in the vicinity
Kurtz: Why Clinton is calling racism to explain sexism in 2016
‘MediaBuzz’ host Howard Kurtz weighs in on Hillary Clinton’s insult to Trump voters once again to explain this time, the result of the election in 2016.
The Democrats are gearing up for the midterm elections, encouraged by the apparent razor-thin victory of Conor Lamb in a Pittsburgh-area, district, Donald Trump, wore by 20 points.
And you begin to maneuver, to take for the year 2020, with the likes of Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Terry McAuliffe and other maneuvers, the party is over, Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden.
And yet, once again here is Hillary Clinton.
And some democratic lawmakers distancing themselves from their latest designs.
Which, not to fine-takes back one point to you, to us to one of the worst moments of their campaign, go to the deplorables.
It is one thing to attack trump, the man who hit you in the Electoral College. It is to disparage another to his voters.
Here she is talking at a conference in Mumbai, as they won the coastal but lost the “middle” of the country:
“I’m going to the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward,” Clinton said. “And his whole campaign to” Make America Great Again ” — was looking to the rear. You know that you don’t like black people getting rights that they don’t know how women getting jobs, you don’t want to, you know, to see that the Indian-American success more than you are. Whatever your problem, I’ll solve it.”
Let’s unpack that for a minute. Trump voters were looking to the rear. You don’t want black people to have rights. You don’t want women getting jobs.
Really? Clinton has not a feeling for sounds, how terribly arrogant?
She believes that is why they lost, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania? Not that Trump appealed to struggling working-class voters, but his supporters are angry women, blacks and immigrants?
There was still more. Clinton suggested white women voted for trump, because of the “continuing, you should end pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever believes that, you.”
Seriously? While that may have taken place, in certain cases, has to be the first female presidential candidate of a major party is of the opinion that women … submissive? I sure don’t.
Hillary’s party is not satisfied with this latest flashback.
“Even the most devoted Clinton allies as well as a long-time adviser to say, the comments were cringeworthy, and ultimately harmful to the Democrats,” says The mountain.
Missouri Claire McCaskill told the Washington Post they were “fighting words”:
“I think they expressed their frustration with the status quo. I may not have agreed with their choice, but to respect I, certainly. And I don’t think that’s the way you talk about each of the voters, especially those in my condition.”
Ohio Sherrod Brown told the Huffington Post: “I really don’t know what you said. I don’t think that’s helpful.”
Hillary Clinton is entitled to say what she wants. You don’t have to be quiet, just because you are frustrating other Democrats.
But this is a regrettable relapse in the comments, you will in the fall of 2016:
“You know, it’s tables only grossly generalized, it could half of the Trump-trailer in what I call the basket deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it.”
This led to identify some of the Trump behind men of pride, as deplorables.
Hillary Clinton blew a promising choice, but she did win the popular vote. She wants to be remembered, for disdaining the middle of the country?
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and host of “MediaBuzz” (Sundays 11 p.m.). He is the author of “media madness: Donald Trump, the press, and The war for the truth.” You can follow him at @Howard Kurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.