You've already pretty much said at that point that the comment that follows is going to go too far.
-
-
-
Maybe Hillary Clinton and her campaign actually have decided that 50% of Donald Trump's supporters are "deplorable," but I don't think so.
-
But, my point is that the language that Clinton used—the "to just be grossly generalistic" line—suggests that she doesn't think it's so.
-
Clinton knows well how to present facts and numbers and information. She does it all the time and does it well. Here, she used a big caveat.
-
My point is: Why use that "grossly generalistic" caveat and then say the line? What was Clinton actually trying to accomplish here?
-
If she wanted to go at it, she could. But she didn't. She majorly hedged it by saying "grossly generalistic," then made the claim. She ...
-
... undermined the claim before she made it. I'm just confused. She knew the "basket" line would cause a ruckus, so why the huge hedging?
-
Please read the 8 preceding tweets (& this 1) together as one line of thought. I'm really just confused by combo of the hedge & the attack.
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
So she can say all the right things and be called "robot" and then she can be upfront and blunt, and be called out too.
#WowThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I bet Hillary is punking the MSM. They are gonna jump all over her "gaffe" while Trump is a "gaffe" machine.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Sounds like you're nitpicking. If anything, she was being generous in saying 1/2 of Trump voters are *not* deplorable
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.