4 ms·

You have it backwards. She was trying to differentiate his racist support from his "we're worried about our jobs" support. Read the text of her speech. "You kn

by finiter 10y ago

You have it backwards. She was trying to differentiate his racist support from his "we're worried about our jobs" support. Read the text of her speech. "You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. [...] But the other basket — and I know this because I see friends from all over America here — I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas — as well as, you know, New York and California — but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change. It doesn’t really even matter where it comes from. They don’t buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won’t wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroine, feel like they’re in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well." EDIT: The transcript I pulled this from: http://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables-transcript/ http://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorable...

drakenot 10y ago
Thanks, I had never read the full quote. That seems much more reasonable than what everyone made it out to be.
- finiter 10y ago
  Be sure to also read her State Department emails that were leaked. Paints a very different picture of her than what headlines do.
rayiner 10y ago
She called 50% of Trump's supporters racists, homophobes, etc. How is that not exactly what the quote is made out to be? If she had said "some of Trump's supporters" you'd be right.
- finiter 10y ago
  I'll agree that she worded that poorly and was unkind. Even Clinton apologized for that part. " “I regret saying ‘half’ -- that was wrong." [1] That's one of the differences between the candidates. In support of her defense of the statement: "to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half". That sounds very vague to me. She even referred to "you could put half" as "grossly generalistic". Then in the rest of her statement she got to empathizing with the people that aren't voting because we have too many Muslims and brown people make me squeeamish. [1]: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/10/clinton-says-regrets-calling-trump-supporters-deplorables.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/10/clinton-says-regr...
- tptacek 10y ago
  You'd think by now politicians --- you have one job! --- would learn that this message always loses. Attack the candidate, never the candidate's supporters. Trump offers a corollary, which is simply "if you're attacking someone other than the candidate, just be super specific about who you're attacking". The "deplorable" thing cost Clinton. The attacks on the Khan family don't seem to have cost Trump much at all.
CamperBob2 10y ago
If you say something like that and expect anyone to keep listening or reading after your first sentence, you have no business -- or future -- in politics.
- finiter 10y ago
  Psh. Lots of politicians have said far worse and been elected. Example: Donald Trump.
  - CamperBob2 10y ago
    He didn't have to outrun the proverbial bear. He only had to outrun Hillary.
    - finiter 10y ago
      I don't understand what you're saying. Are you agreeing with me that your previous statement is wrong?
drblast 10y ago
Imagine you're a poorly educated working class person who's struggling. You hear both candidates speak. Hillary says "We need to have empathy for those people," a phrase that's clearly referring to you by the surrounding context. She's obviously not talking to you, she's talking about you. Trump says "I LOVE THE POORLY EDUCATED!!! And I know you're struggling and I'm going to fix it!" He's talking directly to you. Who do you vote for? Does it even matter what she says at that point about empathy? No. She clearly doesn't even consider the possibility that a poorly educated person who's leaning Trump would even be in the audience. Does "We need to understand you people and empathize with you" sound inclusive? If you're in Camp Hillary it might. If you're not in Camp Hillary, well, those words are pretty much an admission that the in-crowd doesn't relate to you at all, or consider you one of them. And that's the complete arrogance and obliviousness that allowed the left to lose an election to an extremely weak opponent.
- finiter 10y ago
  I feel like you're inventing a story here where one candidate talked to people but the other talked about them. It doesn't hold up. Not just beacuse none of your quotes were actually quotes. Nor just because Trump voters had a higher-than-average income. "We need to have empathy for those people" because of "those people" is exclusive, but "We need to understand you people and empathize with you" is also exclusive. Is it the "you people"? Or should she have lied and said "I'm one of you". I don't know if it matters because she didn't say that anyway. Then the "I love the poorly educated", which is also a "[them]" is inclusive. "She clearly doesn't even consider the possibility that a poorly educated person who's leaning Trump would even be in the audience." She made that speech at a fundraiser. Why would she speak to someone who maybe was there isntead of the people that were? What did Trump say at his private fundraisers? Should we compare stump speeches? Did your hypothetical voter hear Trumps speeches where he constantly mentions how rich he is, how much money he makes in real estate deals, and all the fancy stuff he does? How many golf courses did he talk about in a day? I don't see why it's arrogant to not believe in Trump as a populist. Or to see irony in the claim that one candidate better cares about, relates to, or understands the poorly educated when his party wants to limit social safety nets, unions, health care, and the ability of poor people and minorities to vote. As to the left's obliviousness, our candidate get more votes.
rak00n 10y ago
It would sound much nicer if she had left that basket of deplorable out of the statement.

