Hillary just insults a quarter of all Americans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^

I'm not a liberal, but I am a liberal.

? Only liberals care about the environment. Arnold Schwarzengar, then Republican CA Governor, implemented one of the most stringent environment standards. I voted for Kasich.

Only embarrassed liberals have to tell everyone they aren't liberals.

I voted for Kasich. How does that make me a liberal?

That's not what makes you a liberal, grasshopper.

" I'm not a liberal, but...." That makes you a liberal. When you have to tell everyone you aren't, you are.

I still don't get it. I believe in protecting the environment. Does that alone make me a liberal? No, it doesn't. How is Trump a Republican if he doesn't believe in free trade, which is hallmark of the Republican establishment?

I'll make it easy for you. Say what you have to and move on. Don't tell me what you are or aren't. You're just an anonymous keyboard on the internet. Got it now?

Nope, still don't get it. If you had just said "you don't have to state you are not a liberal, and just move on", then I'd get it. But you first stated that "I am not a liberal but I am a liberal", so I don't understand what you are implying because I am a moderate Repub. That doesn't make me a liberal. Do you get that?

No. I need a charge number to school you further, shortbus. You're wasting too much of my time.

You seem to have no shortage of time to waste as evidenced by your posting here.

[Anonymous]

Hillary is a pompous, elitist fool.
I find her to be deplorable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the one thing that Trump and HRC can agree on.

You can believe Trump

Hillary needs to run this as a campaign ad nonstop thorough Nov. 7.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hillary is a pompous, elitist fool.
I find her to be deplorable.

Good to know. Thanks for sharing.

[Anonymous]

She knew she was wrong.

sort of

“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that’s never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ ? that was wrong,” Clinton said in a statement released by her campaign. She added that it was “deplorable” that Trump had hired former Breitbart CEO Steve Bannon, a champion of the so-called alt-right, and brought fringe racism and hatred into the mainstream.

Clinton Stands By ‘Deplorables,’ But Walks Back The Basket Size A Bit
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables_us_57d44e94e4b06a74c9f4fea9?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So Clinton is criticized for not being authentic and being too calculated in what she says, and then she speaks her mind and tells the truth, and now that's a bad thing?

FWIW, the white nationalists like David Duke who support Trump in large numbers ARE racists. The Trump supporters whose main attack on Clinton is to call her a bitch, say she sucks more than Monica, and want to inflict violence on her ARE misogynist. I don't see any issue with calling them out.

Then point to THEM instead of insulting "1/4" of Americans. She - the "educated one" - is no better than Trump in making a sweeping generalization about people.

Ignorance doesn't win against ignorance. Is this what we want for our country? to one up each other?

Have you ever been to a Trump rally or seen video footage of one or even read the reports of journalists attending them? Scary stuff.

She was talking about those people. And saying only half of them are deplorable is being pretty generous.

No

You don't attack people. Even if people are calling her a fat pig or a demented old lady, she - the supposed role model - shouldn't stoop down to his level. And she's almost there. She's dividing the country, too, with her rhetoric.

It's not acceptable in her case either.

But you're saying a tit for tat is fine.

That's what's wrong with American.

So we need to implode - which will happen soon enough - before we can build ourselves back up.

Calling a racist deplorable is not the equivalent of calling Clinton a fat bitch. Merriam-Webster definition of deplorable: lamentable or deserving censure or contempt. I totally agree that racists and homophobes and misogynists are lamentable and deserving of censure.

Would you decry politicians of the 1950s and 60s who called the segregationists and lynchers deplorable? I admire those who spoke out against the racists of those times.

You're not very bright, PP.

in snippets for your pea brain to handle:

1. NO candidate/potential leader to stoop to that level.
2. NO candidate/potential leader should speak in sweeping generalizations.

Brilliant. In a huff because Clinton calls out the bigots and neo-Nazis in Trump's camp as "deplorable" -- because you say that she shouldn't "stoop to the level" of calling out bigotry as deplorable and then you use insulting language yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hillary is a pompous, elitist fool.
I find her to be deplorable.

As opposed to a billionaire who self funds his campaign By using the money funneled by his poor slaves. the master is not elitist because he doesn't pay taxes unlike his middle class slaves.

[Anonymous]

Dafuq ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://youtu.be/OZHp4JLWjNw

WTG Hillary. I personally think it's a bad campaign strategy to insult voters...but there she did.

Calling 1/4 of Americans deplorable, glad to know what you really think of us.

The woman is nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hillary is a pompous, elitist fool.
I find her to be deplorable.

As opposed to a billionaire who self funds his campaign By using the money funneled by his poor slaves. the master is not elitist because he doesn't pay taxes unlike his middle class slaves.

You sound slightly unhinged and not very literate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the one thing that Trump and HRC can agree on.

You can believe Trump

Hillary needs to run this as a campaign ad nonstop thorough Nov. 7.

The Trump quote didn't happen. See Snopes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the one thing that Trump and HRC can agree on.

You can believe Trump

Hillary needs to run this as a campaign ad nonstop thorough Nov. 7.

The Trump quote didn't happen. See Snopes.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Recognizing that people lie isn't living in La La Land, Einstein. It's a reality. People will quietly vote for Trump. And the ones to worry about are Inds who aren't voting third party. 

If they are quietly voting for him then it shows that they are ashamed to do so.

I don't think ashamed is the word you want, when people are being outwardly assaulted by liberals, and having their homes and personal property vandalized. You don't antagonize a violent individual (break in and you have a whole other situation....)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Recognizing that people lie isn't living in La La Land, Einstein. It's a reality. People will quietly vote for Trump. And the ones to worry about are Inds who aren't voting third party. 

If they are quietly voting for him then it shows that they are ashamed to do so.

I don't think ashamed is the word you want, when people are being outwardly assaulted by liberals, and having their homes and personal property vandalized. You don't antagonize a violent individual (break in and you have a whole other situation....)

Where are these "outward" assaults by liberals happening?

And "ashamed" is the word. Otherwise there would be zero reason to lie to anonymous pollsters who don't give a crap who you're voting for. You're at zero physical risk, or even of being gently mocked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Recognizing that people lie isn't living in La La Land, Einstein. It's a reality. People will quietly vote for Trump. And the ones to worry about are Inds who aren't voting third party. 

If they are quietly voting for him then it shows that they are ashamed to do so.

I don't think ashamed is the word you want, when people are being outwardly assaulted by liberals, and having their homes and personal property vandalized. You don't antagonize a violent individual (break in and you have a whole other situation....)

Where are these "outward" assaults by liberals happening?

And "ashamed" is the word. Otherwise there would be zero reason to lie to anonymous pollsters who don't give a crap who you're voting for. You're at zero physical risk, or even of being gently mocked.

DP. No risk of being even gently mocked? Take a look at the venom that spews from the mouths of liberals, right here on this forum. If the Dems had put up instead someone halfway acceptable (rather than manipulate things because it was Hillary's turn), Trump would have been done long ago. Isn't it strange that nobody (other than a couple of ridiculous candidates) challenged Hillary for the nomination?