by Pa Rock
Citizen Journalist
Back during the debates in the 2016 election cycle, as Donald Trump was discovering that he didn't have the intellectual gravitas to verbally spar with his opponent in a "presidential" manner, he began resorting to the use of snide remarks and insults to hold up his end of what should have been enlightened conversations between adults. It was during the third debate that he shocked many by looking directly into the camera and saying of his opponent, Hillary Clinton, that she was "such a nasty woman."
Presidential campaigns had gotten ugly before, but that was, by almost anyone's standard, a new low. Not only was "nasty" a pejorative term, using it to address a woman had a distinct gender-based, slimy quality to it. Trump wanted viewers to get the complete contempt of his statement: his opponent was one of them - a woman - and she was even worse - a "nasty" woman.
Trump's contemptuous attitude toward women was already well known. His "locker room talk" describing "grabbing" women "by the pussy" had been widely disseminated and many thought that alone would serve to repulse decent people of both genders and both parties, and the demeaning description of Hillary as "nasty" would surely add frosting to that cake. But America was destined to disappoint the world and elect Trump anyway - or at least our "electoral college" saw fit to elect him.
Trump, with his ignorance, sexism, and even racism flying high, managed to bring the malcontents to the polls in record numbers while not alienating the moderate core of the Republican Party to the point where they either failed to vote or voted Democratic. The knuckle-draggers said "He's our guy!" while the party establishment decided that they could live with a buffoon and quietly made a deal with the devil in order to be able to put right-wing judges in the courts.
Well, the outrages that worked so well back then are probably good for another run around the electoral track, right?
Donald Trump has chosen to test that theory. Instead of doing some homework and trying to come up with intelligent challenges to the Democrats who are lining up to oppose him in next year's general election, Trump has again sunk to name-calling, the only type of discourse that his followers appear to understand and enjoy.
Trump seems to fear Joe Biden and Kamala Harris more than any of the other Democrats currently vying for the country's attention, and in sort of a back-handed salute to their preeminence as worthy candidates, he has awarded them insult status. He calls Biden "Sleepy Joe," probably because the older Biden does not seem to exhibit the energy and fire of some of the party's younger lions like Warren, O'Rourke, and Buttigieg. "Sleepy" might imply a low energy level, but it is a relatively harmless label that does not impugn the candidates honesty or morality.
Kamala Harris, however, does not get a softball insult pass from Trump. Trump has a real problem with women, particularly very bright women who don't fall at his feet when he enters the room. This past week Trump has gone after Senator Harris twice, both times referring to her as "nasty" and both times taking his cheap shot of a Fox News program.
Joe Biden may have low energy, but Kamala Harris is far worse. She is "nasty." It has to do with her gender, her sharp mind, and her equally sharp tongue. Trump's method for dealing with "uppity" women is to speak down to them, and to do that he must first show the world that they are "nasty" and beneath contempt.
One must suspect (and hope) that when Donald Trump finally succeeds in getting Kamala Harris pissed off, he will learn in short order just how nasty she can get!
Citizen Journalist
Back during the debates in the 2016 election cycle, as Donald Trump was discovering that he didn't have the intellectual gravitas to verbally spar with his opponent in a "presidential" manner, he began resorting to the use of snide remarks and insults to hold up his end of what should have been enlightened conversations between adults. It was during the third debate that he shocked many by looking directly into the camera and saying of his opponent, Hillary Clinton, that she was "such a nasty woman."
Presidential campaigns had gotten ugly before, but that was, by almost anyone's standard, a new low. Not only was "nasty" a pejorative term, using it to address a woman had a distinct gender-based, slimy quality to it. Trump wanted viewers to get the complete contempt of his statement: his opponent was one of them - a woman - and she was even worse - a "nasty" woman.
Trump's contemptuous attitude toward women was already well known. His "locker room talk" describing "grabbing" women "by the pussy" had been widely disseminated and many thought that alone would serve to repulse decent people of both genders and both parties, and the demeaning description of Hillary as "nasty" would surely add frosting to that cake. But America was destined to disappoint the world and elect Trump anyway - or at least our "electoral college" saw fit to elect him.
Trump, with his ignorance, sexism, and even racism flying high, managed to bring the malcontents to the polls in record numbers while not alienating the moderate core of the Republican Party to the point where they either failed to vote or voted Democratic. The knuckle-draggers said "He's our guy!" while the party establishment decided that they could live with a buffoon and quietly made a deal with the devil in order to be able to put right-wing judges in the courts.
Well, the outrages that worked so well back then are probably good for another run around the electoral track, right?
Donald Trump has chosen to test that theory. Instead of doing some homework and trying to come up with intelligent challenges to the Democrats who are lining up to oppose him in next year's general election, Trump has again sunk to name-calling, the only type of discourse that his followers appear to understand and enjoy.
Trump seems to fear Joe Biden and Kamala Harris more than any of the other Democrats currently vying for the country's attention, and in sort of a back-handed salute to their preeminence as worthy candidates, he has awarded them insult status. He calls Biden "Sleepy Joe," probably because the older Biden does not seem to exhibit the energy and fire of some of the party's younger lions like Warren, O'Rourke, and Buttigieg. "Sleepy" might imply a low energy level, but it is a relatively harmless label that does not impugn the candidates honesty or morality.
Kamala Harris, however, does not get a softball insult pass from Trump. Trump has a real problem with women, particularly very bright women who don't fall at his feet when he enters the room. This past week Trump has gone after Senator Harris twice, both times referring to her as "nasty" and both times taking his cheap shot of a Fox News program.
Joe Biden may have low energy, but Kamala Harris is far worse. She is "nasty." It has to do with her gender, her sharp mind, and her equally sharp tongue. Trump's method for dealing with "uppity" women is to speak down to them, and to do that he must first show the world that they are "nasty" and beneath contempt.
One must suspect (and hope) that when Donald Trump finally succeeds in getting Kamala Harris pissed off, he will learn in short order just how nasty she can get!
No comments:
Post a Comment