Not satisfied with hurling sexist invectives at Hillary Clinton, the Donald has turned his ire on her husband, the former president, claiming he has "a terrible record of women abuse."
Really? Does anyone recall Bill Clinton ridiculing women reporters (as Trump did with Megyn Kelly), insulting the looks of a female candidate (as Trump did with Carly Fiorina) and introducing a generation to Jewish slang for a male organ (his description of Barack Obama's '08 defeat of Hillary Clinton)?
The only reason Donald Trump is a viable candidate for the Republican nomination is because white men dominate Republican primaries and caucuses. They do not dominate general elections. Donald Trump has most "professional" Republicans — the kind who run and fund and organize campaigns — shaking in their boots, because every group except white men is overwhelmingly against Donald Trump.
Women: check. Trump has the biggest gender gap of any candidate in the race. African-Americans: check. They prefer Clinton over Trump by a margin of nearly 10 to 1. Hispanics, one of the fastest growing demographic groups, overwhelmingly oppose Trump, likely because of his over-the-top rhetoric slamming immigrants as rapists and criminals. Interestingly, Asians, who might be expected to lean Republican because of their rising economic status, don't seem to be doing so this time around. It appears that they identify more as immigrants than as new members of the upper-middle-class Republican base.
No wonder Trump is attacking Bill Clinton.
The only problem is that Bill Clinton isn't running for president. And if he were, he would trounce Trump.
No question: The 2008 campaign was a tough one for the Clintons. The media was in love with Obama, in much the same way they'd been in love with Bill Clinton himself back in 1991-1992.
They were largely giving Obama a free ride, and the former president was much angrier on behalf of his wife than she was. I remember, the night before the Iowa caucus, the Clintons arrived late at their hotel, which — perhaps someone's idea of a joke — happened to be the same hotel Fox News had been assigned. Hillary greeted the crowd that formed in the lobby pleasantly and then said goodnight. Her husband stayed, posing for pictures with everyone who wanted one, and when he was done, gave me chapter and verse detailing the unfair coverage of the campaign so far. Anyone who doubts the strength of the bond between the two Clintons need only have listened to that conversation to be convinced.
And what about Monica Lewinsky, whose name, thanks to the Donald, is once again in papers everywhere because of his comments? Yes, Bill Clinton had an inappropriate sexual relationship with Lewinsky nearly 20 years ago. And he paid the price for it, politically. But his wife had nothing to do with it. And while it might have been true back in 2000 that many women were troubled she stayed with him, she won the Senate race that year with strong support from women.
Of course the former president is going to campaign on behalf of his wife. I have yet to meet a Democratic running for any office in recent years whose first choice for a "surrogate" to raise money or to campaign wasn't Bill Clinton. So he'll be out there, as he should be, as wives have been doing for decades, helping his spouse get elected.
But at the end of the day, Hillary is the one running for president, not Bill. And what could be more sexist than an opponent who (even if out of desperation) ignores the female candidate and aims his fire instead at her husband — as if Bill is the one running, as if Hillary is responsible for his sex life?
Happy New Year in these interesting times.
To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2015 CREATORS.COM
|
 |
Comments
|
6 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
The Donald is fast becoming the Democratic party's fantasy republican candidate. Now if only Elisabeth Warren would run...
Comment: #1
Posted by: Mark
Thu Dec 31, 2015 4:56 PM
|
|
|
|
Dear Ms. Estrich,
Your quotes below.
"No question: The 2008 campaign was a tough one for the Clintons. The media was in love with Obama, in much the same way they'd been in love with Bill Clinton himself back in 1991-1992."
"They were largely giving Obama a free ride"
You finally, finally are admitting that there has been and is a Liberal Bias in the News Media????
Nuff Said...Dennis
Comment: #2
Posted by: Dennis
Fri Jan 1, 2016 2:50 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: Dennis
Liberal bias in the News Media.
If you believe that, then the biased right wing, conservative media has done their job.
Thanks to the 6 corporations who own the media, we no longer have 'freedom of the press'.
