On Deplorable Behavior

Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton recently
lambasted the supporters, well, half of them, of her
Republican opponent Donald Trump "a basket of
deplorables" in New York at an exclusive Manhattan
fundraising event. She elaborated that these people
were "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic,
Islamophobic, you name it,". Your quizzical Peasant
wonders what she thinks of the other half of Trump's
supporters then?

Well, one doesn't have to wonder very much if one is
at all familiar with the former First Lady and her public
pronouncements. Even in a rough-and-tumble, no-holds-
barred, anything goes field such as American politics
she is an especially nasty, vituperative, poisonous
figure, even by left-wing standards. She should realize,
though apparently she doesn't, that such attacks are much
more likely to backfire than to advance a candidate's
chances for victory. Just four years ago GOP presidential
hopeful Mitt Romney remarked, also at a private fundraising
event, that 47% of the American electorate were
moochers who "believe they are victims" and that "(his) job
(was) not to worry about those people". Romney was
widely castigated, then defeated by incumbent President
Obama in the general election. Although I personally don't
believe that he actually meant the perceived awfulness of
his words, that he was instead trying to point out that a certain
segment of American voters truly but wrongly believe that
they are not financially successful because they are subject
to the whim of others, and think that their best chance to
remedy this is to vote for candidates who would take from
the more successful and dole out to these people, Romney's
gist was lost behind a questionable choice of words.
Clinton is, on the other hand, simply mean and mean-spirited,
and now she has had her own "47% moment". We'll see
what the consequences of it are.

Then across the pond, as the British refer to the Atlantic Ocean,
the recent fierce battle between those who want Britain to leave
the European Union (the Brexit backers) and those wanting Britain
to stay (the Remain backers) was likely decided by remarks
uttered by prominent members of the latter camp regarding
the Brexit advocates, remarks similar in vehement nature to
those made by Clinton against Trump's backers.

What your deplorable Peasant is trying to convey here is the point
that if one attacks one's opponent and/or one's opponent's supporters
too harshly, there could be a boomerang effect. And even when
making such utterances in the company of one's most ardent
supporters, one must know that one's words are very apt to travel,
traveling to both one's foes and to the general public, some of whom
may not have made up their minds yet but would be swayed
by said remarks toward one's challenger. And it doesn't look
becoming for one to spew such venom in place of sharing ideas
on how one would govern and what the resultant benefits would be.
But then Clinton doesn't have any ideas that would be at all
beneficial; she would merely take over from President Obama
if elected and be the liberals' Phase 2 in transforming our country
into a socialist wasteland. So Hillary does what Hillary does best:
hurl invective.

And as such Hillary Clinton has only disdain for the very people
whom she would rule with the iron hand of statism. Do carry on,
Hillary. You're making our efforts to defeat you in November go
all the more smoothly!


Deplorably Yours,
MEM