When will people get over "deplorables"?

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

When will we stop talking about this? What could possibly distract us from it?

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

Hopefully never which is good because we need a president who will raise minimum wage for the poor.

We need to take the Falkland Islands because the rent is too damn high.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

I've gone for "never" simply because it looks like both campaigns (and, with them, the media) are trying to turn that one word into a defining element of the election. On Trump's side it's faux outrage at how "ordinary Americans" are being smeared; on the Clinton side it's "no one's as deplorable as Trump, do you really want to be like him?"

It looks like the phrase will have endurance, much like "47%" and "I can see Alaska from my house" (yes, I know she never actually said that).

It's amazing she can see Alaska from her house.

"I actually did vote for the $87,000,000,000 before I voted against it."  Context is everything which is something the 5% or so of Americans who don't know the difference between parties lack.  These are the 5% who decide elections. Palin was joking about seeing Russia from her house.  Romney was correct on the 47%.  As for Kerry, a translation would be "I wanted the bill to pass for our troops but didn't want to be held responsible by my party in the primary so I did the most politically convenient thing that would get me to the white house."  Clinton's remark about deplorables wasn't meant to be "half" as she's already stated.  She really meant to say all is my view.

Romney was correct? Lol...

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

I've gone for "never" simply because it looks like both campaigns (and, with them, the media) are trying to turn that one word into a defining element of the election. On Trump's side it's faux outrage at how "ordinary Americans" are being smeared; on the Clinton side it's "no one's as deplorable as Trump, do you really want to be like him?"

It looks like the phrase will have endurance, much like "47%" and "I can see Alaska from my house" (yes, I know she never actually said that).

It's amazing she can see Alaska from her house.

"I actually did vote for the $87,000,000,000 before I voted against it."  Context is everything which is something the 5% or so of Americans who don't know the difference between parties lack.  These are the 5% who decide elections. Palin was joking about seeing Russia from her house.  Romney was correct on the 47%.  As for Kerry, a translation would be "I wanted the bill to pass for our troops but didn't want to be held responsible by my party in the primary so I did the most politically convenient thing that would get me to the white house."  Clinton's remark about deplorables wasn't meant to be "half" as she's already stated.  She really meant to say all is my view.

Romney was correct? Lol...

What part of his 47% comment was incorrect.  He was pretty close to accurate and not just because he got 47% of the vote.

OK, I'll provide you with a quote:
"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what, all right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what."
Because people who work minimum wage are all obviously just moochers. Why don't they just get better jobs, if they want more money? So lazy. /s

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

She's done damage to her campaign that she'll never undo; she can only contain and minimize.

I've never seen a campaign where a candidate trashed 1/2 of the other candidate's supporters.  Hillary, however, can't hide her contempt for culturally conservative white voters.  They're scum in her book, for WHO they are.  

Ummm... try 2012?

Besides, if "cultural conservatism" is the new euphemism for bigotry, then yeah, so-called cultural conservatives deserve some criticism (even if not in these words). At least get them thinking about their own choices; maybe some of them can pull a Robert Byrd. Unlike poverty, open racism is an individual choice.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

She's done damage to her campaign that she'll never undo; she can only contain and minimize.

I've never seen a campaign where a candidate trashed 1/2 of the other candidate's supporters.  Hillary, however, can't hide her contempt for culturally conservative white voters.  They're scum in her book, for WHO they are.  

Ummm... try 2012?

Besides, if "cultural conservatism" is the new euphemism for bigotry, then yeah, so-called cultural conservatives deserve some criticism (even if not in these words). At least get them thinking about their own choices; maybe some of them can pull a Robert Byrd. Unlike poverty, open racism is an individual choice.

I don't know how much effect it will have politically, but

You have an over the top example of Hillary MAKING a bigoted comment.
The audience laughed and applauded a bigot.

Trump has said controversial things, nothing was this offensive or wrong.

She said 50% of Trump's supporters are:
“The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it."
...She's talking about 25 to 30 million Americans. 
Military veterans and the people who make the country function are Trump's base --- they are the opposite of deplorable they are honorable. 

Part of the damage isn't the insult though, it is that it is so wrong and out of touch with reality that it scares people.  If you wanted to look at it sure maybe 1 to 2% of Trumps support could be called one of those things, but More of Hillary's supporters could by far.  She says it to feed the smug sense of moral superiority that leftist idiots and elitists get high off of.  You have a cult of delusional-s who need to lie in order to feel better about themselves. 

The fact that you have people saying:
yes she should say this and
 "cultural conservatism is the new euphemism for bigotry"
etc
is evidence that people are in a scary bubble of hate. 

Trump says he doesn't like people breaking the law -- Dems call him racist
Hillary says 30 million people are deplorable scum based on her bigoted thought process -- Dems agree
Who are the bigots???

The difference is, several polls have shown that many Trump supporters (particularly during the primaries) do hold racist views (birtherism, belief that Obama is a Muslim, outright white supremacism). Do you deny that these views are disgraceful?

