WTF Mitt? A public $10,000 bet?

[Katzndogz]

If you think that the election will turn on a $10,000 bet or Perry's number of Supreme Court Justices you are seriously delusional.

 

[Inthemiddle]

If he said $1 million, would that have been better?

 

[Toro]

The guy could have said "Betcha a dollar" and been just fine, but he picked a sufficiently high amount to make most people back down from even a sure thing. It's an arrogant, elitist thing to do and for this working man, about as endearing as Mr. Potter talking down to the residents of Bedford Falls. Prick.

It was a dumb thing to do, no doubt.

If he said $1, it would have been much more effective.

But in the moment, you don't have the luxury of Sunday morning quarterbacking. I can't count the times, even remember the times, but there have been a LOT of them, after a conversation or discussion that I wished I had said thus and so or had said something differently. I would bet $10,000 that we have all been there at some time or another.

To nitpick an extemporaneous phrase or term that probably would have been said differently if the person had had time to think about it rather than focus on the intent of the comment is just silly and unfair to the person.

I'm sure this guy would agree!

[youtube]KDwODbl3muE[/youtube]

 

[Zander]

Obama is a lock! He's got it made now!! Woohoo!!!

Oh wait..

 

[JoeB131]

For the record, I think for either side to make a big deal out of the $10,000 bet comment is petty and silly. Rick Perry, I believe honorably, attempted to use something from Mitt's book in the debate. Mitt was absolutely convinced Perry was using it out of context and incorrectly and defended his own words in his own book. The bet was a way of expressing his conviction that he could defend his point of view.

How many times have we 'bet' somebody a $100 dollars or a million dollars that we never expected to be taken seriously when we were convinced of the rightness of our fact or point of view?

For heavens sake, whether it is Obama or Mitt Romney or Rick Perry or Michelle Bachmann or any of us at USMB, if people can't find any better way to debate than to nitpick a single phrase or term or word or fact as the total of what anybody says, we are a pretty pathetic bunch.

I disagree.

Romney's biggest problem has been his inability to connect with working class people, including working class republicans. He simply has never had a time in his life where he's had to work to make ends meet. Perry grew up dirt poor on a farm in texas, while Gingrich struggled as an academic and Bachmann came from very middle class backgrounds. Mitt has had everything handed to him his whole life. He's a guy who put working class guys out of jobs to make himself richer and then only balked at hiring illegals to do his lawn work on the cheap "because I'm running for office, for Pete's Sake!"

So for him to blurt out "$10,000" knowing that it's scratch to him and real money to Perry, adn then smugly look down on Perry when he refused the bet, just dug him into a deeper hole.

Mitt had another problem last night as well. With Huntsman gone, he became the most leftward guy on the stage. Not a good place to be.

 

[Foxfyre]

For the record, I think for either side to make a big deal out of the $10,000 bet comment is petty and silly. Rick Perry, I believe honorably, attempted to use something from Mitt's book in the debate. Mitt was absolutely convinced Perry was using it out of context and incorrectly and defended his own words in his own book. The bet was a way of expressing his conviction that he could defend his point of view.

How many times have we 'bet' somebody a $100 dollars or a million dollars that we never expected to be taken seriously when we were convinced of the rightness of our fact or point of view?

For heavens sake, whether it is Obama or Mitt Romney or Rick Perry or Michelle Bachmann or any of us at USMB, if people can't find any better way to debate than to nitpick a single phrase or term or word or fact as the total of what anybody says, we are a pretty pathetic bunch.

I disagree.

Romney's biggest problem has been his inability to connect with working class people, including working class republicans. He simply has never had a time in his life where he's had to work to make ends meet. Perry grew up dirt poor on a farm in texas, while Gingrich struggled as an academic and Bachmann came from very middle class backgrounds. Mitt has had everything handed to him his whole life. He's a guy who put working class guys out of jobs to make himself richer and then only balked at hiring illegals to do his lawn work on the cheap "because I'm running for office, for Pete's Sake!"

So for him to blurt out "$10,000" knowing that it's scratch to him and real money to Perry, adn then smugly look down on Perry when he refused the bet, just dug him into a deeper hole.

Mitt had another problem last night as well. With Huntsman gone, he became the most leftward guy on the stage. Not a good place to be.