by finiter 10y ago

drakenot 10y ago

Thanks, I had never read the full quote. That seems much more reasonable than what everyone made it out to be.

finiter 10y ago
Be sure to also read her State Department emails that were leaked. Paints a very different picture of her than what headlines do.

rayiner 10y ago

She called 50% of Trump's supporters racists, homophobes, etc. How is that not exactly what the quote is made out to be? If she had said "some of Trump's supporters" you'd be right.

finiter 10y ago
I'll agree that she worded that poorly and was unkind. Even Clinton apologized for that part. " “I regret saying ‘half’ -- that was wrong." [1] That's one of the differences between the candidates. In support of her defense of the statement: "to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half". That sounds very vague to me. She even referred to "you could put half" as "grossly generalistic". Then in the rest of her statement she got to empathizing with the people that aren't voting because we have too many Muslims and brown people make me squeeamish. [1]: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/10/clinton-says-regrets-calling-trump-supporters-deplorables.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/10/clinton-says-regr...
tptacek 10y ago
You'd think by now politicians --- you have one job! --- would learn that this message always loses. Attack the candidate, never the candidate's supporters. Trump offers a corollary, which is simply "if you're attacking someone other than the candidate, just be super specific about who you're attacking". The "deplorable" thing cost Clinton. The attacks on the Khan family don't seem to have cost Trump much at all.

CamperBob2 10y ago

If you say something like that and expect anyone to keep listening or reading after your first sentence, you have no business -- or future -- in politics.

finiter 10y ago
Psh. Lots of politicians have said far worse and been elected. Example: Donald Trump.
- CamperBob2 10y ago
  He didn't have to outrun the proverbial bear. He only had to outrun Hillary.
  - finiter 10y ago
    I don't understand what you're saying. Are you agreeing with me that your previous statement is wrong?

drblast 10y ago

Imagine you're a poorly educated working class person who's struggling. You hear both candidates speak. Hillary says "We need to have empathy for those people," a phrase that's clearly referring to you by the surrounding context. She's obviously not talking to you, she's talking about you. Trump says "I LOVE THE POORLY EDUCATED!!! And I know you're struggling and I'm going to fix it!" He's talking directly to you. Who do you vote for? Does it even matter what she says at that point about empathy? No. She clearly doesn't even consider the possibility that a poorly educated person who's leaning Trump would even be in the audience. Does "We need to understand you people and empathize with you" sound inclusive? If you're in Camp Hillary it might. If you're not in Camp Hillary, well, those words are pretty much an admission that the in-crowd doesn't relate to you at all, or consider you one of them. And that's the complete arrogance and obliviousness that allowed the left to lose an election to an extremely weak opponent.

finiter 10y ago
I feel like you're inventing a story here where one candidate talked to people but the other talked about them. It doesn't hold up. Not just beacuse none of your quotes were actually quotes. Nor just because Trump voters had a higher-than-average income. "We need to have empathy for those people" because of "those people" is exclusive, but "We need to understand you people and empathize with you" is also exclusive. Is it the "you people"? Or should she have lied and said "I'm one of you". I don't know if it matters because she didn't say that anyway. Then the "I love the poorly educated", which is also a "[them]" is inclusive. "She clearly doesn't even consider the possibility that a poorly educated person who's leaning Trump would even be in the audience." She made that speech at a fundraiser. Why would she speak to someone who maybe was there isntead of the people that were? What did Trump say at his private fundraisers? Should we compare stump speeches? Did your hypothetical voter hear Trumps speeches where he constantly mentions how rich he is, how much money he makes in real estate deals, and all the fancy stuff he does? How many golf courses did he talk about in a day? I don't see why it's arrogant to not believe in Trump as a populist. Or to see irony in the claim that one candidate better cares about, relates to, or understands the poorly educated when his party wants to limit social safety nets, unions, health care, and the ability of poor people and minorities to vote. As to the left's obliviousness, our candidate get more votes.

rak00n 10y ago

It would sound much nicer if she had left that basket of deplorable out of the statement.