The only way I can make sense of what she said is to look at the two sentences in context and then figure out what she means - here are both sentences:
“What people recognize is that there’s a fear that the United States is in an unstoppable decline. They see the rise of China, the rise of India, the rise of the Soviet Union and our loss militarily going forward,”
1. “What people (referring to her people, her supporters, the post-reformation builders of Western Civilization and the American idea) recognize is that there’s a fear (existing in minds of the progressives now in power that leads to the liberal ideology of retreat of the West) that the United States is in an unstoppable decline.
2. They (these same liberals) see the rise of China, the rise of India, the rise of the Soviet Union (and thus the receding of Western influence, economic power, and respect by these three largest powers) and our loss militarily going forward,” ( future military defeat when the inevitable military clash with these non-western civilizations occurs in the future).
At least that is the only way I can interpret what she said. If that was her meaning, then to openly verbalize recognition of such a deep historical trend, one that may be true, would indeed be a gaffe by a candidate for president.
Am I wrong? What do you think?
You’re wrong.
The subject seems to be worry about America’s decline as a super-power, and she uses countries currently on the rise (like India and China) as a contrast.
The Soviet Union rose to become a super-power during the same time period the USA rose to become a super-power—the first half of the last century.
Had she used the term Russia, her sentence would have made perfect sense. As Russia (after going through a down period after the breakup of the USSR) is again rising.
It was a gaffee, plain and simple.