Clinton: 'Deplorables' comment was "grossly generalistic"

[ClutchClark]

35 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

The comment was not deplorable.

The segment of trump supporters that meet her description in the speech are deplorable.

Yes, trump is trying to spin this and say she was talking about all his supporters.

But that's a big lie ... as usual he thinks the voters are stupid.

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/errol-louis-calling-deplorables-article-1.2789229

 

My answer -- NO RESPECT. 

 

 

My answer...hillary clearly stated HALF of Trump supporters.

Trump has about half the American vote (=/-) and half of that is 1/4 of the US population.

 

That is a mighty big brush that the ol' gal hillary decided to paint with.

[Pinot]

1 hour ago, ClutchClark said:

 

My answer...hillary clearly stated HALF of Trump supporters.

Trump has about half the American vote (=/-) and half of that is 1/4 of the US population.

 

That is a mighty big brush that the ol' gal hillary decided to paint with.

 

Bummed out? I would be.

 

The future POTUS  covered you. 

[Silurian]

Hmmm, maybe not so grossly generalistic.

 

Statistics support Clinton's 'deplorables' comment

 

http://us.cnn.com/2016/09/13/politics/dana-milbank-washington-post-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-deplorable/index.html

 

"It's really quite shocking. Something like 62% of white voters have these sorts of sentiments, and by better than two-to-one, they vote Republican."

[Ulysses G.]

22 minutes ago, Silurian said:

 

Statistics support Clinton's 'deplorables' comment

 

 

 Lies, damned lies and liberal statistics. Complete BS.

[iReason]

Yes, half of Trump supporters are racist  

 

"The American National Election Studies, the long-running, extensive poll of American voters, asked voters in 2012 a basic test of prejudice: to rank black and white people on a scale from hardworking to lazy and from intelligent to unintelligent."

 

"The researchers found that 62 percent of white people gave black people a lower score in at least one of the attributes."

 

"This was a jump in prejudicial attitudes from 2008, when 45 percent of white people expressed negative stereotypes."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/clinton-wasnt-wrong-about-the-deplorables-among-trumps-supporters/2016/09/12/93720264-7932-11e6-beac-57a4a412e93a_story.html?utm_term=.7c4b5dd81981

 

Truly deplorable...

Edited September 15, 2016 by iReason

[keemapoot]

Just read an interesting article (I think it was NYT) that this "Deplorables" comment was a carefully crafted, strategic move by the Clinton campaign to use the same kind of negative branding on Trump that he uses on everybody else, and that it might be working. Initially it caused lots of outrage (just like Trump), but then the label (brand) has stuck, and all the media are now embracing this and it is becoming a strong meme and being researched and part of the dialogue now.  So, the essence is that Clinton has started using this same Trump game back on him and it is working. 

[Ulysses G.]

1 hour ago, keemapoot said:

Just read an interesting article (I think it was NYT) that this "Deplorables" comment was a carefully crafted, strategic move by the Clinton campaign to use the same kind of negative branding on Trump that he uses on everybody else, and that it might be working. 

 

The left has been making false allegations against Trump all along. This is nothing new. I do not listen to much of what the NYTs has to say about Republican candidates. They are VERY partisan.

Edited September 16, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[keemapoot]

3 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

The left has been making false allegations against Trump all along. This is nothing new. I do not listen to much of what the NYTs has to say about Republican candidates. They are VERY partisan.

 

It wasn't a hit piece on Trump, just checked and it was NBC, not NYT, but I know to Trump supporters any of those established national main stream sources are equivalent to the Karl Marx Daily , but, as you can read below it was analyzing the effectiveness of Clinton using the same negative name calling branding techniques that Trump uses: Pocahontas, Mexican judges, etc..

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/clinton-deploring-trump-s-racial-views-part-broader-strategy-n648906

[Ulysses G.]

My point is that she - certainly her supporters - have been making up lies and calling him names all along. The articles reference it, by the way. This is nothing new.

Edited September 16, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[keemapoot]

2 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

My point is that she - certainly her supporters - have been making up lies and calling him names all along. This is nothing new.

 

Of course. The point is that Trump has a knack for making those nasty names into media events and memes, and that Clinton has now nailed down this same technique and it may be working against Trump.

[Pimay1]

6 minutes ago, keemapoot said:

Of course. The point is that Trump has a knack for making those nasty names into media events and memes, and that Clinton has now nailed down this same technique and it may be working against Trump.

Name calling of opponents in politics is a normal happening. It is another thing when a politician calls one third of the American people deplorable.

[keemapoot]

Just now, Pimay1 said:

Name calling of opponents in politics is a normal happening. It is another thing when a politician calls one third of the American people deplorable.

 

Yes, unfortunately, it is indeed another thing if that deplorable label is largely true. It's even more unfortunate for those who are not in that category but by putting their support behind this man Trump get painted with the same brush.

[Ulysses G.]

3 minutes ago, Pimay1 said:

Name calling of opponents in politics is a normal happening. It is another thing when a politician calls one third of the American people deplorable.

 

Especially people that she is trying to convince to vote for her.

[keemapoot]

Just now, Ulysses G. said:

 

Especially people that she is trying to convince to vote for her.

 

Come on. Clinton has no hope of getting any of these inbreds to vote for her. Trump has that vote locked up. 

[Ulysses G.]

Just now, keemapoot said:

 

Come on. Clinton has no hope of getting any of these inbreds to vote for her. 

 

Not anymore, she doesn't. 

[iReason]

The Deplorables.

 

Perfect fit. 

 

62% of the Lemmings that follow the: 

Text-Book Racist, draft dodging, tax evading, allegeded fraudster, allegeded peodophile, (Trials forthcoming) 

Mafia associated Bloviater.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/13/politics/dana-milbank-washington-post-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-deplorable/

 

Although, the number may be too low... 

[Jingthing]

The speech was a political mistake. 
It was poorly written.

It was poorly performed. 

But the content was largely accurate.

Of course, in politics, that doesn't matter. 

 

[partington]

I agree. It seems like the political mistake of a novice, not an experienced politician. You do not call people stupid racists for supporting your opponent (even though clearly a very large number of Trump's supporters fit very precisely into this exact category): you just do NOT say it.

 

Why Clinton would do this now is a bit baffling, as saying very little and relying on Trump to detonate his own campaign would be safer.

 

Nevertheless it is very worrying that against an emotionally and intellectually immature candidate, stunted in ability, empathy and knowledge, who is regarded with incredulity in the rest of the world , Clinton is not MILES ahead in the polls at this stage.

 

[zydeco]

7 hours ago, keemapoot said:

 

Come on. Clinton has no hope of getting any of these inbreds to vote for her. Trump has that vote locked up. 

 

You might want to look at the Clinton family history before you go around accusing people of being inbreeds.