I don't know that he had any thought in his head how much money that was to him or to Perry when he said it anymore than I would be thinking whether I could afford the $100 I bet somebody to emphasize a point. And you don't know either. It was a number he pulled out of thin air in an extemporaneous exchange. Coulda, woulda, shoulda is a great game for armchair quarterbacks to play, but unless you've been in an active debate situation like that, you can't sympathize with how easy it is to say something other than what you would say if you had time to think about it a moment or two.

That he is having problems connecting with working class people is a fact, and of course the media and those who are only dealing with the shallow stuff will jump on something like that and make a big deal out of it. By all means lets don't pass up a chance to emphasize that using Romney's own words.

I prefer to give people an honest shake and evaluate them on what matters. As long as the opposition can keep everybody focused on Romney offering a tongue-in-cheek $10,000 bet, they'll never get to much of anything that matters. And Romney is pretty far down on my short list of who I think I want to be the GOP nominee too.

 

[JoeB131]

I don't know that he had any thought in his head how much money that was to him or to Perry when he said it anymore than I would be thinking whether I could afford the $100 I bet somebody to emphasize a point. And you don't know either. It was a number he pulled out of thin air in an extemporaneous exchange. Coulda, woulda, shoulda is a great game for armchair quarterbacks to play, but unless you've been in an active debate situation like that, you can't sympathize with how easy it is to say something other than what you would say if you had time to think about it a moment or two.

That he is having problems connecting with working class people is a fact, and of course the media and those who are only dealing with the shallow stuff will jump on something like that and make a big deal out of it. By all means lets don't pass up a chance to emphasize that using Romney's own words.

I prefer to give people an honest shake and evaluate them on what matters. As long as the opposition can keep everybody focused on Romney offering a tongue-in-cheek $10,000 bet, they'll never get to much of anything that matters. And Romney is pretty far down on my short list of who I think I want to be the GOP nominee too.

My attitude. Romney is slime. He doesn't deserve an "honest shake" because he's a dishonest person. Sleazy business practices, crackpot religion, flip-flopping on a dime. So if this is something I can use to turn the screws on him, I'll happily do it. Absolutely.

I really hate the man.

 

[Toro]

I don't know that he had any thought in his head how much money that was to him or to Perry when he said it anymore than I would be thinking whether I could afford the $100 I bet somebody to emphasize a point. And you don't know either. It was a number he pulled out of thin air in an extemporaneous exchange. Coulda, woulda, shoulda is a great game for armchair quarterbacks to play, but unless you've been in an active debate situation like that, you can't sympathize with how easy it is to say something other than what you would say if you had time to think about it a moment or two.

That he is having problems connecting with working class people is a fact, and of course the media and those who are only dealing with the shallow stuff will jump on something like that and make a big deal out of it. By all means lets don't pass up a chance to emphasize that using Romney's own words.

I prefer to give people an honest shake and evaluate them on what matters. As long as the opposition can keep everybody focused on Romney offering a tongue-in-cheek $10,000 bet, they'll never get to much of anything that matters. And Romney is pretty far down on my short list of who I think I want to be the GOP nominee too.

My attitude. Romney is slime. He doesn't deserve an "honest shake" because he's a dishonest person. Sleazy business practices, crackpot religion, flip-flopping on a dime. So if this is something I can use to turn the screws on him, I'll happily do it. Absolutely.

I really hate the man.

 

[J.E.D]

That "bet" is going to be a big part of the election cycle..throughout.
Mitt just messed up, yet again. Someone pointed out that $10,000. is a three month salary for folks in Iowa.

Four or five months for many others.

So much for Mr. ‘Average American.’

How much do you bet when you are convinced you are right?? A nickel- I will take that bet. Get flippin real, I can't beleive for an instant that anyone would pick up on that, we all do that.

We're not all running for POTUS at a time when the US economy is barely above stagnant and the gap between rich and poor is growing ever wider, with the middle class shrinking more every day. It makes him look out of touch with your average American (not that he needed any more help). It was stupid, childish and unpresidential.

 

[Synthaholic]

It was a dumb thing to do, no doubt.

If he said $1, it would have been much more effective.

But in the moment, you don't have the luxury of Sunday morning quarterbacking. I can't count the times, even remember the times, but there have been a LOT of them, after a conversation or discussion that I wished I had said thus and so or had said something differently. I would bet $10,000 that we have all been there at some time or another.

To nitpick an extemporaneous phrase or term that probably would have been said differently if the person had had time to think about it rather than focus on the intent of the comment is just silly and unfair to the person.

I'm sure this guy would agree!

