WHAT PERCENTAGE OF MUSLIMS ARE 'DEPLORABLE'?

COULD HILLARY TELL US WHAT PERCENTAGE OF MUSLIMS ARE 'DEPLORABLE'? [...]  Sad people with meaningless lives were suddenly empowered to condemn other people. I beat you in blacks yesterday; I'm going to beat you in women today. This is what makes them feel superior to other people, especially other white people. It's not about racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.; it's just a self-actualization movement for people with emotional issues. The dead giveaway is that all the hacks on the left are using the same jokes. Compare the opening lines of James Kirchick of the New York Daily News and Dana Milbank of The Washington Post in their columns on Hillary's "basket of deplorables" insult: Kirchick: "Hillary Clinton was way off base Friday night when she claimed that 'half' of Donald Trump supporters are 'deplorable' racists, sexists and nativists. ... It's not 50 percent of Trump supporters who are bigots. It's closer to 100 percent.” Milbank: "Hillary Clinton may have been unwise to say half of Donald Trump's supporters are racists ... If anything, when it comes to Trump's racist support, she might have low-balled the number.” It never occurs to a hack that someone else may have had the same idea. But as long as liberals are such perfect thermometers of deplorableness, could they tell us how many Muslims are "deplorable”— specifically, what percentage are “sexist” or “homophobic"? For decades now, the most important job of anyone covering a presidential election is to unceasingly demand that the Republican candidate disavow David Duke. This laughably irrelevant man must be trotted out as a bogeyman to frighten NPR listeners. Instead of reporting news, journalists have become Official David Duke Disavowal Demanders. The only way we find out that Duke is still alive is that Republicans are asked to denounce him every four years. For all we know, Duke died 20 years ago and the media are using a body double. Will Hillary ever be asked to "disavow" Al Sharpton, George Soros, Black Lives Matter or Colin Kaepernick? These are people who have power and visibility even when it's not an election year. In fact, the only time some of them are not in the public eye is during election years, when, for example, Al Sharpton is sent off to a safe house for six months. By contrast, the only time Duke is in the news is during election years. It doesn't matter who the candidate is -- the GOP could run Bobby Kennedy, and journalists would incessantly demand that Bobby "disavow" Duke.  [FULL COULD HILLARY TELL US WHAT PERCENTAGE OF MUSLIMS ARE 'DEPLORABLE'?] You're welcome