Archives for category: Trump

We used to expect our Presidents to be role models. We encouraged our children to emulate them. We hoped that our children would learn from their example of service, valor, and dedication to principle. Sometimes we airbrushed their flaws or mythologized them. But we expected them to act and speak with dignity, as befits the Office.

But not Donald Trump. He has made a mockery of the Presidency. Imagine Abe Lincoln or Harry Truman or Dwight D. Eisenhower hawking tennis shoes or watches for his personal profit in the middle of his campaign.

Worse, however, is his crude language. He has brought locker-room talk onto the public stage, which no other American President has ever done. It is literally impossible to imagine any previous President talking in public with admiration about the size of Arnold Palmer’s genitals. Trump and his campaign hit a new low at the infamous event at Madison Square Garden.

The New York Times noticed:

Four-letter words were flying everywhere. One speaker flipped his middle finger at the opposition. Another made what was interpreted as an oral sex joke regarding Vice President Kamala Harris. Another suggested she was a prostitute. Still another discussed the supposed sexual habits of Latinos rather explicitly.

All in all, former President Donald J. Trump’s rally at Madison Square Garden on Sunday was a cornucopia of crudeness, punctuated by the kind of language that once would have been unthinkable for a gathering held to promote the candidacy of a would-be president of the United States. But among the many lines that Mr. Trump has obliterated in his time in politics is the invisible boundary between propriety and profanity.

Mr. Trump has always been more prone than any of his predecessors in the White House to publicly use what were once called dirty words. But in his third campaign for the presidency, his speeches have grown coarser and coarser. Altogether, according to a computer search, Mr. Trump has used words that would have once gotten a kid’s mouth washed out with soap at least 140 times in public this year. Counting tamer four-letter words like “damn” and “hell,” he has cursed in public at least 1,787 times in 2024

What minimal self-restraint Mr. Trump once showed in his public discourse has evaporated. A recent New York Times analysis of his public comments this year showed that he uses such language 69 percent more often than he did when he first ran for president in 2016. He sometimes acknowledges that he knows he should not but quickly adds that he cannot help himself.

He often relates that Franklin Graham, the evangelical leader and son of the Rev. Billy Graham, has chided the former president about his language. “I wrote him back,” Mr. Trump said at a rally this month where he discussed the golfer Arnold Palmer’s penis size and invited the crowd to shout out a four-letter word to describe Ms. Harris. “I said, I’m going to try to do that, but actually, the stories won’t be as good. Because you can’t put the same emphasis on it. So tonight, I broke my rule.”

The crowd typically does not mind; quite the opposite. The thousands on hand at Madison Square Garden cheered and laughed at the F-bombs, S-bombs and other bombs thrown out by the various speakers and warm-up acts for Mr. Trump. It clearly is part of the testosterone-driven appeal: Real men curse. Mr. Trump is a real man. What they want is a real man for president.

In total, a computer search of 17 of the speakers at Madison Square Garden found epithets used at least 43 times. One of the most prolific was Sid Rosenberg, a conservative radio host. “What a sick son of a bitch,” he said of Hillary Clinton. “The whole fucking party, a bunch of degenerates, lowlives, Jew haters and lowlives. Every one of them.”

Scott LoBaido, an artist, flipped the bird to the Democrats and called Mr. Trump “the greatest fucking president in the world.”

Tony Hinchcliffe, the comic who made insulting jokes about Latino sexual practices, likewise disparaged Jews and Palestinians and called Puerto Rico “a floating island of garbage,” the only comment the Trump campaign later disavowed.

Mr. Trump himself was somewhat more reticent at Madison Square Garden, deploying an “ass,” a couple of “damns,” eight “hells” and a “shit.” But at other recent rallies, he has called Ms. Harris “a shit vice president” and used the same word at a Catholic charity dinner in front of New York’s cardinal.

At one appearance in February before the Conservative Political Action Conference, Mr. Trump spiced his speech with no fewer than 44 epithets. “I got indicted four times by this gang of thugs for nothing, or as I say respectfully to the people from foreign countries, for bullshit,” he said at one point.

The computer analysis showed that Mr. Trump’s use of curses has been on the rise particularly in the past few months as the campaign heated up. But Mr. Trump, now 78, did not resort to such language nearly as much during the final months of the 2020 campaign, according to the analysis, and some experts point to his increased profanity as an example of “disinhibition,” a trait often found with aging as people become less restrained in what they say.

The day after Trump’s Madison Square Garden, the media reacted with shock to the raw racism and misogyny on display. The New York Times reported:

Former President Donald J. Trump sought to head off the major speech Vice President Kamala Harris was planning to deliver Tuesday night by casting her as responsible for all of the nation’s ills while also attempting to draw attention away from bigoted and racist remarks at his rally in New York.