Reporters see their stories refused or edited beyond recognition. Indeed, we have a 'biased press'.
Mass market media (MSM) is loyal to their sponsors.. advertisers and government.. rather than to the interests of the people. Stories are suppressed that don't serve their elite sponsors conservative or liberal interests or stories are repetitiously run that do reflect their interests. Either way, we all lose.
These 6 mega giants not only decide what messages they want to send us in movies and tv shows, in their news reporting they reduce the diversity of information provided as well as reducing the accountability of information providers. Is my opinion the many troubles we are experiencing today domestic and foreign, is due to a seriously uninformed public, and our sadly unqualified choices for President, all owned by these same elitists hence the constant media attention on Trump's every word, reflect the full power and damage of elitists and of government and corporate media propaganda and their unrivaled ability to sway public opinion then reflect it, who devalue ethical journalism and make mockery of Freedom of The Press by eliminating/buying up competitors and firing qualified, ethical reporters.
"How To Detect Bias In News Media" is article I read on FAIR, Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting.
It is described as progressive and left wing and conservatives hate it.
It's counterpart, started and still owned and run by an author on this site, Bozell, is epitome of what I dislike about conservatives. Some may find it more to their liking.
Comment: #3
Posted by: steveM
Sat Jan 2, 2016 11:11 AM
|
|
|
|
I see I forget to name the conservative counterpart for bias in news media, is owned and run by Brent Bozell, named Media Research Center.
Comment: #4
Posted by: steveM
Sat Jan 2, 2016 11:15 AM
|
|
|
|
AS to Bill Clinton's record of abuse of women Estrich asks- Really? Is this a joke? Is she serious? Are liberals really that stupid or that willingly blind?
I wonder why Extrich does not ask:
Does anyone recall Bill Clinton using a female intern as human humidor? Answer yes.
Does anyone recall credible reports of Bill Clinton physically and sexually abusing a series of women including but not limited to Ellen Wellstone, Carolyn Moffet, Paula Corbin, Christy Zercher, Kathleen Willey, and Juanita Broaddrick. Answer Yes.
Does anyone recall his continuing spousal abuse of his door mat Hillary Clinton? Answer Yes!
Dies anyone recall his flights with convicted pedophile Jeffry Epstein on the "Lolita Express". Answer Yes, Why do bank robbers rob banks? Because that's where the money is. Why did Clinton ride the "Lolita Express/" Because that's where the little girls were.
Bill Clinton is a confirmed repeat serial actual physical and mental abuser of women. Period. But that does not matter to Estrich. She is hermetically sealed to the truth.
Estich in final comical fashion throws out "as if Hillary is responsible for his sex life" . LOL !!!
Hillary is his wife. In this matter one does however have sympathy for Bill.
Hillary, that fugly, cackling, cankled, foul mouthed, rumored to be lesbian, humorless, dishonest, screeching tub of lard shrew is enough to make any male part shrivel and die. So maybe she is directly responsible for Bill straying.
She is certainly responsible for the war and character assassination she waged on the women Bill abused and assaulted.
Comment: #5
Posted by: joseph wright
Sat Jan 2, 2016 11:26 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: steveM
Dear Steve,
I appreciate your comment.
The quotes I used were verbatim by Ms. Estrich. If her own quotes don't acknowledge a Liberal Bias by the MSM, what does? I also notice Howie Kurtz, another well respected columnist seems to have come around to the decision in his columns there is a Liberal Bias in the MSM, and these are as I stated, respected columnists! Let me also add though, both I believe now also write for FOX News.
I don't know how better to say this other than I know a blatant bias when I see, hear or read it. Of course many other Moderates and Conservatives, as well as even now Liberals acknowledge a Liberal Bias in the MSM.
Please keep in mind a single word placed strategically can alter the meaning of any sentence to reflect one's bias.
Allow me to add the old sayings "one man's meat is another man's poison", and "Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder!" The thing here is so many honest people believe there is a Liberal Bias for it to be just a Conservative fable.
Nuff Said...Dennis
Comment: #6
Posted by: Dennis
Sat Jan 2, 2016 3:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