[youtube]KDwODbl3muE[/youtube]

Excellent example of how, when the establishment does not want a candidate, all forces are marshaled to deny that candidate a shot. They got all their media cronies on both sides to make a huge fucking deal over Dean rallying a bunch of college students. There were even questions about his mental stability from FOXNEWS. And Chris Matthews was not much better.

It was one of the most pitiful examples since they all had it in for Perot, when he burst onto the scene in 1990/91.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't know that he had any thought in his head how much money that was to him or to Perry when he said it anymore than I would be thinking whether I could afford the $100 I bet somebody to emphasize a point. And you don't know either. It was a number he pulled out of thin air in an extemporaneous exchange. Coulda, woulda, shoulda is a great game for armchair quarterbacks to play, but unless you've been in an active debate situation like that, you can't sympathize with how easy it is to say something other than what you would say if you had time to think about it a moment or two.

That he is having problems connecting with working class people is a fact, and of course the media and those who are only dealing with the shallow stuff will jump on something like that and make a big deal out of it. By all means lets don't pass up a chance to emphasize that using Romney's own words.

I prefer to give people an honest shake and evaluate them on what matters. As long as the opposition can keep everybody focused on Romney offering a tongue-in-cheek $10,000 bet, they'll never get to much of anything that matters. And Romney is pretty far down on my short list of who I think I want to be the GOP nominee too.

My attitude. Romney is slime. He doesn't deserve an "honest shake" because he's a dishonest person. Sleazy business practices, crackpot religion, flip-flopping on a dime. So if this is something I can use to turn the screws on him, I'll happily do it. Absolutely.

I really hate the man.

Well he isn't my first choice at the moment or, as I said, high on the short list of candidates I think I can support come November. But I don't hate him or even dislike him and I prefer to give everybody a fair shake. My Christmas wish is that enough people become sick enough of the politics of personal destruction and will start looking for people who can and will actually do the job in the House, in the Senate, and in the White House. That will require focusing on credentials, resume, and track record of the candidates instead of the silly stuff like a $10,000 bet.

 

[California Girl]

Four or five months for many others.

So much for Mr. ‘Average American.’

How much do you bet when you are convinced you are right?? A nickel- I will take that bet. Get flippin real, I can't beleive for an instant that anyone would pick up on that, we all do that.

We're not all running for POTUS at a time when the US economy is barely above stagnant and the gap between rich and poor is growing ever wider, with the middle class shrinking more every day. It makes him look out of touch with your average American (not that he needed any more help). It was stupid, childish and unpresidential.

And yet, you'll happily high five whatever asinine bullshit that Obama utters. Go figure.

 

[California Girl]

I don't know that he had any thought in his head how much money that was to him or to Perry when he said it anymore than I would be thinking whether I could afford the $100 I bet somebody to emphasize a point. And you don't know either. It was a number he pulled out of thin air in an extemporaneous exchange. Coulda, woulda, shoulda is a great game for armchair quarterbacks to play, but unless you've been in an active debate situation like that, you can't sympathize with how easy it is to say something other than what you would say if you had time to think about it a moment or two.

That he is having problems connecting with working class people is a fact, and of course the media and those who are only dealing with the shallow stuff will jump on something like that and make a big deal out of it. By all means lets don't pass up a chance to emphasize that using Romney's own words.

I prefer to give people an honest shake and evaluate them on what matters. As long as the opposition can keep everybody focused on Romney offering a tongue-in-cheek $10,000 bet, they'll never get to much of anything that matters. And Romney is pretty far down on my short list of who I think I want to be the GOP nominee too.

My attitude. Romney is slime. He doesn't deserve an "honest shake" because he's a dishonest person. Sleazy business practices, crackpot religion, flip-flopping on a dime. So if this is something I can use to turn the screws on him, I'll happily do it. Absolutely.

I really hate the man.

Well he isn't my first choice at the moment or, as I said, high on the short list of candidates I think I can support come November. But I don't hate him or even dislike him and I prefer to give everybody a fair shake. My Christmas wish is that enough people become sick enough of the politics of personal destruction and will start looking for people who can and will actually do the job in the House, in the Senate, and in the White House. That will require focusing on credentials, resume, and track record of the candidates instead of the silly stuff like a $10,000 bet.

If I had a hissy fit every time some politician said something stupid, I would be exhausted. What I find funny is that so many idiots are getting all butthurt about it. Frankly, I would think we'd have more intelligent issues to be concerned with. I am, sadly, not surprised that idiots are making this into an issue.

