Clinton: Half of Trump supporters are in 'basket of deplorables'

a reply to: TheRedneck

I have called you none of those things.

I cannot speak or explain those who have said those things to you.

You asked me what I would say about you, and I told you.

You don't know me? LOL. Really? Fair enough.

However, given that, it seems that your only clue that I "hate those who disagree with me" is that you think I support Hillary. And I certainly do as an alternative to Donald Trump. Not only that, I do support speaking out against all those negative traits, and I'm glad she did it. It's time to call that crap deplorable, the people who justify that crap are deplorable, and not be mealy mouthed or all Care Bear about it.

I've already told you what I think about you.

If you're fair-minded and a hard working American, I think you're making a very unfortunate choice in Donald Trump.

Apparently, though, I don't know you. My mistake.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Gryphon66

If you support her statement, given that I just declared my complete support for Trump, am I to understand you consider me deplorable? Or am I one of the 'non-deplorable' Trump supporters? Or perhaps I am only halfway deplorable? Maybe I'm not deplorable yet but will be because I share a basket with deplorable?

This is the true issue. Is your support for her based on anything concrete and substantial, or is it a hatred for others who disagree with you?

Well, that depends. Are you a racist, sexist, homophobic, religious bigot who hates certain ethnicities?

That doesn't even make sense. You're just throwing out words and labels you don't know the meanings of.

The left has such an atrocious understanding of the English language they think building a wall and protecting our borders is racist, wanting to address Islamic extremism is religious bigotry, not wanting your 15 yr old daughter to share a locker room with a 15 yr old boy is sexist, and on and on.

The words you erroneously toss around are simply labels the left throws around with people they disagree with and it's mostly due to fear of the facts and fear of reality, and anything to distract from an honest debate on the issues.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Annee

And I didn't realize it was a street brawl.

Did you miss my last reply to you?

TheRedneck

Metaphor.

I'm surprised you have trouble understanding that. Or is it you choose to not understand it is a metaphor?

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Gryphon66
I concur. The only snowflakes I hear whining at the moment on this topic are those Trump supporters who think that Hillary called them a mean name.

Then you have selective hearing. As in, you hear what you want to hear. All I hear is Mrs. Clinton trying to pull her cankles out of her mouth.

"Suck it up" indeed. Let's adopt that as a standard shall we? For all whiners on whatever side of the political spectrum?

That's pretty much my modus operandi, especially with Trump. He ain't perfect, he's just better than any other option right now.

Cankles. Wow, there's an enlightened response. Perhaps you should take a second and read what she actually said. Or you can keep whining about her being mean to you like the other sycophants. Really means nothing to me.

Trump is the most ludicrous example of a Presidential Candidate since Lyndon LaRouche and probably more so.

/shrug We disagree. What a surprise.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Are you a racist, sexist, homophobic, religious bigot who hates certain ethnicities?

Trump is about Trump, money, power, control.

He's embracing the Fundamental Christian Lobby.

Did you know he wants to abolish the Johnson Gag Order?

Hillary is about herself, money, power and control.

She's embracing every plank of the Communist Manifesto..
every one. Alinsky at this point would feel inadequate in
comparing his efforts to her successes, and of her overlords.

And you DO know she wants to abolish every one of
everybody's basic rights-- constitutional or otherwise.
She mentions it as major elements of her platform. I espe-
cially like "We're going to have to take away things..." :yeah,
that quote.

I suppose for this^ I should be called deplorable. But I'm
not D.Rockefeller, and I stand guilty as charged... without
regret.
Besides, I'd rather be called names than gassed, burned
or shot. At least until getting 'classified' as one of those
'names' can get you scraped into another deuce-and-a-half.

I think more research should be directed by us all on what
kind of dictatorship usually results from democracy. Germany
had a good one until about 1932: we're almost there. One
more good sized voting bloc to justify electronically flipping...
but wow, 47% of your opposition? Is it November yet?

a reply to: MysticPearl

Was I talking to you?

You're just BSing your way into another diatribe spewing your blatantly ignorant opinions about "the left."

Believe me, we don't think any better about you and your lot, generally speaking.

Building a wall is not racist ... it's just stupid. Keeping all members of a religion out is not addressing extremism, and your 15 year old daughter is in more danger from the other girls in the room than a Trans girl who probably wants nothing to do with her.

