How the Clintons went from "dead broke" to rich (WaPo)

[IceSpear]

Okay media, it's time to move on. The comment was not that big of a deal.

[IceSpear]

Okay media, it's time to move on. The comment was not that big of a deal.

Yea, sure, not that big of a deal in the sense that Romney calling himself "unemployed" was "not that big of a deal" or McCain forgetting how many homes he owns was "not that big of a deal."

I like how people try to draw a false equivalence between this single out of touch gaffe and the dozens that Mitt Romney had. Nor did the media harp on any of Romney's gaffes for weeks (except 47%, which was obviously an entirely different beast). They even let him get away with not releasing his tax returns.

[IceSpear]

Okay media, it's time to move on. The comment was not that big of a deal.

Yea, sure, not that big of a deal in the sense that Romney calling himself "unemployed" was "not that big of a deal" or McCain forgetting how many homes he owns was "not that big of a deal."

I like how people try to draw a false equivalence between this single out of touch gaffe and the dozens that Mitt Romney had. Nor did the media harp on any of Romney's gaffes for weeks (except 47%, which was obviously an entirely different beast). They even let him get away with not releasing his tax returns.

Your grasp on reality is not great.

In other words, you have no rebuttal. Thanks for playing.

[IceSpear]

Okay media, it's time to move on. The comment was not that big of a deal.

Yea, sure, not that big of a deal in the sense that Romney calling himself "unemployed" was "not that big of a deal" or McCain forgetting how many homes he owns was "not that big of a deal."

I like how people try to draw a false equivalence between this single out of touch gaffe and the dozens that Mitt Romney had. Nor did the media harp on any of Romney's gaffes for weeks (except 47%, which was obviously an entirely different beast). They even let him get away with not releasing his tax returns.

Your grasp on reality is not great.

In other words, you have no rebuttal. Thanks for playing.

The rebuttal is that you're simply wrong.

It being a "single out of touch gaffe" doesn't lessen the fact that it is an out of touch comment. If you should know anything about American politics, it's that singular moments can be defining (not that I necessarily believe this one to be).

Your assertion that the media didn't "harp" on Romney's gaffes is absolutely inaccurate, as is the idea that he "got away" with not releasing his tax returns - which was a story for months. These were all reasons why this guy lost the election and fed into the narrative of his candidacy... not exactly things that were glossed over. What you're saying is literally not how it happened in reality.

When did I say it wasn't an out of touch comment? There's a pretty big difference between a single out of touch comment and a consistent trend of them like with Romney (corporations are people my friend, Ann drives a couple of cadillacs, I like being able to fire people, I'm middle class too, I'm unemployed, I bet you $10,000, etc. etc. etc.), which is why it's a false equivalence for the media to be labeling her as Mitt Romney 2.0 based off a single comment. Sure, maybe if she starts making more the comparison could be made, but at the moment it's just lazy journalism.