Tyler Durden: "Les Deplorables"
Pretty good, I say.
Donald Trump’s appeal, in part, is that he cracks back at progressive cultural condescension in utterly crude terms.Nativists exist, and the sky is still blue. But the overwhelming majority of these people aren’t phobic about a modernizing America. They’re fed up with the relentless, moral superciliousness of Hillary, the Obamas, progressive pundits and 19-year-old campus activists. ...
The moral clarity that drove the original civil-rights movement or the women’s movement has degenerated into a confused moral narcissism. One wonders if even some of the people in Mrs. Clinton’s Streisandian audience didn’t feel discomfort at the ease with which the presidential candidate slapped isms and phobias on so many people.
Presidential politics has become hyper-focused on individual personalities because the media rubs them in our face nonstop. It is a mistake, though, to blame Hillary alone for that derisive remark. It’s not just her. Hillary Clinton is the logical result of the Democratic Party’s new, progressive algorithm—a set of strict social rules that drives politics and the culture to one point of view. A Clinton victory would enable and entrench the forces her comment represents.Again, truth is a defense here. (Not from the perspective of politics/rhetoric, of course...) If Clinton was right, then she was right...though many alleged proofs that she is right contain obvious errors. Still...she might very well be right...
I'd kinda say this: Clinton may be right. Ok. But the idiocy on the left--the constant stream of vile and scurrilous moral accusations against good, innocent people who disagree with the left about some relative jot or tittle--it's wrong and it's stupid. And many people are fed up with it. It's become something like a boy-who-cried-wolf situation. It's so bad that many people are willing to cut Trump slack despite the fact that the charges against him are sometimes justified and some other times plausible. They're willing to play a bit fast-and-loose with the plausible accusations because they're so fed up with the implausible ones. And they're not willing to cut Hillary slack for basically the inverse of that reason.
But this is pretty much shooting from the hip. HRC wasn't even clear about whether she was offering a long conjunction or a long disjunction. If she meant that half of Trump supporters have some bigoted belief or other rather than all of the ones she listed, that makes it a lot easier for it to be true. And, though I kinda doubt that she believes this, it's basically orthodoxy the farther left you go that we're all bigoted...well...all us white folks, anyway... So was that assumption operative?