Trump’s ‘nasty woman’ remark adds to woes with female voters
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump delivers a speech during a campaign event, Saturday, Oct. 22, 2016, in Gettysburg, Pa.
NEW YORK >> “Such a nasty woman.”
Like many people, 23-year-old Emily DiVito was multitasking while watching last week’s presidential debate, with a little studying and a little Twitter-surfing. But when DiVito heard Donald Trump say those four words to Hillary Clinton, she shot up in her seat.
“The interruptions were so absurd, but that was particularly biting,” she said.
What’s more, the moment gave DiVito, a former avid supporter of Clinton’s primary rival Bernie Sanders, a feeling of solidarity with Clinton — a “moment of connectivity,” as she put it. “I was for Bernie, but moments like this make me proud to be affiliated with her, the way she is persevering.”
That’s good news for Clinton, who despite her lead in the polls, has struggled to connect with millennial voters.
It also was probably bad news for Trump. Days after his devastating “grab ‘em” remarks emerged and he started facing new allegations of sexual assault, the GOP presidential nominee had another bad week, leading some to wonder whether his popularity with female voters had reached rock bottom.
Don't miss out on what's happening!
Stay in touch with top news, as it happens, conveniently in your email inbox. It's FREE!
The candidate who so badly needed to close the gender gap instead saw his “nasty woman” remark — accompanied by a wagging index finger — become a feminist battle cry, a galvanizing moment for Clinton and an exclamation point to a campaign dominated by gender.
To Kathy Spillar, the “nasty woman” comment sounded like “the coffin shutting.’”
“I thought, ‘That’s it,’” said Spillar, executive director of the Feminist Majority Foundation. “Women voters are going to defeat Trump.” The comment, she said, not only “summed up his whole attitude about women,” but showed how bitter he was about potentially losing to one.
“Losing would be bad enough, but that he has lost to a woman really grates on him,” Spillar said. “That’s certainly clear. And this just fuels the gender gap.”
An ABC News poll released Sunday, and conducted in the days following Wednesday’s debate, gave Clinton a 55 percent-35 percent lead over Trump among women. Among college-educated white women, the gap was 62 percent to 30 percent. Likely voters, by a margin of 69 percent to 24 percent, disapproved of Trump’s response to questions about his treatment of women. In a Quinnipiac University poll conducted before that debate, Clinton led Trump among women by 52 percent to 37 percent.
Also, an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released a few days before the debate showed women favoring Clinton over Trump by 55 percent to 35 percent.
Trump supporter Patti Stites felt the latest Trump remarks were unfortunate, but wouldn’t sway her choice.
“It’s certainly not nice, it’s not appropriate, especially in a debate,” said Stites, 61, of Northfield, New Jersey. “But he says what he thinks. You still have to judge him by the issues.
“I don’t need to like my president,” added Stites, a former employee of a Trump property, the now-shuttered Trump Taj Mahal in Atlantic City.
The “nasty woman” interjection — coming on a night when both candidates interrupted each other frequently — went viral. Spotify tweeted that streams of Janet Jackson’s “Nasty” were up 250 percent. “Nasty Woman” T-shirts were on offer (“Bad Hombre” ones, too.) Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House, got in on the act, tweeting to Clinton: “From one #NastyWoman to another, you were an inspiration last night.”
“So much of this election cycle has been about the ways men belittle women when they don’t get what they want from them,” said Andi Zeisler, 43, feminist author and founder of the nonprofit Bitch Media. “Now, people are seeing themselves in Donald Trump’s words toward Hillary, they’re seeing themselves in how his surrogates act toward women — and toward Latinos and anyone who is not a straight white man.”
The “nasty woman” remark, she said, is a “somewhat predictable and almost laughable apex” of what’s been going on all year. But, she added, it is totally possible that there might be a new apex to come.
Throughout the debate, Clinton tried to highlight her opponent’s trouble with female voters, saying at one point: “Donald thinks belittling women makes him bigger.” When it came to abortion, she argued in a pointed way for a woman’s right to control her own body, after Trump said he would appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade.
That, too, impressed DiVito, who worked for Sanders’ campaign for several months after graduating from Wellesley, Clinton’s alma mater.
“I felt solidarity rooted in pride for a woman who was up there sticking up for other women against a man who has zero interest in trying to empathize with the emotional and physical complexity of abortion,” DiVito said.
