFFF?

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 6:10 PM

And what point are you trying to make about this 90 year old grandmother who is living off of the state and other people’s money? I’m supposed to support her life (which her kids and grandkids won’t)?

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 6:10 PM

No doubt. Why do I owe this hypothetical woman anything? She should have children to help care for her. She should have friends who help care for here. She should have been active in the community and have people who feel connected to her enough to help care for her. The community should have Churches and Charities that are well funded enough on the excess wealth and charitable contributions of the people of the community to help care for her. Not to mention, she should have had some savings and wealth creation stock piled for her old age so as to not unduly burden her family, her friends, her community and charitable organizations.

I have my own mother to care for. I have my own children to care for. I have my own friends that come into need from time to time. I have neighbors who come into need way too often considering they are mostly all on the dole. I have charities that I feel do a good job helping people without making them dependents that I would like to give more money to.

astonerii on November 23, 2012 at 6:16 PM

cam2 on November 23, 2012 at 6:03 PM

And, BTW, the article you linked to noted that MediCAID spending totaled over $350 billion in 2008 and that program is being supercharged by ObamaScare. How much do you think is enough? How much do you think can be spent of other people’s money on this program (which is totally un-Constitutional at the federal level)? How much do you think people sucking money off of this program ought to feel responsible for the decay of our society and the death of the nation?

How much have you donated to help the plight of these people you seem to claim you care so much about? Or are you just a specialist in determining how much other people should pay for a program that you feel good about? That’s a forte of the left, like all those idiot “patriotic millionaires” who want to raise everyone’s taxes but refuse to just pay more on their own. Truly despicable people.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 6:20 PM

She should have children to help care for her. She should have friends who help care for here. She should have been active in the community and have people who feel connected to her enough to help care for her. The community should have Churches and Charities that are well funded enough on the excess wealth and charitable contributions of the people of the community to help care for her. Not to mention, she should have had some savings and wealth creation stock piled for her old age so as to not unduly burden her family, her friends, her community and charitable organizations.

Yep.

I have my own mother to care for. I have my own children to care for. I have my own friends that come into need from time to time. I have neighbors who come into need way too often considering they are mostly all on the dole. I have charities that I feel do a good job helping people without making them dependents that I would like to give more money to.

astonerii on November 23, 2012 at 6:16 PM

Yep, again. My family took care of our grandparents. My grandfather had Parkinson’s (awful stuff, especially as it leaves the mind essentially intact as the body degrades to nothing) and we all had to pitch in to help him in his final years. He was an old school guy (as would make sense) and was embarrassed just to have to depend on us for his needs, but he had more than earned it as he had been a hard worker and had provided for the family all of his working life.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 6:25 PM

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 23, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Total spending in 2011 for the Federal government was around $3,600B
Total spending in 2011 for the Federal government on wealth transfers to individuals was $1,945B. More than half of all federal spending. Probably does not include unemployment benefits.

astonerii on November 23, 2012 at 6:27 PM

complete aside from the insult, the sentiment illustrated the campaign strategy that it was completely unwilling to advocate or argue for free market policy, instead relying on voters already inclined to support him (i.e., preferring to preach to the choir).

besser tot als rot on November 23, 2012 at 6:30 PM

The phrase that lost Romney the election

47 percent. That in turn led to the “cares about people like you” number.

Stoic Patriot on November 23, 2012 at 6:40 PM

The phrase that lost Romney the election

‘Solly, not tonight–I have a spritting headache’

:P

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on November 23, 2012 at 6:54 PM

The phrase RINO Christie lost the election.

Not Rinomney.

SparkPlug on November 23, 2012 at 7:11 PM

Opps. Meant Romney not Rinomney.

SparkPlug on November 23, 2012 at 7:12 PM

What this article doesn’t mention is that Team Obama’s ads about Mitt and Bain Capital were outright lies. Even the Washington Post was giving the Obama Campaign Pinocchio’s on a regular basis.

The Romney Campaign made the mistake of not fighting back against this narrative from the beginning.