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

The difference is, several polls have shown that many Trump supporters (particularly during the primaries) do hold racist views (birtherism, belief that Obama is a Muslim, outright white supremacism). Do you deny that these views are disgraceful?

Lol, it is not a racism.

Do you really believe that any white President would be subjected to this bullsh*t? And about the whole Obama=Muslim thing, given that he has publicly denied being a Muslim, this would imply that being a Muslim was something to hide- something potentially incriminating.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

The difference is, several polls have shown that many Trump supporters (particularly during the primaries) do hold racist views (birtherism, belief that Obama is a Muslim, outright white supremacism). Do you deny that these views are disgraceful?

Lol, it is not a racism.

Do you really believe that any white President would be subjected to this bullsh*t? And about the whole Obama=Muslim thing, given that he has publicly denied being a Muslim, this would imply that being a Muslim was something to hide- something potentially incriminating.

A white arab-looking male whose name is Barack Hussein Obama. Of course!

And if it was a white whose name Vladimir Ivanov Putin, it would be plausible to assume that he belongs to Russian orthodox church. Racism?

If he publicly denied being Russian Orthodox, then it would indeed be bigoted to assume that, as it would imply that Russian Orthodoxy was somehow a suspect religion.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

She's done damage to her campaign that she'll never undo; she can only contain and minimize.

I've never seen a campaign where a candidate trashed 1/2 of the other candidate's supporters.  Hillary, however, can't hide her contempt for culturally conservative white voters.  They're scum in her book, for WHO they are.  

Ummm... try 2012?

Besides, if "cultural conservatism" is the new euphemism for bigotry, then yeah, so-called cultural conservatives deserve some criticism (even if not in these words). At least get them thinking about their own choices; maybe some of them can pull a Robert Byrd. Unlike poverty, open racism is an individual choice.

Robert Byrd long ago apologized for being a Klan member, and compiled a mostly liberal record in public office on civil rights matters.  Jesse Jackson has not yet apologized for calling NYC "Hymietown" in 1984.  Al Sharpton has never apologized for perpetuating a hoax that smeared the name of white police officers in the Tawana Brawley matter, nor have the Democratic elite shunned them.  But I digress.

Whatever one's beliefs, folks have at least a moral right to believe that their President has their best interests as Americans at heart.  It is sad that black folks haven't had that at least from the Grover Cleveland Administration until LBJ, and the Nixon and Reagan Presidencies did, indeed, engage in "Southern Strategies".  I'm not for that at all.  But I'm also not in favor of a President governing America by doing, say, white folks in Appalachia in the same way that many Presidents did black folks.  That's Hillary's message to 25% of America; that they're scum, and now it's THEIR turn to be oppressed.  The guesswork is in trying to figure out who comprises the 25%.

Trump's comments on Mexicans may have been over the top, but he wasn't referring to American citizens.  He was referring to foreigners who sought to crash our border, and pointing out that a significant number of these folks have, indeed, engaged in crimes within the US.  He has no obligation to those folks beyond dealing with them in a Constitutional manner during the deportation process and respecting their Constitutional rights to due process of law.  Trump has, to date, never disparaged a group of American citizens as Trump did.  Trump, indeed, is far more likely to conduct himself in a manner as being President of ALL Americans, even in polarizing times, than Hillary Clinton will.  "Stronger Together" isn't a governing philosophy for a Hillary Clinton Administration; it's a rallying cry for the Democratic Left, pure and simple.  And that's fine for being a candidate.  But let's dispel the notion that Hillary Clinton is a candidate that considers the welfare of every American citizen to be important.  (I doubt the re-education camps she intends for the "deplorables" will even be air-conditioned, lol.)

She has never called for anyone to be "oppressed". She called racism and sexism "deplorable", because that's what they are- a disgrace upon our country's name. "Re-education camps" are nothing but a purifies conspiracy theory.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

It's not that they will never support her, though for many of them this is true. It is because many of them espouse a worldview which places people in different social classes based on things like race, gender and sexuality- the definitions of racism, sexism, and homiphobia. Many of Trump's supporters have made comments to this effect- if one was feeling particularly speculative, one could argue that this is the foundation behind "Make America Great Again", considering our country's history of oppression of these very groups. Yeah, the 50's were nice- if you were a wealthy, white male (or, if you were lucky, a female) who didn't step out of line. Now, this is a bit of a leap of interpretation, and I would forgive rejecting it (I have reservations about it myself), but it's hard to argue that this isn't what's resonating with his supporters.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

The point is, Clinton looks at bigotry and says "this can be improved". Trump sees the same bigotry, and thinks "this can be exploited" (just like bankruptcy laws, just like foreign workers, just like American contractors). Which of these people do you want leading your country?

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

The point is, Clinton looks at bigotry and says "this can be improved". Trump sees the same bigotry, and thinks "this can be exploited" (just like bankruptcy laws, just like foreign workers, just like American contractors). Which of these people do you want leading your country?

Not the one calling people "deplorables"

Oh my god, you just don't see it.