And you literally made me laugh out loud with your tripe about "an honest debate" ... when your whole schtick is to start out with absurd ad hominem and insult.

You've got a few pat phrases you drag out in just about every post. I've seen most of them at this point, and they're boring.

Bring in some facts or evidence ... anything besides your own opinions, and I'll be glad to "debate" with you.

As it is, you're just acting like a kid.

originally posted by: derfreebie


And you DO know she wants to abolish every one of
everybody's basic rights-- constitutional or otherwise.
She mentions it as major elements of her platform. I espe-
cially like "We're going to have to take away things..." :yeah,
that quote.

I suppose for this^ I should be called deplorable.

I wouldn't call you deplorable ... I'd call you either extraordinarily misinformed or intentionally misrepresenting the truth.

Which is it?

Why don't you link up the proof of Hillary wanting to "abolish every one of everybody's basic rights" ... ?

Put your facts where your beliefs are.

a reply to: Gryphon66

No, you have not. And I do not expect you to explain the actions of others. But my point is that others have. That means, according to Clinton's statements, that I am 'deplorable.' At least according to them.

Do you honestly not see how that is offensive?

I have not called you anything in this thread. I have given my opinion and presented what I consider to be logical arguments in my favor. Hillary Clinton, if those individuals I referenced earlier are given credence, has called me deplorable, and you seem to admit to agreeing with her. If I am reading you wrong, and you are simply agreeing about the small minority of true racists and bigots of other shades that admittedly exist, then please accept my apologies.

My point, however, is that when painting with such a broad brush, one tends to demonize those they do not truly wish to demonize. Clinton herself has apologized for doing so. In my case, you have potentially alienated someone who otherwise would be an ally against true bigotry.

Of course, I don't personally get offended easily. What someone calls me is just vibrations in the wind, quickly dissipating evidence of low intelligence that cannot make a coherent argument without resorting to ad hominem labelling techniques. I have more important things to occupy my time. When those vibrations in the wind become threatening to my peaceful life here in the woods, it is a different story. And in today's political climate, that is indeed a possibility.

My lifestyle is precious to me. That, good sir, I will fight for. Vehemently.

TheRedneck

I love hearing Hillary supporters trying to spin this as a good thing for her.

Twitter is going nuts on it...and Monday it will be all over the news.
She's already apologized and trying to backtrack from it...but it's abundantly clear she knows she just shot herself in the a$$...with both barrels.

a reply to: Annee

As I stated in my earlier reply, your metaphor is only applicable if you consider an election to be chaotic with rule of force. I do not. I see an election as a civilized method to elect the best person for the position without the need to resort to the time-honored method of obtaining dominion through violence.

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree on what an election is.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: IAMTAT
I love hearing Hillary supporters trying to spin this as a good thing for her.

Twitter is going nuts on it...and Monday it will be all over the news.
She's already apologized and trying to backtrack from it...but it's abundantly clear she knows she just shot herself in the a$$...with both barrels.

It's pretty funny. HIllary pulled a Trump. Let's see how the MSM deflects the news this week.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Annee

Your analogy is only appropriate if you consider the election to be an example of anarchy and force rule.

I for one do not. I consider an election top be a civilized method of choosing leaders.

TheRedneck

It absolutely should be, but the Jerry Springer nation mentality wants and tit for a tat, and they want to fight fire with fire.

People are choosing their leaders based on emotions, rather than picking a leader that has ethics, good leadership qualities, and critical thinking skills.

I'll vote for a 3rd party for sure this time around.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I have told you twice what I think about you based on your statements about yourself. Obviously, that's all I have to go on.

I have made it clear what the demarcation point is in Mrs. Clinton's comments, that I support.

You're trying to hold Hillary Clinton responsible for names other people have called you? I find that incredible.

No, I do not see how a comment that racism, sexism, et. al are deplorable is insulting. To me, it sounds like a much-needed truth.

You've not called me anything in this thread? Nope, didn't say you had. You decided though, apparently, because I support Clinton I must hate everyone because they disagree with me. At this point, dude, I don't care honestly.

Logical arguments in your favor? Of what? I haven't called you racist/sexist/homophobic. Others have. Take it up with them.

You asked me a question, I answered it. Twice.