It didn’t help Trump that he evoked audible laughter in the audience — despite moderator Chris Wallace’s admonitions to the crowd — when he said: “Nobody has more respect for women than I do.”
Debbie Walsh, who specializes in women and politics at Rutgers University, said she wasn’t particularly shocked by Trump’s remark, given his other recent statements.
“Gender is front and center in this campaign, and he is clearly using it,” said Walsh, director of the school’s Center for American Women and Politics. She recalled Trump’s saying Clinton had “tremendous hate in her heart,” calling her the devil, even saying he “wasn’t impressed” when she walked in front of him — interpreted as a comment on her appearance.
“He is the gift that keeps on giving on this stuff,” Walsh said.
For a male Clinton supporter, the moment was a chance to reflect on how women might react when they hear such things.
“I imagined women throwing things at the TV,” said Stefan Krieger, 69, a law professor in New York. “I imagine there are some men that say such things to their girlfriends, their wives, their partners, in a fit of rage. It’s a way of men lashing out with power.”
“I hope I’m not like that.”
27 responses to “Trump’s ‘nasty woman’ remark adds to woes with female voters”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
What a shibai-excuse of a man
Is that you Lazy Mazie? Stay awake now.
The Chump aka Chester the Molester.
He’s not a nice man. He doesn’t respect women. He doesn’t respect anyone.
Mr. Trump is without question the worst major candidate ever nominated by a political party.
There will be books written about how spectacularly unfit a campaign was run by Mr. Trump. He ran the campaign exactly the same way he runs his businesses, and that is into the ground.
He used the donations of other people to put his children on the campaign payroll, and even paid himself a salary to be the candidate. The forensic accounting and analyses of his campaign spending will be a great read!
What a loser.
Can’t wait to see his tax returns. No doubt he’ll go back on his word, will refuse to release them even “when the audit is over.”
Maybe when the Russians tire of him after his spectacular defeat, they’ll hack into and leak his returns. That’ll be something to see!
Why do you call everyone a loser klastri? Maybe you are a loser.
You’re lying, of course. I don’t write that “everyone is a loser”, and never have. Mr. Trump is a loser for sure – but not everyone. Naturally, you’re going to believe whatever you made up in your head. Have fun with your delusions!
You’re lying, of course.
And you are a pettifogging pipsqueak prevaricator.
Clinton supporters violently oppose whatever they are told to, and wholeheartedly support whatever they are told to.
Do you think that this also applies to Trump supported?
Some people might call that “loyalty.”
I call it bullheadedness to continue to support a man who is the epitome of womanizer.
” I shot up in my seat, and hit my head on the ceiling “.
You should stop shooting up.
(I wonder how many people watched the second and third debates just to see what he would do next?)
blah, blah, blah… I thought Trump said he loves women.
Look who will be running for president in 4 years, isn’t this cute? She’s on the speaking tour right now.
Edward “Ed” Mezvinsky, born January 17, 1937.
You probably say, “Who is Ed Mezvinsky?” Well, he is a former Democrat congressman who represented Iowa’s 1st congressional district in the United States House of Representatives for two terms, from 1973 to 1977. He sat on the House Judiciary Committee that decided the fate of Richard Nixon. He was outspoken saying that Nixon was a crook and a disgrace to politics and the nation and should be impeached.
He and the Clintons were friends and very politically intertwined for many years. Ed Mezvinsky had an affair with NBC News reporter Marjorie Sue Margolies and later married her after his wife divorced him. In 1993, Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky, then a freshman Democrat in Congress, cast the deciding vote that got President Bill Clinton’s controversial tax package through the House of Representatives. In March 2001, Mezvinsky was indicted and later pleaded guilty to 31 of 69 counts of bank fraud, mail fraud, and wire fraud. Ed Mezvinsky embezzled more than $10 million dollars from people via both a Ponzi scheme and the notorious Nigerian e-mail scams. He was found guilty and sentenced to 80 months in federal prison. After serving less than five years in federal prison, he was released in April 2008 and remains on federal probation. To this day, he still owes $9.4 million in restitution to his victims. About now you are saying, “So what!” Well, this is Marc and Chelsea Mezvinsky. That’s right; Ed Mezvinsky is Chelsea Clinton’s father-in law. Now Marc and Chelsea are in their early thirties and purchased a 10.5 million dollar NYC apartment (after being married in George Soros’ mansion). Has anyone heard mention of any of this in any of the media?
