Did Ann Romney impress or insult Puerto Ricans?

1. 73

   Mighty Momposted 12 years ago

   How would you rate Ann Romney's efforts to  "woo" Latino voters?
   Here are my takeways from her speech:
   1. You need to WAKE UP and GET PAST your BIASES
   2. Your governor and first lady are doing REMARKABLE THINGS on THAT LITTLE ISLAND (PR)
   3. And once again with the YOU PEOPLE in what sounds to me like a back-handed compliment , describing the "rocking good time" she had in Puerto Rico:
   "YOU PEOPLE really know how to PARTY"
   
   Really, Ann? Insulting your audience into voting for your husband?
   :rolleyes;
   
   Hispanics are an important voting bloc, especially in this battleground state. Romney said she’s speaking out to make “sure that those coalitions,” referring to women and Hispanic voters, “that would naturally be voting for another party wake up and say, You’d better really look at the issues this time.”
   
   “You’d better really look at your future and figure out who’s going to be the guy that’s going to make it better for you and your children, and there is only one answer,” Mrs. Romney said, giving a harsher pitch than we usually hear from the woman who wants to be the next first lady.
   
   “It really is a message that would resonate well if they could just get past some of their biases that have been there from the Democratic machines that have made us look like we don’t care about this community,” Romney said. “And that is not true. We very much care about you and your families and the opportunities that are there for you and your families.”
   
   She stressed her immigrant roots, mentioning that her grandfather was Welsh.
   
   “I know what it’s like to be the daughter of immigrants,” she said.
   
   Romney praised the first lady of Puerto Rico, Luce Fortuno, who introduced her last night, calling them “kindred spirits.”
   
   “What she and her husband are doing on that little island is quite remarkable. You should be so proud,” Romney said before her son Craig mentioned that Gov. Luis Fortuno was actually sitting in the audience.
   
   “Luis! Ola!” Romney said, clearly surprised.
   
   ” I had the most rocking time in Puerto Rico at a political rally than I’ve ever had in my entire life,” Romney said. “You people really know how to party. It was crazy!”

   replyreport
2. 60

   janesixposted 12 years ago

   Ann Romney is only impressive in the fact that she is slightly less disgusting than Michelle Obama.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      xstaticposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I would have to say way more disgusting really.

      replyreport
3. 61

   swordsbaneposted 12 years ago

   That's the problem with insults; they depend so much on the audience.  If she had been saying the same things at a speech on Rhode Island, people might...MIGHT be a little miffed, but it wouldn't even get close to the same media attention.
   
   It also has to do with the mind of the speaker.  Despite what the popular mode of thought is, a word cannot be offensive, nor can a phrase.  They are sounds in the air or words on a page.  The intent of the person speaking is the only thing that's important.  While I don't particularly like Republicans in general or the Romney family in particular (I think they are ignorant assholes) I can't find anything particularly offensive in what was said.  Offensive language is more often percieved as worse by those other than it was directed at.  Any Puerto Ricans want to weigh in on this?

   replyreport
   1. 73

      Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The intent of the speaker is not always what the audience receives. And yes, we all bring our inherent biases to the table, especially in something as emotionally loaded as politics. Are we listening for new information or to reinforce what we already know?
      
      Words are very powerful and can (sometimes intentionally, sometimes unintentionally) have the opposite effect than intended.
      It's important to consider how your choice of words will be perceieved by the reader/listener/viewer.
      Which is why focus group testing is so, so important in advertising.
      "Will our potential customers respond better to word X or word Y? Or maybe they actually prefer word Z, a word we never even considered."
      
      Mrs. Romney's intent here is to convince Latino/Latina voters -- not just Puerto Ricans -- to take another look at the GOP and her husband as a better candidate for their needs than Obama.
      Any candidate who refers to my group as "YOU PEOPLE" and tells us we had "BETTER WAKE UP" does not make me feel included, valued, or intelligent.
      No one likes to be talked down to. Not even children.
      
      I guess we will find out soon how successful she was.
      

      replyreport
      1. 61

         swordsbaneposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         If her intent was to win over the people of Puerto Rico, then it follows that her intent was not malicious. What you say is true; we do have a responsibility to speak carefully and consider our audience, but as an audience we also have a responsibility to look further than just what was said and try to divine an intent.  Since we agree on intent, the logical conclusion is that Mrs Romney was an idiot, not a racist.  Unfortunately, many who listened to her speech will erroneously leap to the conclusion that she was a racist and took this as an opportunity to try to slip racial slurs into the conversation, hoping no one would notice so she could talk down to those she obviously feels superior to.  Those people are even more idiotic than Mrs Romney.  They are being willfully ignorant, wheras she was just being ignorant.

         replyreport
         1. 73

            Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Agreed.
            Intent certainly not malicious. Overly ambitious and an uphill battle, perhaps.
            Not unlike Mitt addressing the NAACP.
            
            I do not believe Mrs. Romney is racist. She has trouble communicating "straight across" to audiences out of her comfort zone.
            Not an effective "bridger" basically.
            I believe she is not a natural orator, but is being thrust into both roles: public speaking in general and having to speak persuasively to audiences she is not naturally comfortable with.
            I get the impression that she, like her husband, is a private, quiet person. But very passionate about her belief that her husband would be a great president.
            Like many others, it's a struggle not to see both of them as elitist. But multiple exposures to interviews and speeches by both have left me little choice but to conclude they really do feel superior and are out of touch.
            
            Also agree with you the audience has a responsibility to look beyond the words and divine an intent. But when someone is a powerful, persuasive speaker,  it's easier to believe what they're saying.
            
            Thank goodness we have organizations like factcheck.org to call those silver-tongued devils (Christie, Ryan -- and no doubt next week speakers on the "other side") on their BS!

            replyreport