j.r. leonard

I think the problem here may be that you are trying to have a normative conversation and I’m having a purely descriptive one. I’m talking about what happened and why it did. Not whether it should have

But you said Clinton was exclusionary when she was not. I see no evidence she was dismissive of any voter other than the racists: The “basket of deplorables” for whom there was no redemption or persuasion to be had.

She specifically said the other half of his supporters were good people who might be misguided or need our empathy and understanding. How is that not inclusive of them?

You really don’t see how patronizing that is?

She’s the one telling her supporters NOT to dismiss these people. Would you rather she not have asked them that? Jesus you cannot have it both ways.

If you were ambivalently supporting a racist because you were misguided or temporarily uninformed, would you not want to be reached and persuaded? Would’nt you want the other candidate to give a shit about you and say we need to reach out to you and NOT give up?

Having it both ways was the whole point of my original comment. Trump is president because he manages to be explicitly white supremacist but make his followers believe that they are anything but. We’re Americans. We like to live in denial.

HRC and the Democrats have been pitching a different form of denial and it just hasn’t been as persuasive to a whole bunch of Americans. And believe me, I wish that this wasn’t the case