I love that most all of the replies to the video are NUH-UNH YOU DO TOO. Like…that’s the best defense you have. To try and find some barely tangible link between the opposition and the crap you’re getting called out for, rather than addressing the crap itself. Denial seems to be rough on some people.
What’s weird to me is that, even in the defenders’ denial, it almost seems like acceptance. “Yes, we may seem racist. But so do you,” is more what it sounds like to my ears.
That’s just something people tell themselves to feel like they’re not missing out because their stubby fingers can’t hold anything bigger than a Samsung Galaxy A3.
I don’t vote D no matter what, all I know is that this time around there is a definite difference between the person who wants to take away rights from various groups and the person who wants to expand equality. It’s not even the lesser of two evils, it’s that one literally wants to prevent my Muslim friend from working to make polio extinct and the other, well, she’s okay if polio gets stopped.
It’s good seeing this called out in a campaign ad.
But, it’s not going to win her any votes from people who weren’t already going to vote for her.
“Donald Trump is Buddies with White Supremacists!” just makes Donald Trump like that dude at everyone’s Thanksgiving dinner. Most folks who consider that a reason to vote against Trump already know this, and are planning to vote against Trump. If the hope is to spook Bernie fans into getting on board, that plan is never going to work (if that’s the hope, there’s not a whole lot Hillary can actually do, to be honest, short of some big policy announcement that out-socializes the actual Socialist, and that might be too big of a left lean now that we’re this far into the campaign).
I did like the explicit linking of the “alt right” with white nationalists, though. That’s a truth that too many of the Randians that make up that red-pill chum-bucket aren’t called out on.
I want you to win, HRC. You can do better than flinging this low-hanging hate-fruit.
Trump’s current strategy seems to be making token outreach to minority voters in order to persuade moderate white conservatives that they can vote for him without supporting white supremacy. This ad comes as a reminder of just how deep the bigotry runs. It may not convince more people to vote for Hillary, but it might convince a few to withhold their votes for Trump.
I can follow that logic. I just don’t think it’s the place I’d invest her campaign war chest. The Donald will fail on his own terms, as he always has. Hell, this pivot was impossible for Mitt Romney and John McCain to make, and they are actually about as moderate as the Republican party gets these days.
The risk in November is that Democrats stay home, and screaming about how awful Trump is won’t make any more show up. Touting your own plans might.
Like, what’s HRC’s response to white supremecists and systematic racism, aside from saying “it’s bad?” What’s her solution? Can we talk about that for a while? Because I’m pretty sure she has one, but I’d be damned if I can tell you what it is.
I think that right now is the perfect time to air an ad linking all of these elements in one tidy piece: white nationalists, Breitbart, the KKK, Bannon, and Trump. To a lot of casual news readers, they may have seen these things mentioned here and there, but it’s good and right for Hillary to tie them up with a tidy bow.
She can also run ads focusing on her own ideas and platform. I see no reason why these things can’t coexist.
Certainly it’s true that they should be selling Hillary on her own merits as well, but if “Democrats staying home” is the biggest risk for her campaign then you can also argue “Republicans staying home” is the biggest risk for Trump’s campaign. In fact “Republicans getting so disgusted by Trump that they refuse to vote altogether” could not just mean the Democrats take the White House, it’s looking increasingly likely that it will help them regain control of the Senate.
That’s exactly what this particular ad aims to do: keep moderates from voting for Trump.
It may be my particular media bubble, but this doesn’t seem to be a big risk from where I’m sitting.
HRC’s campaign probably knows better than I do, though. 
Well, this ad makes part of that clear.
STEP ONE: prevent white supremacists from being elected.
As far as systematic racism, she’s been addressing that, too.
Well, moderate by Republican standards anyway.
Step One is the easy part. Most of the country has been doing that since at least the '60’s.
And she’s not addressing it in a way that people can hear. A slug under a rock could tell you Trump’s in bed with racism. He started his campaign by calling Mexicans rapists! He’s building a wall, he’s banning Muslims, we KNOW what he would do in office! It’s not like his racism has been absent from the media narrative, here.
The money and time and effort spent on this ad telling everyone what they already know and understand about the most talked-about man of the year could, IMO, have been better spent telling everyone what they don’t know and understand - like what she would actually do.
There’s a limited amount of ad dollars in the coffer, and this does not seem like an efficient use of them to me.
Yeah, but there’s casual racism and then there’s freakin’ white supremacist racism. I know pretty easygoing people who nodded their heads when they heard Trump start yelling about how illegal Mexicans are taking our jobs. But if you can plant a seed of uncertainty in the head of a casual Fox/Breitbart reader who sees their news source factually linked with actual white nationalists, and how Klansmen are applauding those same people, that’s a way bigger pill to swallow for centrist Republicans than a common uncertainty about illegal Mexican workers.
Her platform now, or her platform a couple months ago, or her actual platform after she’s elected? This is great because these guys are legitimately scary, and it saves her from having to lie through her teeth about things like the TPP or anything else she might be claiming as part of her platform.
Yes. Her platform now. The one you can read on her website. The one that isn’t lying.
Interesting. I just checked it, and in a glaring omission, it doesn’t mention TPP once, though she claimed she strongly opposed it a couple months ago, and supported it a year before that. Do you honestly think she’ll still oppose it when she’s president? Do you see any reason to believe that her position on any other issue wouldn’t be just as likely to change due to expedience?
You apparently skimmed quickly, as her statement from last year on her opposition to the TPP is available here.
I suspect there are a lot of Americans who were not aware of how the KKK are A-OK with Trump. But “elections are won in the middle”, and the voting block now in play is those people who are in the middle, undecided, who maybe don’t think that much about politics yet still vote. I can see those people pulling the lever for Trump because he’s “different”, or “a guy who just speaks his mind, like me kinda!” Every bit of slime dripping off him should be given a spotlight so undecideds can consider if Trump is “different” in a way they actually like.
My understanding is Obama is going to try to get it passed during his lame duck session, shielding Hillary’s position either way.
Edit: Republican obstructionism finally does some good