Clinton sees bigotry (which few would deny exists in our society) and calls it a disgrace (I do not agree with her wording, but this is her point). Trump, on the other hand, tailors his message to speak to these exact people, and gets their support, along with the economically distressed, and with partisan GOP'ers and hardcore #NeverClinton-ers after the primary. These people probably now make up the majority of his voters, but it's hard to deny that it was bigots, and bigotry, that got him the nomination in the first place.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

The point is, Clinton looks at bigotry and says "this can be improved". Trump sees the same bigotry, and thinks "this can be exploited" (just like bankruptcy laws, just like foreign workers, just like American contractors). Which of these people do you want leading your country?

Not the one calling people "deplorables"

Oh my god, you just don't see it.

Clinton sees bigotry (which few would deny exists in our society) and calls it a disgrace (I do not agree with her wording, but this is her point). Trump, on the other hand, tailors his message to speak to these exact people, and gets their support, along with the economically distressed, and with partisan GOP'ers and hardcore #NeverClinton-ers after the primary. These people probably now make up the majority of his voters, but it's hard to deny that it was bigots, and bigotry, that got him the nomination in the first place.

No she rants about bigotry about anyone who disagrees with anything she says.  You sound like you think she's some sort of saint.

examples please. Even in the "deplorables" speech (which was a mistake), she acknowledges that many support Trump out of economic anxiety. Maybe you should actually look at what the candidates have said... and I'm far from considering Clinton a saint, but I respect her, which is more than can be said for Trump. Things aren't black-and-white between hating and revering someone, you know.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

The point is, Clinton looks at bigotry and says "this can be improved". Trump sees the same bigotry, and thinks "this can be exploited" (just like bankruptcy laws, just like foreign workers, just like American contractors). Which of these people do you want leading your country?

Not the one calling people "deplorables"

Oh my god, you just don't see it.

Clinton sees bigotry (which few would deny exists in our society) and calls it a disgrace (I do not agree with her wording, but this is her point). Trump, on the other hand, tailors his message to speak to these exact people, and gets their support, along with the economically distressed, and with partisan GOP'ers and hardcore #NeverClinton-ers after the primary. These people probably now make up the majority of his voters, but it's hard to deny that it was bigots, and bigotry, that got him the nomination in the first place.

No she rants about bigotry about anyone who disagrees with anything she says.  You sound like you think she's some sort of saint.

examples please. Even in the "deplorables" speech (which was a mistake), she acknowledges that many support Trump out of economic anxiety. Maybe you should actually look at what the candidates have said... and I'm far from considering Clinton a saint, but I respect her, which is more than can be said for Trump.

It was a "mistake" alright.  A tactical mistake, in which she gave up the ghost as far as what she really thinks of 25% of America that doesn't support her.  But it's what she meant.

"Out of the wellsprings of the heart, the mouth speaks."  Scripture describes Hillary Clinton to a "t".

OK. Now hold Trump to the same standards. Go ahead; what did he really mean when he spoke about Mexicans being rapists? You tell me. Besides, openly acting on bigotry is a personal choice. Where you're born isn't.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

Nice spin... Then I guess we get to say that Clinton was specifically referring to the bigotry itself. Maybe it wasn't such a mistake after all... And besides, immigrants have LOWER levels of crime than native-born citizens.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

Nice spin... Then I guess we get to say that Clinton was specifically referring to the bigotry itself. Maybe it wasn't such a mistake after all...

Trump's supporters are your average ordinary Americans so what did Clinton mean by deplorables?

If you're allowed to say that Trump meant the land and not the people, then I might as well say that Clinton was talking about the opinions and not the people.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

Ironically, the "bleeding from wherever" comment didn't damage Trump in the long term at all, so it sort of confuses me that the village idiots of Bad Atlas are choosing that option.

That's the point

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

Nice spin... Then I guess we get to say that Clinton was specifically referring to the bigotry itself. Maybe it wasn't such a mistake after all...

Trump's supporters are your average ordinary Americans so what did Clinton mean by deplorables?

If you're allowed to say that Trump meant the land and not the people, then I might as well say that Clinton was talking about the opinions and not the people.

Yes Democrats will say anything to defend her so of course you'll say that which is fine.  Convincing people is the key though.

Um, I don't actually believe that, I'm just pointing out that if you're allowed to spin Trump's quotes, were allowed to spin Clinton's.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

I don't think you're pretending to be dense, so i'll bother explaining.
A) illegal immigrants commit rapes
B) Trump said "They're rapists"
C) Democrats called Trump a racist for saying B.
--- C can not be true because A is true.  A factual statement is not racism, it is a factual statement.      

A) If stating facts is not allowed than our society will collapse.
B) Dems don't allow facts to be stated as evidenced by above.  
C) Dems want society to collapse.
--- This is logically sound

The thing is, this also works:

A) White people commit rapes
B) I am calling white people rapists
C) You are going to call me racist

However, by your logic (and note that I do not subscribe to this, but you must to have any semblance of consistency), C is wrong, because A is factually true.