Despite facing significant backlash for her pointed critique of Donald Trump’s supporters during the 2016 election cycle, Hillary Clinton maintains a reflective stance. Back then, she had sparked a controversy by categorizing half of Trump’s supporters as a ‘basketful of deplorables’, a remark that was seen as a touch unkind and disconnecting, primarily by moderate, blue-collar voters. Looking back at the election that she didn’t win, Clinton acknowledges that her phrasing was not politically astute. Yet, she finds herself questioning if she should have been more direct in expressing her concerns about those rallied behind Trump’s perceived racial, gender, and religious biases.
Hey Mark, remember when Hillary Clinton called Trump supporters “deplorables”? https://t.co/v7dqMPMFlu pic.twitter.com/i7Cem02yW4
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) August 25, 2024
Clinton outlines these thoughts in her recent book where she comments on the demographic roped in by Trump due to what she perceived as his racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, and Islamophobia. She opines that these individuals saw Trump’s contentious behaviors as attractive qualities rather than problematic ones. Her ‘basket of deplorables’ comment may have been an inopportune choice of words, but according to Clinton, it underscored a critical reality.
She further questions the development of events over the years that followed, pointing to instances such as the racially-charged violence in Charlottesville and the events of January 6th at the Capitol. According to Clinton, these examples underscore an unmasked reality of what she sees as the hate and violent extremism found among certain segments of Trump’s fanbase. For her, in hindsight, the term ‘deplorable’ seems too mild a word to describe the levels of intolerance and aggression demonstrated.
At the peak of the controversy, Clinton’s other remarks during that infamously contentious talk took a backseat as the term ‘deplorables’ dominated the narrative. It became a rallying cry and a perceived badge of honor for Trump supporters, spawning a merchandise trend featuring the label on T-shirts, hats, and internet memes.
A month and a bit beyond her infamous speech, Clinton lost to Trump in the electoral college, though she recorded victory in the popular vote. Looking back, she asserts that she finds a sense of ‘validation’ in her reading of the escalation in intolerance during Trump’s presidency.
A noteworthy incident reflects this validation when a newspaper editor reached out to her in 2022 following a mass shooting incident. This act of violence was committed in Buffalo, where a gunman targeted black supermarket shoppers, reportedly swayed by the ‘great replacement’ conspiracy theory. This theory was promoted on popular television forums like Fox News, more specifically by its then-anchor, Tucker Carlson, a well-known ally of Trump.
Moreover, Clinton shares an interesting anecdote about how newsroom editors were deeply impacted by the incident and the associated revelation. The editor conveyed that they had spent significant time discussing this in an editorial meeting. The underlying fact that the most popular show on cable news also happens to be the most racially prejudiced impacted them deeply, stirring references to Clinton’s ‘deplorables’ remark and her purported foresight in predicting such an outcome.
The editor wished for Clinton to publicly revisit her 2016 comment in light of this fresh act of racial violence, presumably to draw a poignant parallel. However, Clinton declined his proposition, not wanting to revisit an old controversy and color it with the hues of present-day tragedy.
She expresses in her book a desire for her constituents to recall the entire context of her controversial remarks from that fateful 2016 day. She wished the public had not focussed solely on her ‘deplorables’ comment, but rather taken into account the complete narrative which included empathy for the Trump supporters who felt neglected and disregarded by the government and the economy.
She acknowledges that there were individuals who felt let down by the system and were desperate for a change. In retrospect, Clinton rues using the term ‘irredeemable’ to describe majority of those she perceived as ‘deplorable’. She understood and expressed even then that there were those who felt disheartened by their circumstances and were gravitating towards change.
The incident affords a moment of reflection and introspection, offering an opportunity to discourse about the evolution of political dialogue and the perception of differing viewpoints. Remembering the event years later still echoes the lasting implications of our public rhetoric and how it’s interpreted.
In conclusion, Clinton’s reflection offers a panoramic view of the tension-laced 2016 elections, her controversial remarks, and her ongoing exploration of those comments in light of subsequent incidents. While her terminology may have been politically inadvisable, her intention to spotlight potentially damaging facets of Trump’s support base uncovers the profound impact and significance of those words today.
Through her candid retrospective, Hillary Clinton invites an open discussion about the contentious political climate during that time and continues to assert her perspectives regarding the issues she saw with Trump’s supporter base. Her recollections and subsequent reflections exemplify the power of discourse, the weight of words, and their lasting implications.