Wait, what? Only one in three? That means two-thirds of Republican women would be OK (or better) with Trump winning.
What, many of us wonder, are they thinking? This is a man who has called women “disgusting pigs,” who has discussed a television host’s menstruation habits, who has defended his campaign manager’s assault on a female reporter. Why would any self-respecting woman vote for this guy?
Many of these women are the so-called security moms, who first seemed to emerge during the 2004 presidential campaign (but were around for much longer). They’re women who vote not on traditional “women’s issues” — education, abortion, etc. — but on foreign policy.
I know where they’re coming from. When it comes to pulling the lever at the poll, I’m a one-issue voter.
I started to think this way before I became a mother. When I was living in New York City as a single woman, I voted for mayor based on who was going to give the greatest support to the Police Department and who would keep the streets safest. Did I agree with Rudy Giuliani about abortion? Obviously not. Would I have liked Michael Bloomberg to stop trying to regulate my soda purchases? Clearly. But the voting booth does not allow for nuance.
Similarly when it came to national politics, I worried about who was going to keep America safe. When fellow conservatives lectured me about John McCain’s record on campaign finance and his efforts to regulate free speech during elections, I sympathized. But during the 2000 primary there was no candidate I thought would do more to strengthen the military. He knew the difference between America’s friends and enemies and was in no danger of confusing them.
So what is a security mom to do? Kellyanne Conway, a Republican pollster who is working for a Ted Cruz super PAC, says that when she’s interviewed female Trump supporters, they say they are most concerned about “security, fairness and patriotism.” They like the strength that he projects. Like his male supporters, they are attracted to Trump’s claims of being an outsider because women are particularly concerned with the “corruptibility” of elected officials. And, finally, says Conway, they are attracted to his message of “optimism.”
As much as I sympathize with the desires of these Trump supporting security moms to make America safe again, I think their choice of candidate is completely misguided. The letter signed by more than 100 GOP foreign-policy experts last month makes the case plainly. As these former cabinet secretaries, diplomats and wonks note, “Mr. Trump’s own statements lead us to conclude that as president, he would use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe and which would diminish our standing in the world.”
Between his admiration for Vladimir Putin and his demand that our allies pay us for protection, Trump would seem a better candidate for running the mob than the United States.
The tragedy is that Trump’s failings make a Hillary Clinton presidency all the more likely. If the security moms don’t feel safe now, imagine what the world will look like after four more years of the same policies.
No comments:
Post a Comment