Hillary Clinton took on Donald Trump’s racism with surgical precision yesterday in a powerful speech (you can read the full transcript here). Here is Matt Flegenheimer’s write-up at The New York Times:
In a 31-minute address, building to a controlled simmer, Mrs. Clinton did everything but call Mr. Trump a racist outright — saying he had promoted “racist lie” after “racist lie,” pushed conspiracy theories with “racist undertones” and heartened racists across the country by submitting to an “emerging racist ideology known as the alt-right.” [...]
With Mr. Trump’s rise, Mrs. Clinton has often struck a have-you-no-sense-of-decency theme in her critiques — warning sternly and repeatedly that the arc of his candidacy transcended standard political attack. But her effort on Thursday was remarkable for its exhaustive accounting of Mr. Trump’s controversial racial history in business and in his presidential campaign.
Gideon Resnick at The Daily Beast:
Eight months later, Hillary Clinton reminded a crowd in Reno, Nevada, that Jones, a friend of former Trump adviser Roger Stone and a major booster of his campaign, is not only a conspiracy peddler whose site frequently purports that Clinton is near death and sells snake-oil pills and bulk survival food for the end times, but that he also believes the children killed at Sandy Hook Elementary were planted by the government in a longtail effort to take away Americans’ guns.
Clinton’s speech was an effort to force Trump to disavow the innumerable fringe groups that have fully embraced his campaign—or face the consequences of aligning with leaders like Jones, who once told his InfoWars viewership that government programs are producing “people with gills” and “humanoids crossed with fish.” [...]
“This is what happens when you treat the National Enquirer like Gospel,” she added. [...]
This is what Trump has wrought—and is now attempting to put back in the bottle. And he only has 74 days left to do it.
“There’s no other Donald Trump,” Clinton concluded. “This is it.”
The truth is, she’s probably right.
Jamelle Bouie at Slate:
Her most important move in the speech was to contrast Trump’s behavior with that of past Republican presidents and nominees. Clinton favorably cited Bob Dole’s admonition against racists during the 1996 Republican National Convention, praised George W. Bush for his outreach to Muslim Americans after 9/11, and highlighted John McCain for his pushback against racist conspiracy theories during the 2008 presidential election.
As analysis, Clinton’s argument about Trump’s distance from the rest of the GOP is wrong. At various points in their campaigns, those Republicans gave their winks and nods to the most toxic elements in their party. And broadly, the Republican Party has long appealed to the white racial resentment and hostility that now fuels the Trump campaign in explicit form.
As strategy, however, Clinton’s approach is shrewd. She could tie the entire GOP to Trump, but at the risk of embattling Republican voters and activating a tribal loyalty to the party. By distancing Trump from the Republican mainstream, she offers those voters another choice: You can vote for me, or if that’s too much, you can just not vote at all. Either way, Trump’s margin shrinks.
Paul Waldman at The Week:
If he loses, does the Republican Party revisit the idea of opening itself to minority groups in hopes of one day winning the White House? Or will Trumpism remain the dominant force within the GOP, shaping its approach to campaigns and governing, just waiting for a more skilled candidate to exploit it?
It will be some time before we know for sure, but for the moment, Clinton's attack on Trump could persuade more than a few Republicans that they can reject him, then return to their party once it has purged itself of his influence. But that will be no easy task.
Over at New York Magazine, meanwhile, Margaret Hartmann analyzes the tragicomedy that is Trump’s immigration stance:
Donald Trump – the guy who’s spent the past 14 months talking about Mexican rapists and a “deportation force” – just found out what Donald Trump – the candidate who wants Hispanics to vote for him – has been saying about immigration reform, and boy is he mad! [...] Trump seemed rather annoyed that people are accusing him of modifying his immigration stance, though he’s the one who suggested that he was shifting his position.
Eugene Robinson at The Washington Post analyzes Trump’s immigration policy debacle:
Donald Trump’s supporters can pretend otherwise, but deep down they must know the truth: Trump has been playing them for fools all along. [...]
I realize that most of Trump’s ardent fans do not take kindly to being lectured by the likes of me. But it is with a certain degree of genuine sympathy that I say what has to be said: Your candidate is a flake. A fraud. A bag of air. A con man. A joke.
And, on a final note, click through and read all of Scot Lehigh’s piece on Hillary Clinton’s health over at The Boston Globe:
I know, I know, Clinton’s doctor actually says she is in good health. But she hasn’t been out on the Internets the way I have, to learn from people who don’t know her and haven’t examined her and so are more objective about these things.
Here’s what I’ve learned: Clinton suffers from weird seizures, psychotic facial tics, and strange lesions on her tongue — and the question is whether it’s all caused by brain damage or narcissistic personality disorder. Or even drug abuse. Or syphilis.
Now you can say, Scot, that’s the sort of cross-eyed crazy stuff you hear from Alex Jones and Infowars and Paul Joseph Watson, but I’m telling you, this is serious! Why, some of it has even been explored on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show, and if there’s anyone who understands odd behavior that can result from intellectual impairment, it’s Sean.