Among the Trump supporters I know of, have seen and interacted with the number of racists/et. al. are more than 50 percent. But they are so not because they're supporting Trump, but BECAUSE of their beliefs, their actions, and specifically, the way they treat other people.

Clinton "apologized" only to the extent that some people didn't listen to what she clearly said.

If you aren't a racist, then you aren't one. It doesn't matter what I think, what Clinton thinks, what those folks who called you bad names think. You're the only one who knows in the truest sense. However, if you act like a racist, say racist things, take racist actions, then you're a racist to most of us in the world who can only go by what we see and hear.

I think you're overreacting a bit to the whole deal myself, honestly. Why do you think anyone is "coming to the woods to interfere with your lifestyle"? Are you on with the fear-mongering that is being bandied about here, that Clinton is going to take the Nazi approach to governance? If you are, I can only say, nothing in her history or demeanor or anything she's ever said would suggest that ... but I could NOT say the same for your man Trump.

As for you protecting yourself and your way of life that you choose while harming none, bully for you. That's your American right.

... but if you lay down with dogs and get up with fleas, then perhaps you should expect a flea dip at least, LOL.

To be more specific, before that is taken as some sort of threat ... if you ignore the racism and religious bigotry that Trump does stand for, it is you who will ultimately find your ideals corrupted ... not from without, but from within.

The time to ignore all the ills that plague us is coming to an end one way or another.

It won't end with who wins in November.

Of that, I'm certain of, "good sir."

Best.

originally posted by: kruphix

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: kruphix

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: Gryphon66

I'm late to the party, how do you, as hillary supporter ( or wait, was it anti Trump ) justify insulting millions of your countrymen?

It's a gaff?

Is it an insult if it's true?

And even if it's true, they are Americans, and she should be representing all Americans, as she accused Trump of not doing. This is her Mitt Romney "47%" moment, and she will pay dearly for it, as Romney did.

You know...for all of you being so anti-PC....you guys are really crying about Hillary not being PC.

Romney's comment was about all Americans...Hillary's comment was only for a portion of Trump supporters. She isn't going to lose anyone she didn't already have.

If an intellectually dishonest person says "this is making me vote for Trump"...well that is their right...go vote for the guy who insults everybody he doesn't like on a daily basis...because Hillary made a true statement about a portion of Trump supporters.

Who's crying? If you bothered to read my previous replies, which apparently looks like you didn't, I agreed with Hillary in her statement. I just don't think it's half of Trump supporters, as opposed to a smaller portion. But she will have to deal with the backlash. Like it or not, she alienated a lot of opposition supporters, if she had any hope at all in reaching out in a conciliatory gesture as a true leader would try to do. Whereas Dubya labeled himself the "great uniter ", Hillary is making great strides as the "great divider". She going to bend over backwards for the non-American Syrian refugees, but not one iota towards fellow Americans she may not agree with.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

But if you want to represent what she said ... at least do it fairly.

Yet you said

Because she's standing up against racism, sexism, homophobia, religious intolerance and ethnic hatred

She only pretends to do these things, in reality she does not stand
against these things, if she actually did all of the foreign donors
to The Clinton Foundation would have all donations returned.

Now there is hypocrisy at its height.

It is really astounding to see the intellectual dishonesty clinton
followers exercise, and funny you think she actually cares about
anyone besides her Campaign employees and Clinton Foundation
employees she can use to rake in their billions, from countries
that embrace and practice racism, sexism, homophobia,
religious intolerance and ethnic hatred.

a reply to: UnBreakable

That a good point Obama and now Hillary seem to the most intentionally divisive president/candidate/politicians I have ever seen in my life.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

No, I do not see how a comment that racism, sexism, et. al are deplorable is insulting. To me, it sounds like a much-needed truth.

What's interesting about this comment is I actually agree with it in part.

When laying the truth cards on the table, why not lay them all out.

Hillary needs to stop lying and just tell the truth, also deflection by name calling, or ad hominem attacks is a logical fallacy.



She and Trump are the epitome of hypocrites

a reply to: Gryphon66

Ah, well, twice I have tried to make my point to you; twice you have missed it, preferring to instead become defensive. So be it.

I wish you well in your endeavors. I suspect otherwise, but I do wish you well.

TheRedneck