The truth hurts: Clinton lost white women in a landslide!

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, right, stops in to speak to workers at a campaign office for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., left, in Davie, Fla., Tuesday, Aug. 9, 2016. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, right, stops in to speak to workers at a campaign office for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., left, in Davie, Fla., Tuesday, Aug. 9, 2016. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Jill Filipovic, attorney and feminist writer, ignores reality:

What Donald Trump Thinks It Takes to Be a Man

Jill Filipovic | November 2, 2017

Donald Trump is a new kind of old-school American man. In some ways, he’s a throwback to days when authority and power were exclusively white and male by definition, when displays of masculine entitlement were overt and unapologetic. But he’s also a thoroughly modern man-child, the kind of overgrown adolescent you expect to find on internet forums dedicated to video games or anti-feminism: a tweeter of juvenile threats, a crass name-caller, an id unrestrained. Trump-style masculinity, in other words, is less John Wayne and more Tucker Max — and a revealing insight into American male anxiety.

American manhood is reshaping itself in two opposing directions, and both archetypes are ones we’ve never seen before. If Barack Obama embodied the new ideal of the progressive man — a hands-on dad and a self-identified feminist married to a high-achieving woman who was once his boss, who is also well mannered and protective of his family — then Mr. Trump is his antithesis, an old-school chauvinist embracing a new code of adolescent anarchy. He is a paradigm of feckless male entitlement, embracing male power while abnegating the traditional masculine requirements of chivalry, courtesy and responsibility.

Almost a year ago, he won the presidential election by presenting this version of aggrieved manhood in opposition to Hillary Clinton’s hand-raising Hermione Granger feminism. White American men loved it.

Naturally. Miss Filipovic has much more, which you can read if you follow the link. But, and not for the first time, she has blamed Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton on “white men,” while never mentioning that a majority of white women also voted for Mr Trump. Mrs Clinton has lamented that fact, and claimed that women — “particularly white women” — who supported Mr Trump “disrespected themselves.”

But then, there’s the unmentioned statistic. While the exit polls revealed that 52+% of white women voted for Mr Trump, only 43% voted for Mrs Clinton. The remaining 5% either voted for a third party candidate or refused to answer. Remember: Gary Johnson received 3.28% of the vote,¹ while Jill Stein took 1.07%. The rejection of Mrs Clinton by the white women who were expected to flock to her candidacy was pretty overwhelming. Political scientists tend to define a landslide victory as a ten percent margin, and, by that definition, Mrs Clinton lost white women in a landslide.

For Miss Filipovic, the only explanation is that “a yawning fear of female power kept one of the best-qualified candidates in history out of office.” That “one of the best-qualified candidates in history” might have some real issues that kept white women from seeing her as a goddess seems to have escaped her.

She concluded:

Plenty of American men are doing exactly the opposite of Mr. Trump and embracing the more productive characteristics of masculinity while rejecting the malicious ones. And the virtues of self-respect — toughness, moral nerve, character — have never been, unlike the presidency, male-only business.

And yet, we are learning more, seemingly every other day, that the candidate Miss Filipovic extolled was somewhat deficient in “moral nerve” and “character.” When it comes to “moral nerve,” the candidate who, in 2008, told us that she was the one ready to answer the three AM phone call, and this year that Mr Trump wasn’t, lamented her lack of nerve, when she wanted to tell Mr Trump to “back up, you creep,” but didn’t.

Character? Character?! Last week we heard about Mrs Clinton’s “Uranium One” deal with Russia, while just yesterday, Donna Brazile, a notorious Clinton partisan, the woman who fed Mrs Clinton at least one advance debate question, told us that she not only had positive proof that Mrs Clinton used the Democratic National Committee to rig the primary campaign against Senator Bernie Sanders (S-VT), but that her campaign had completely co-opted and controlled the DNC before her nomination, including leaving the DNC broke and in debt.

In what must be taken with a fairly large grain of salt, given the nature of hindsight, Miss Brazile wrote, about talking to Mr Sanders, “I did not trust the polls, I said. I told him I had visited states around the country and I found a lack of enthusiasm for her everywhere.” That Miss Filipovic and many other feminists were very enthusiastic over having a woman win the Democratic presidential nomination is understandable. Their biggest problem was just which woman it was. They want to blame sexism and everything else that they can for Mrs Clinton’s unanticipated loss, but the biggest problem they faced is that she was a rotten, weak and corrupt candidate. When Mr Trump nicknamed her “Crooked Hillary,” he was telling the truth.
¹ – I voted for Governor Johnson.