TarheelBen on November 23, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Some people, more people than ever, survive with government help, and are not proud of it, hate it. Some people are hardworking but have parents, siblings, children in such situations.The namecalling,(leeches, freeloaders, moochers, parasites) hardens their hearts to your argument and will become that much less likely to vote your way. Nobody thinks highly of anyone who lives proudly off the government but if they are humble and ashamed about it, are you still gonna call them names?

thebrokenrattle on November 23, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Yup.

Because your imaginary stories and whining are meaningless when we see the people who really are on government assistance.

San Francisco has paid at least $150,000 for Kenny Walters in the past year. He isn’t employed, has an arrest record as long as his hair, and can often be found passed out in a doorway on Haight Street.

Kenny Walters’ job is to get drunk.

And there’s more:

Stanley Thornton Jr., 30, is a self-described “adult baby,” who sleeps in a huge crib, drinks from a bottle, wears diapers, lives with a former nurse who acts as his “mom”… and subsists on Social Security disability benefits.

And even more:

If the US Airforce did all airline food, it would be strawberries dipped in dark chocolate and grilled chicken salads all round.

Unfortunately this luxury is reserved for top US politicians alone, as new documents detailing Nancy Pelosi’s travel expenses reveal.

The former House Speaker was showered with a cornucopia of gourmet food and alcohol as she travelled over 90,000 miles around the world in just nine months last year – all courtesy of the US Airforce (USAF).

On one overseas excursion, her office even wrote to the USAF asking for strawberries dipped in dark chocolate as a birthday treat.

The documents, uncovered by political corruption watchdog Judicial Watch, reveal that the US taxpayer was billed for $101,429 (£64,000) in Mrs Pelosi’s in-flight services over a period of two years.

One internal Air Force email sent on March 25, 2010 said: ‘The speaker’s office is requesting egg salad sandwiches on wheat toast with fruit (watermelon, etc) for desert [sic].

‘It’s the speaker’s B-Day tomorrow so we’re also asking for something like chocolate covered strawberries (dark chocolate preferred)…’

Another member of the Air Force staff immediately replied: ‘Copy all. We’ll plan something for the birthday and take care of the meal.’

Another documents revealed an order for six raspberry chocolate cups, costing almost $16 (£10), and one for pasta spinach salad with grilled chicken. There were also orders for a variety of nuts, cranberry juice, raisins, dipping chocolate and spring water.

In short, these people who are whining and crying about being called moochers, freeloaders, and parasites are putting drunks, adult babies, and insider-trading millionaires on the welfare rolls and demanding that all the rest of us pay for them.

The short answer: Go to hell.

northdallasthirty on November 23, 2012 at 7:18 PM

The Romney Campaign made the mistake of not fighting back against this narrative from the beginning.

TarheelBen on November 23, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Most Competent Presidential Candidate Ever, except Thomas Jefferson. Washington I do not think had to run for office did he?

Not aimed at you TarheelBen, just adding to your thought.

astonerii on November 23, 2012 at 7:20 PM

Yeah, all those 90 year-old grandmothers on Medicaid, mooching off us makers to pay for their nursing home care. What a bunch of parasitic leeches. Makes me sick.

cam2 on November 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM

LOL. Try dealing with REAL examples of welfare, like I just pointed out, instead of posting hypothetical sob stories.

Now, if your concern is 90-year-old grandmothers, why are you spending BILLIONS of dollars on drunks, adult babies, and insider-trading multimillionaires instead?

Answer: You don’t give a damn about 90-year-old grandmothers. You’re just using them as an excuse to loot and mooch, you parasite.

northdallasthirty on November 23, 2012 at 7:22 PM

Romneycare

“I’m not concerned about the very poor”

“I should tell my story. I’m also unemployed.”

“I’ll tell you what, ten-thousand bucks? $10,000 bet?”

“Middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.”

“I like those fancy raincoats you bought. Really sprung for the big bucks.”

“I have some friends who are NASCAR team owners.”

“We have a president, who I think is a nice guy…”

So many to choose from…

sharrukin on November 23, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 2