If this guy was Jenna or Barbara Bush’s, or better yet, Sarah Palin’s daughter’s father-in- law, the news would be an everyday headline and every detail would be reported over and over. And yet say there are no double standards in political reporting. And people are already talking about Hillarious as our next President! And then there is possibly Chelsea for president in our future! The cycle never ends! Lying and corruption seem to make Democrat candidates more popular. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.
When the government fears the people, there is liberty. ~~ Thomas Jefferson
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” ~ ~Abraham Lincoln
Wow … that is quite a tale you spun there! I’m sure you have some conspiracy theory in your mind that will lead from this to “tyranny.”
This passage is particularly funny: “If this guy was Jenna or Barbara Bush’s, or better yet, Sarah Palin’s daughter’s father-in- law, the news would be an everyday headline and every detail would be reported over and over. ” Sarah Palin’s daughter’s father in law? That’s really amusing!
Yes, I’m sure you can connect the dots there. Who couldn’t?
klastri you live a life of denial, keep drinking the cool-aid, I’m not going to change your mind nor do I, or anybody else care too.
It’s great to know that you speak for everybody. That is quite an accomplishment!
You seem to share Mr. Trump’s delusional and outsized opinion of oneself. Very well deserved indeed!
And it’s Kool-Aid. With a K.
klas less, I spelled it with a C so you would have something to complain about………Wait, you complain about EVERYTHING!
You might want to have equal space for father-in-law felons, e.g. Ivankas father-in-law.
Equal space you ask. Item of interest for the truth seekers…”It’s one thing for the right-wing press to accuse the Clinton foundation of cronyism, corruption, and scandal (especially if the facts, and internal admissions by affiliated employees, confirm as much) – it tends to be generally ignored by the broader, if left-leaning, media. But when the Watergate scandal’s Bob Woodward, associate editor at the liberal Washington Post, says very much the same, Hillary Clinton’s campaign has no choice but to notice. This is precisely what happened today when journalist Bob Woodward told a Fox News Sunday panel that the Clinton Foundation is “corrupt” and that Hillary Clinton has not answered for it.
Here, courtesy of RealClearPolitics, is the transcript of today’s exchange:
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS SUNDAY: Then there are the allegations about the Clinton Foundation and pay to play, which I asked Secretary Clinton about in the debate, and she turned into an attack on the Trump Foundation.
But, Bob, I want to go back to the conversation I was having with Robby Mook before. When — when you see what seems to be clear evidence that Clinton Foundation donors were being treated differently than non-donors in terms of access, when you see this new — new revelations about the $12 million deal between Hillary Clinton, the foundation, and the king of Morocco, are voters right to be troubled by this?
x
BOB WOODWARD, THE WASHINGTON POST: I — yes, it’s a — it’s corrupt. It’s — it’s a scandal. And she didn’t answer your question at all. And she turned to embrace the good work that the Clinton Foundation has done. And she has a case there. But the mixing of speech fees, the Clinton Foundation, and actions by the State Department, which she ran, are all intertwined and it’s corrupt. You know, I mean, you can’t just say it’s unsavory. But there’s no formal investigation going on now, and there are outs that they have.
But the election isn’t going to be decided on that. I mean Karl was making the point about this, I’m not going to observe the result of the election. I mean that’s — that’s absurd. I mean it has no consequence. If Trump loses, they’re not going to let him in the White House. He’s not going to have a transition team. And — and to focus on that, I think, is wrong. I think the issue is, what’s going to be the aftermath of this campaign.
So it’s corrupt, it’s a scandal, and… it will have no consequences at all. It’s time to look up the latest definition of Banana republic again.”
Ever notice how the establishment media (like the Clinton propaganda factory formerly known as AP) frames what is “important” in this election and how you should feel about it. The only “news” worth reporting is damaging to Trump. Then the croaking chorus of liberal social media (like the parrots in this comment section) take over and repeat and repeat and repeat the negative “factoid” of the day like dutiful sheep. Any proof of corruption associated with the Clintons is deemed to be not newsworthy. Welcome to what’s left of democracy in America. Now go back to registering illegal aliens and dead people to vote.
Yes, it’s so sad that the news folks write down and report things Mr. Trump says and does. Nothing good can come of that. But of course, none of that is Mr. Trump’s fault, since all he did was do or say what was reported. That’s quite a conspiracy!
President Hillary Clinton. Sounds pretty good, doesn’t it?
SNL is AWESOME!