How four words sealed Donald Trump's fate with women voters
"Such a nasty woman"
"Such a nasty woman."
Those four words sealed Donald Trump's fate, not as the loser of the 2016 presidential race — which even before Wednesday's debate he was almost certain to be, unless Hillary Clinton is caught on video strangling a basketful of kittens while pledging eternal loyalty to her lord and master Beelzebub — but as the candidate who did more to alienate women voters than any in modern history. You thought there was a gender gap before? Just you wait.
It was inevitable that Chris Wallace would bring up the fact that in the last couple of weeks around a dozen women have charged that Donald Trump kissed them, groped them, or watched them undress (the latter in the case of pageant contestants, including at the Miss Teen USA pageant) against their will. So you might have thought that even an operation as obviously incompetent as the Trump campaign would have managed to prepare him for the question with a good response, one that didn't just discredit those charges but also made an attempt to reassure women voters with something more persuasive than his oft-repeated "Nobody has more respect for women than I do."
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
But he didn't have anything better prepared. Instead, he claimed that their stories have been "debunked" (not remotely true), and said, "I didn't even apologize to my wife, who's sitting right here, because I didn't do anything." It was enough to make you think that he has no idea how that sounds to women voters, like a man who tells them that what he did wrong is actually their fault.
But you know who did have a strong answer for that question prepared? Hillary Clinton, naturally. Here's what she said (I've removed Trump's interruptions):
We'll have to wait to see whether this debate has some impact with women voters over and above what has already happened so far in the campaign. But what we already know is that we're heading for the largest gender gap we've ever recorded.
While there were a few earlier elections in which men and women voted somewhat differently, it was in 1980 — when Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter by 1 point among women but 17 points among men — that the gender gap became a semi-permanent fixture of presidential politics, with women always voting more Democratic than men. In the years since it varied somewhat in each election, but it has always been present to some degree. The largest gap came in 2012, when Mitt Romney beat Barack Obama by 7 points among men while Barack Obama won by 11 points among women, for a total gap of 18 points.
This year, it's going to be higher — maybe much higher. Recently, FiveThirtyEight collected gender breakdowns on a group of recent polls, and found the gender gap averaging 26 points. And it's mostly college educated women, a group Romney narrowly won in 2012, who are creating this gap. Some polls have shown Clinton leading among them by as much as 30 points.
What's most remarkable is that Trump either has no idea that he's bleeding women voters and can't win without them, or he thinks that what he's doing will actually win them back. How else to explain how he acted in Wednesday's debate?
It wasn't just his response to the question about his accusers, or even his attempts to attack Hillary Clinton for Bill Clinton's sexual history (message: If your husband cheats, it's your fault). Someone might have told him that women took particular issue with the way he seemed to loom over her during the second debate, walking up behind her while she was talking in a way that looked almost threatening. Or they might have told him that every woman understands that men interrupt women much more often than women interrupt each other — it's a power move that says "I get to decide when you can talk, and as soon as I have something to say you have to shut up" — which means that he'd have to be careful about how much he interrupted her.
But he wasn't careful. Just as in the first two debates, Trump was sedate and contained for the first few minutes, acting as though he was executing some kind of plan. But as soon as things got going, he became dismissive, perturbed, even contemptuous, interrupting her again and again, all while Clinton maintained her calm throughout (which probably irritated him all the more).
And then near the end, Clinton gave Trump a jibe, when talking about Social Security taxes: "My Social Security payroll contribution will go up, as will Donald's, assuming he can't figure out how to get out of it." A little personal? Maybe, but certainly not terribly out of line, and no more rude than a dozen things each of them had said about the other in the preceding hour. But Trump, utterly unable to help himself, leaned into his microphone and said those words: "Such a nasty woman."
Because Donald Trump isn't going to just stand there and let some woman criticize him without showing her who's boss. He showed her, alright. And he showed all the women watching at home, too.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Paul Waldman is a senior writer with The American Prospect magazine and a blogger for The Washington Post. His writing has appeared in dozens of newspapers, magazines, and web sites, and he is the author or co-author of four books on media and politics.
-
Today's political cartoons - September 7, 2024
Cartoons Saturday's cartoons - football widows, meddling kids, and more
By The Week US Published
-
Smoking ban: the return of the nanny state?
Talking Point Starmer's plan to revive Sunak-era war on tobacco has struck an unsettling chord even with some non-smokers
By The Week UK Published
-
Crossword: September 7, 2024
The Week's daily crossword puzzle
By The Week Staff Published
-
A brief history of third parties in the US
In Depth Though none of America's third parties have won a presidential election, they have nonetheless had a large impact on the country's politics
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
How could J.D. Vance impact the special relationship?
Today's Big Question Trump's hawkish pick for VP said UK is the first 'truly Islamist country' with a nuclear weapon
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Biden, Trump urge calm after assassination attempt
Speed Reads A 20-year-old gunman grazed Trump's ear and fatally shot a rally attendee on Saturday
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Supreme Court rejects challenge to CFPB
Speed Read The court rejected a conservative-backed challenge to the way the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is funded
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Arizona court reinstates 1864 abortion ban
Speed Read The law makes all abortions illegal in the state except to save the mother's life
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Trump, billions richer, is selling Bibles
Speed Read The former president is hawking a $60 "God Bless the USA Bible"
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
The debate about Biden's age and mental fitness
In Depth Some critics argue Biden is too old to run again. Does the argument have merit?
By Grayson Quay Published
-
How would a second Trump presidency affect Britain?
Today's Big Question Re-election of Republican frontrunner could threaten UK security, warns former head of secret service
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published