 

[Foxfyre]

My attitude. Romney is slime. He doesn't deserve an "honest shake" because he's a dishonest person. Sleazy business practices, crackpot religion, flip-flopping on a dime. So if this is something I can use to turn the screws on him, I'll happily do it. Absolutely.

I really hate the man.

Well he isn't my first choice at the moment or, as I said, high on the short list of candidates I think I can support come November. But I don't hate him or even dislike him and I prefer to give everybody a fair shake. My Christmas wish is that enough people become sick enough of the politics of personal destruction and will start looking for people who can and will actually do the job in the House, in the Senate, and in the White House. That will require focusing on credentials, resume, and track record of the candidates instead of the silly stuff like a $10,000 bet.

If I had a hissy fit every time some politician said something stupid, I would be exhausted. What I find funny is that so many idiots are getting all butthurt about it. Frankly, I would think we'd have more intelligent issues to be concerned with. I am, sadly, not surprised that idiots are making this into an issue.

Also, there are some who aren't going to give ANYBODY but their own choice a fair hearing of any kind. As JoeB said, he hates Romney so all the stuff about Romney having trouble with connecting, etc. is just the usual smoke screen. Romney could have said ANYTHING and it would be wrong to somebody who hates him. So they'll keep making anything into an issue to avoid discussing the actual issues that we should be focused on if we want the best possible candidate available to be elected. I despair sometimes that we'll ever get back to the grown ups running the country again.

 

[Foxfyre]

But oh well, it's going on 2 a.m. here and I get overly cranky when I get really tired. So I'm headed to bed.

Good night eveybody.

 

[JoeB131]

Excellent example of how, when the establishment does not want a candidate, all forces are marshaled to deny that candidate a shot. They got all their media cronies on both sides to make a huge fucking deal over Dean rallying a bunch of college students. There were even questions about his mental stability from FOXNEWS. And Chris Matthews was not much better.

It was one of the most pitiful examples since they all had it in for Perot, when he burst onto the scene in 1990/91.

Or maybe these people were really crazy.

Sorry, I actually seriously considered voting for Perot in 1992. Until he did that whole dropping out thing, and then got back in after claiming that Bush was scheming to ruin his daughter's wedding.

And Dean's "scream" just capped off a bunch of erratic behavior.

I do agree both parties will sandbag people they don't want. The GOP establishment sandbagged Huckabee four years ago. Again, so what? It's our own fault for playing along, but we do.

 

[JoeB131]

I don't know that he had any thought in his head how much money that was to him or to Perry when he said it anymore than I would be thinking whether I could afford the $100 I bet somebody to emphasize a point. And you don't know either. It was a number he pulled out of thin air in an extemporaneous exchange. Coulda, woulda, shoulda is a great game for armchair quarterbacks to play, but unless you've been in an active debate situation like that, you can't sympathize with how easy it is to say something other than what you would say if you had time to think about it a moment or two.

That he is having problems connecting with working class people is a fact, and of course the media and those who are only dealing with the shallow stuff will jump on something like that and make a big deal out of it. By all means lets don't pass up a chance to emphasize that using Romney's own words.

I prefer to give people an honest shake and evaluate them on what matters. As long as the opposition can keep everybody focused on Romney offering a tongue-in-cheek $10,000 bet, they'll never get to much of anything that matters. And Romney is pretty far down on my short list of who I think I want to be the GOP nominee too.

My attitude. Romney is slime. He doesn't deserve an "honest shake" because he's a dishonest person. Sleazy business practices, crackpot religion, flip-flopping on a dime. So if this is something I can use to turn the screws on him, I'll happily do it. Absolutely.

I really hate the man.

Well he isn't my first choice at the moment or, as I said, high on the short list of candidates I think I can support come November. But I don't hate him or even dislike him and I prefer to give everybody a fair shake. My Christmas wish is that enough people become sick enough of the politics of personal destruction and will start looking for people who can and will actually do the job in the House, in the Senate, and in the White House. That will require focusing on credentials, resume, and track record of the candidates instead of the silly stuff like a $10,000 bet.

Well, my mind was made up on Romney a long time ago, so this didn't actually change my opinion. But it was indicative of the deep rooted problems with the guy.

He's a great candidate for people like Toro who watch "It's a Wonderful Life" and cheer for Mr. Potter driving people out of their homes, while that "socialist" George Bailey was helping them buy houses and build a community.

For the rest of us, he's a clueless rich guy who's never gotten dirt under his fingers in his life.

The only reason he's considered "qualified" is because he's willing to spend ridiculous amounts of his own money on these failed runs.

