General News Hillary Clinton says 50% of Trump supporters are "deplorables"

Yes, Romney learned this lesson the hard way. It is one thing to attack your opponent in a political race. It's quite another to attack the voters who support that candidate. It can snowball out of control and backlash very quickly.

In addition, for a couple of decades the Democrats have grown addicted to winning elections by calling their opponents names and drumming up hysteria, instead of promoting good policies and their own strengths. It seems very easy for Hillary Clinton to continue this, by just sitting back and expecting Donald Trump to self destruct. If I were her, I would not even mention the man's name, and focus on explaining what my own agenda was should I be elected. This could blow up on her in a big way, just like Mitt Romney's comments did.

You can attack the electorate if you want, if you're a candidate. One of the only persons I know who routinely got away with openly insulting voters who disagreed with him was Rep. Barney Frank. Barney, however, was in a very safe district. The presidential elections do not have a "safe district."

 

My exact thoughts, you said it way better than I ever could. :lol:

 

Honestly 50% is being generous... I would've stated a much higher number

 

I don't think it's generally a good idea to insult 25% of Americans when you're running for president.

 

Not as bad as what Romney said but still really bad. Let's stop calling everyone racists, biggots, homophones, sexists eyc. It's not true and it's not helping. The boy who cried wolf is never a good thing

 

So does this get rid of everyone's "moral imperative" to vote for her? We can go third party now?

 

Hahaha :lol: that's not going to happen!

 

I feel like she didn't say that on accident. She knew to stay away from saying all of them are that way just to not cost her the election. I don't think it will hurt her as much as Romney's comments. Maybe just a little?

It's really less than 25%, because a lot of people from both parties are supporting neither Trump nor Clinton. That's aside the point.

---------- Post added 10th Sep 2016 at 05:01 PM ----------

Honestly, if Clinton's scandals up until now haven't cost her the election, idk what will.

 

Political correctness is out of control these case if we can't call a spade a spade.

 

I say don't apologize for saying things that are true. Trump supporters get to wear "Make America White Again" shirts at Trump rallies and get to be offended and day you're playing the race card when you call them a bunch of racist morons.

 

It may be true... Still poor taste for someone who wants to lead the entire country, not just the 44% or so that support her.

 

I'd say it's more like 20% of trump votes are the inbred hick racist homophobes. The others are stupid or at best, misguided.

 

Well, the situation is a little different. Romney attacked about 50% of Americans as I recall, and Clinton attacked a certain percentage of a specific group of Americans, and percent of those people are going to be much lower than 50% of the population.

It's not like Clinton hasn't gotten away with saying something she shouldn't have already this year. She had such wonderful things to say about Nancy Reagan, and how wonderful she was during the AIDS crisis. That caused a high school classmate--who can remember just what it was like in the 80s--to pull the plug on supporting Clinton (even after a lifetime of vote Democrat or die). It had significant impact on my willingness to support Clinton, too. And yet...Clinton seems to have survived, and has lots of LGBT support. Admittedly, she's the lesser of evils, even if she loves Nancy Reagan.

It's also worth noting we have two months to survive until this ghastly election is over. There will be plenty of time for Donald to say lots of offensive things that will help cancel out Clinton's statement.

---------- Post added 10th Sep 2016 at 07:57 PM ----------

Reality is no matter what she'd said, she won't lead the country. She might be elected, but there will be a large percentage of voters who won't deal with that very gracefully. In our climate of today, the idea of "well, I didn't vote for ___, but ___ won, and I hope ____ does a good job for the good of the country" no longer exists.

 

I don't see how one questionable comment could "cost her the election" when basically everything Trump says is a lie. At least what she said was true, and honestly, I don't think most Trump supporters would even mind being called those things. I think that they know that they are those things. I mean, there's probably a small percent who are just voting out of "party loyalty" who would be offended--at least would be offended if she had said that all Trump supporters were those things.
I don't like how Trump's bizarre comments have lowered the standards of what politicians can get away with saying. I think that Clinton should avoid saying aggressive comments for the most part because honestly I don't think she needs to. But I think this comment wasn't radical considering how Trump supporters behave. I think she was justified in saying it.

 

I mean...she's not wrong.

---------- Post added 11th Sep 2016 at 04:37 AM ----------

Agree and tbh if EC doesn't think Trump saying things like Mexicans are rapists and women bleed everywhere won't cost him the election I don't know why we are discussing this costing Hillary the election LOL. The man spews out poop for a living.

 

I'm not seeing the issue. If you hold the kind of bigoted opinions that a lot of Trump supporters do then you're a deplorable person, end of story.

Tip toeing around the open bigotry that Trump spouts and has inspired is what has allowed him to get into the position he is in now. It should be called what it is instead of worrying about the feelings of those who hold these views.

 

It was a tactical blunder more than a great slight on ordinary Americans - to know Trump's positions (policies is too strong a word) and practices and support them is quite deplorable, no matter how you spin it.

What does amaze me is the double standard coming out here. Hillary Clinton exaggerates a claim that's not even particularly unreasonable in the form the gaffe took. Donald Trump repeatedly lies, obfuscates, demonstrates utter lack of substantive knowledge, advocates immoral and illegal acts such as torture and shows a ratings-driven approach to politics rather than a principled stand on anything and so much of it is brushed to the side. Fact-checks are sparingly used on him - Clinton is hammered for even slight untruths or spin. That a mild and not particularly disturbing statement from Clinton makes headlines while Trump gets away with absurdities by over-saturating media with insanely preposterous statements indicates a sloppiness in the attempt to be balanced where no such attempt is feasible in this particular race.

If this is enough to impact the Clinton campaign's optics, then the Trump campaign should have so much pressure it has to recant, retract, apologise or crumble in the face of the same media scrutiny.

That standard is applied to Clinton fair and square, as it should for any candidate seeking the US presidency. It should also apply to Trump.

 

No, actually from what I've heard there are plenty of Americans who simply vote for Trump because they hate Hillary. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

My thoughts too. I don't think many people would "switch" (to Trump) due to this statement.

I understand why the statement is seen as undesirable, but the media is using the statement solely for its shock value. I put it in the but you will NOT believe what she is about to say NEXT category.