This guy really is a true hero. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Republicans are their own worst enemies.

I think the importance of this tape shouldn't be downplayed. It was unlikely he would win, but this knocked the Romney campaign permanently off kilter. He looked focused only once after that - right after Obama's weak performance at the first debate, and I'm not sure Obama would have been weak if he hadn't been coasting a bit on the damage done by the video.

The tape alone didn't defeat Romney, but it was the hardest blow he took.

I like how he kept his identity secret while the video was still the big story. And then just about the time it's all blown over and everybody starts to forget, he comes back with this postscript to the story. Which puts it back in the news and gets everyone talking about inequality again.

(And it's not a tape.)

Let's all recognize this for what it is. A savvy attempt at getting tipped 47% on every single drink he pours for the rest of his career (assuming he has the good sense to work at a liberal establishment). Well Played Scott Prouty

@5 - Romney only said what right wingers say all the time. A takers versus providers world view is central to conservative ideology.

"Rmoney"?

Prouty did America a big favor, for sure, but let's not forget the effect of that bruising primary run. The whole case against Romney was laid out perfectly by Gingrich and Santorum early on; remember "King of Bain: When Romney Came To Town"?

McCain left a lovely legacy of Romney hit-piece fodder from 2008 as well.

This is perhaps the biggest reason Obama won, and a warning to Democrats who think they're a shoo-in next time: he was already coronated, and faced no opposition to make him look bad, while his opponent got shredded endlessly by the most brutal primary campaign in history -- which included not just loads of anti-Romney stuff. don't underestimate the effect of seeing the Republicans faff around with complete idiots like Perry and Cain for all those months. They "damaged the brand", as they say, making it really easy to paint the Republicans as "The Stupid Party".

2016 is going to be a fight on both sides again. Remember, the Republicans have looked dead before, after 1964, only to win four years later with the (relatively) moderate Nixon, and to full John Birch climactic mode with Reagan in 1980. Their "death" was in fact just the first shock wave of their most dominant period in history. (Interestingly, the first time a party was called "The Stupid Party" from within, by one of its own people, was the Tories in Britain, so-called by moderate-right think tank The Bow Group way back in 1951.)

...nose bone?

47 percent of the population IS made up of people who believe they are “victims,” and are “dependent on government.

It is a true statement. Look no further than the Slog...

The truth hurts yo!

See, knuckledragger @11 felt compelled to provide evidence for my statement @7.

@11 And yet Romney lost. Weird.

I'm with @10... Nose bone? This is the second time I've heard that phrase this week, and I have no idea what it means in this context. I mean, it sounds vaguely like a racist figure of speech...

@11: what you don't seem to understand is that Rmoney was trying to say that 47% of voters were going to vote for Obama no matter what, and he didn't need to try and win their votes. then he linked it to his (and your) patent BS about victimhood and government dependence.

he fucked up royally trying to make a valid point about electoral politics.

47 percent of the population IS made up of people who believe they are “victims,” and are “dependent on government.

It is a true statement. Look no further than the Slog...

... says the guy reading and commenting on the Slog.

@11, and yet the people who pay no income tax -- the source of the "47%" remark -- PAY MUCH MORE IN TAXES, as a portion of their income, than the 53% above them. Huh. Income tax is a relatively small part of the total tax bite.

And, of course, that 47% includes three million soldiers -- parasites, right? And something like 60 million retired people -- your parents, bloodsuckers, huh? The working poor? How many millions are they? They work twice as hard as you ever have, but don't earn enough to owe income tax. Some of them make $15,000 a year working full time.

The people "the 47%" is meant to demonize is more like "the 3%" of people who subsist, barely, on poverty-related welfare. People getting a "free ride" by your inane calculus but in reality struggle all day long every day with the worst this country has to offer.

But I heartily encourage you to continue this line of argument, because those 47% vote, and they will never again vote for the likes of you, or your preferred candidate. You are the zero percent, shithead.

@17: I'd say he's 100% shithead.

@18,

100% agreed

Fnarf. I imagine you huffing and puffing that boring screed with a lisp. Am I right?

The 47% don't pay any federal taxes either. Hmmmmm.

Do you think they should "pay their fair share" as the Libs are so fond of saying about wealthy people? After all, the 47% does use more government services than the rich.

Just axin...

@20: "The 47% don't pay any federal taxes either."
Yes they do. They pay into Social Security and Medicare. And as Fnarf explained, they tend to pay proportionally more taxes than the other 53%, since sales tax hits the poor harder.

@20,

The wealthy use FAR more government services than the poor.

From subsidies to tax credits to resource usage to public goods consumption and so on and so on...

Even John Stossel wrote a piece about how much more in government services he uses than the poor.

Do some research before you spout off.