The unfortunate thing is, the Rank and File of the GOP said "Hell, NO!" to this guy four years ago, when the GOP Establishment tried to shove him down our throats. But here they come again, and they are finding themselves getting pretty much the same result after encouraging a lot more qualified guys (Thune, Daniels, Pawlenty, etc.) that it was "his turn".

And this, I think, is a problem with the GOP. We have a bad habit of supporting people who lost last time because "it's their turn". The Democrats have a habit of "shooting their wounded", that if you lose, you're done.

Dole and McCain should have shown us the folly of that kind of thinking.

 

[Foxfyre]

My attitude. Romney is slime. He doesn't deserve an "honest shake" because he's a dishonest person. Sleazy business practices, crackpot religion, flip-flopping on a dime. So if this is something I can use to turn the screws on him, I'll happily do it. Absolutely.

I really hate the man.

Well he isn't my first choice at the moment or, as I said, high on the short list of candidates I think I can support come November. But I don't hate him or even dislike him and I prefer to give everybody a fair shake. My Christmas wish is that enough people become sick enough of the politics of personal destruction and will start looking for people who can and will actually do the job in the House, in the Senate, and in the White House. That will require focusing on credentials, resume, and track record of the candidates instead of the silly stuff like a $10,000 bet.

Well, my mind was made up on Romney a long time ago, so this didn't actually change my opinion. But it was indicative of the deep rooted problems with the guy.

He's a great candidate for people like Toro who watch "It's a Wonderful Life" and cheer for Mr. Potter driving people out of their homes, while that "socialist" George Bailey was helping them buy houses and build a community.

For the rest of us, he's a clueless rich guy who's never gotten dirt under his fingers in his life.

The only reason he's considered "qualified" is because he's willing to spend ridiculous amounts of his own money on these failed runs.

The unfortunate thing is, the Rank and File of the GOP said "Hell, NO!" to this guy four years ago, when the GOP Establishment tried to shove him down our throats. But here they come again, and they are finding themselves getting pretty much the same result after encouraging a lot more qualified guys (Thune, Daniels, Pawlenty, etc.) that it was "his turn".

And this, I think, is a problem with the GOP. We have a bad habit of supporting people who lost last time because "it's their turn". The Democrats have a habit of "shooting their wounded", that if you lose, you're done.

Dole and McCain should have shown us the folly of that kind of thinking.

Well Romney may be the absolute worst of anybody running for President. I don't know that, but let's assume for a minute that he is.

Do you in your wildest imagination think he would have done a worse job as POTUS than Barack Obama has done? Do you think he would have done anywhere near the damage? Do you think the economy would not now be doing better with Romney at the helm?

 

[Synthaholic]

Excellent example of how, when the establishment does not want a candidate, all forces are marshaled to deny that candidate a shot. They got all their media cronies on both sides to make a huge fucking deal over Dean rallying a bunch of college students. There were even questions about his mental stability from FOXNEWS. And Chris Matthews was not much better.

It was one of the most pitiful examples since they all had it in for Perot, when he burst onto the scene in 1990/91.

Or maybe these people were really crazy.

Sorry, I actually seriously considered voting for Perot in 1992. Until he did that whole dropping out thing, and then got back in after claiming that Bush was scheming to ruin his daughter's wedding.

And Dean's "scream" just capped off a bunch of erratic behavior.

I do agree both parties will sandbag people they don't want. The GOP establishment sandbagged Huckabee four years ago. Again, so what? It's our own fault for playing along, but we do.

Bullshit. List them, liar.

 

[BluePhantom]

In reality this is no big deal. Romney was simply trying to emphasize a falsehood that Perry has been spreading*. His method was not good and it's going to play badly, not because anyone really takes it seriously but because it provides an opportunity for the left to make the same claims we have seen on this thread: he's an elitist, people would kill for $10,000 and he's willing to blow that much on a bet so he's out of touch, etc. The reality though is that it's an example of people capitalizing on a poorly phrased statement for political gain.


*"Perry refused an offer from Romney to bet $10,000 as to who was right. In fact, Perry is wrong and Romney is correct. As we have written a couple of times before, the book was revised and this line was removed: “We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country.” But the phrase “the same thing” refers to the goals of the state law: “portable, affordable health insurance,” not the controversial individual mandate or the entire law. Romney saw the Massachusetts plan as a potential model for other states, if they so choose, but not as a federal mandate."

FactCheck.org : More Baloney at ABC/Yahoo! Debate