And . . . what you're quoting is a distortion of what was said in the speech, taken so out of context it makes your comment a lie. If I wanted to play that game, here's an example I could take from Trump's state of the union:
Actually said - "But as we work to improve Americans’ health care, there are those who want to take away your health care, take away your doctor, and abolish private insurance entirely."
Totally taken out of context (the way Boris likes it):
"we work to take away your health care, take away your doctor entirely."
How can you support a president who wants to take away your health care and doctor Boris? That's an incredibly stupid political move. According to you, it doesn't matter what was actually said - only the lies others pass as the truth matter now. Welcome to politics?
These don't seem like comparable distortions. What Hillary Clinton actually said was that
half of Trump's supporters were deplorables and the other half were decent people that the democratic party could and should work to win over. Would you agree that is an adequate summary of that segment of her speech?
So what has happened over time is people are talking something Clinton actually said (half of Trump supporters are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic) and they've been fudging the numbers until now most people seem to remember or think of it as her having said all 100% of Trump supporters fall into that category.
In your example distortion, you are taking something Trump said, and editing out some words out of it to have it mean the opposite. I tried to find a good statement from Trump's state of the union to illustrate a distortion where we'd take a moderate, measured, or qualified statement and distort it into an absolute statement. ... but in the short part of the transcript I was able to get through I couldn't find any. The guy speaks in absolute statements.
Anyway, imagine he'd said "We've already built half of a wall across our southern border which will keep immigrants out and preserve american jobs."
The statement gets repeated as "Trump says wall is complete and will preserve jobs."
People get angry because:
1) the wall isn't complete (which Trump didn't say)
2) The wall isn't even 50% complete (which Trump did say)
3) Even if the wall were complete it wouldn't stop immigration
because there are huge gates all along its length which must be left open all summer to avoid it being destroyed by monsoon flooding. (Which isn't something Trump said, but is related to something he said.)
All that said, thank you for posting the full excerpt of the Clinton speech. The thing the next point she made (the "other basket" bit), is an important message even today, and it is indeed one I'd forgotten Clinton made back in 2016.
"...that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change. It doesn’t really even matter where it comes from." I think Clinton's statement there just as valid, if not more so, in 2020 as it was in 2016. In some ways she was prescient that people who turned out to vote for change with Obama in 2008 and 2012 would vote for completely different change from a different source in 2016.