Hillary Clinton appeared at a school in Keota, Iowa, and the Des Moines Register edited something she said down to one small quote taken completely out of context. Political drama has ensued. But look at the 18 minute mark.
The Register cuts it down to:
I wouldn’t keep any school open that wasn’t doing a better than average job
Which makes it seem as if she's saying she would close underachieving schools. But that's not even remotely what she's saying.
The Register did provide partial context before the quote:
Although leaders say the school district is not in immediate danger of being closed, as many other small Iowa districts have, the students are worried about its future.
“I know that’s the original reason why you got so excited and why you were stalking presidential candidates, and I don’t blame you,” she said, drawing laughter.
To repeat: She was speaking to a community that is worried that its underfunded, overachieving school is going to be closed. The Register cut a long quote and thus completely changed Clinton’s meaning.
Clinton is referring to a recent special school funding bill that had bipartisan support but was vetoed by Iowa's Republican Gov. Terry Branstad. Clinton clearly is saying that she doesn't understand how anyone could veto special funding for overachieving but underfunded schools. Her wording then becomes clumsy, but it's clear that what she means is that she wouldn't support such special funding for just any school, but when schools are doing a good job and need extra help, they should get it. She's saying that not every school deserves such help, because not every school should remain open, but she very explicitly states that it depends on what's best for the students.
In other words: If a school is failing, figure out what's best for its students; if a school is overachieving and underfunded, give it more money. She doesn't want just to throw money around, but she does want to help underfunded schools that are doing a good job. And she wants always to do what’s best for the students.
UPDATE: In the comments, NMDad transcribed part of the quote. It’s even longer, and the video still should be viewed, but thanks to NMDad!
For the life of me, I don’t understand why your state government, and I know Governor Branstad vetoed the money that would have come to help this school and it was a bipartisan agreement, you know those are hard to come by these days. You had a bipartisan agreement in your legislature for more one-time student funding to help deal with some of the financial challenges districts like this one have and Governor Branstad vetoed it. Yet at the same time you have these laws which require if you have a deficit you may not be able to be a school district. It doesn’t make sense to me. When you, when y- something is not broke, don’t break it, right? And this school district and these schools throughout Iowa are doing a better than average job. Now, I wouldn’t keep any school open that wasn’t doing a better than average job. If a school’s not doing a good job, then, you know, that may not be good for the kids, but when you have a district that is doing a good job, it seems kind of counter-productive to impose financial burdens on it.