It is extremely important that a candidate put together a team that performs rigorous research on why things are the way they are and what numbers mean. Romney's "off the cuff" statements concerning not supporting the auto industry, or the banks, and connecting together the 47% demonstrate a sloppy reasoning at best, and a dangerously rash rush to judgments that affect everyone at worst.
For instance, the auto-industry not only consists of the car companies, but also the derived after markets or secondary markets that support them, and secondarily, the auto companies were not uniformly unprofitable, instead they were holding 401K's and insurances for all the current and past employees in the banks (responsibly), which when failed, left the auto companies totally liable for those cash flows.
Which makes one think that the banks are to blame, but they also are not. The real problem is that the fed is artificially holding inflation and min wages down while printing cash, lowering the "invested value" (in local banks) of the cash itself for all the populace, while the local banks invest the real capital and make money on the spread. Without going too far into it, the real problem is that much of the economic situation is due to Fed decisions over the last 50 years or so, so the Fed absolutely has to support those industries.
The main point is that Romney's off the cuff statements suggest that he hasn't even bother to spend the time understanding what the issues are himself before making grossly polarizing statements.