Two days after he hosted a rally at Madison Square Garden where several speakers made racist and vulgar statements, Mr. Trump accused Ms. Harris of running “a campaign of absolute hate.”

Mr. Trump then headed to Pennsylvania, a crucial battleground state, for two campaign stops. Ms. Harris is expected to speak at the Ellipse, the same park near the White House where Mr. Trump marshaled his supporters to descend on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The setting for Ms. Harris’s remarks will provide her campaign with a symbolic moment to go along with its increasingly blunt warnings about the dangers posed by Mr. Trump, who Democrats say is unstable and will run roughshod over democratic norms if he returns to the White House.

Mr. Trump’s allies have shown anxiety that the backlash to the Madison Square Garden event, and descriptions of him as a racist and a fascist, may be breaking through to segments of voters in battleground states. On Tuesday, however, the former president sought to attack Ms. Harris with the very accusations he himself has been facing, telling a group of supporters and reporters at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida that her message “has been a message of hate and division.”

In his remarks, Mr. Trump continued to push back against criticisms of his rally — which he called, unprompted, “an absolute love fest” — mocking Democrats who have pointed out that a pro-Nazi rally was held at Madison Square Garden in 1939.

Election Day is one week from today. Here’s what else to know:

  • Madison Square Garden rally fallout: Republicans moved swiftly to distance themselves from remarks disparaging Puerto Rico made by the comedian Tony Hinchcliffe, who was one of the opening speakers at Mr. Trump’s New York rally. The island’s Republican Party chairman is demanding an apology, and the Puerto Rican rapper Bad Bunny stepped up his condemnation of the remarks on Tuesday.
  • Hinting at a vulgar taunt: An ad from Elon Musk’s PAC refers to Ms. Harris as a “C Word” — eventually calling her a “communist” — in an allusion to an insult against women that is one of the most obscene words in American English.

Jeff Bezos may have killed the Washington Post’s editorial endorsement of Kamala Harris, but he certainly didn’t muzzle the editorial board, which lacerated Trump about his behavior on January 6, which he recently called “a day of love.”

The editorial on Monday said:

Vice President Kamala Harris will deliver her closing argument in a speech Tuesday at the Ellipse in D.C. This location, where President Donald Trump incited a mob to ransack the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, is fitting and proper. Mr. Trump’s unprecedented efforts to overturn his defeat in the 2020 election, combined with promises to pardon supporters convicted of crimes committed that day, represent Ms. Harris’s strongest argument for why voters shouldn’t return him to the White House.

Mr. Trump has shown no contrition for what happened during the worst assault on the Capitol since the British set it ablaze in 1814. Instead, he’s attempted to rewrite history.

During a Univision town hall on Oct. 16, Republican Ramiro González, a 56-year-old construction worker living in Tampa, expressed concern to Mr. Trump about his inaction on Jan. 6. Mr. Trump said, not for the first time, that it was actually “a day of love” and referred to the rioters in the first person plural. “The others had guns, but we didn’t have guns,” he said. By “others,” Mr. Trump is referring to law enforcement officers, some 140 of whom were assaulted by his supporters that day. Moreover, it’s not true “we” didn’t have guns.

Six people were arrested on Jan. 6 while possessing guns in the vicinity of the Capitol, and more than a dozen have been charged with bringing weapons into D.C. Police officers testified that they observed more people with weapons but didn’t try to arrest them because they were regaining control of the Capitol.

Former Trump aide Cassidy Hutchinson, a star witness during the Jan. 6 congressional inquest, testified under oath that the president was angry that Secret Service agents weren’t letting armed supporters through security at the Ellipse. “I don’t even care that they have weapons,” Ms. Hutchinson recalled Mr. Trump saying. “They’re not here to hurt me.” (Mr. Trump denies this.)

This month alone, Mr. Trump played footsie with a conspiracy theory that the insurrection was some kind of FBI inside job, sharing a meme on social media that said: “January 6 will go down in history as the day the government staged a riot to cover up the fact that they certified a fraudulent election.” As he reiterated his false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him, Mr. Trump told podcaster Joe Rogan on Friday that “the enemy from within” poses a greater threat than North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un.

During an interview with radio host Dan Bongino, he compared the incarceration of his supporters for Jan. 6 crimes to the internment of 112,000 Japanese Americans during World War II, even though Japanese Americans were interned entirely because of their ethnicity and without due process.

When pressed, Mr. Trump added that he told attendees at his “Stop the Steal” rally to protest “peacefully and patriotically.” But he also urged them to “walk down” to the Capitol. “And I’ll be there with you,” he said. “If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore,” he continued. “You have to show strength, and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing.”

More than 1,500 people have been criminally charged by federal prosecutors in connection with breaching the Capitol that day. Of those, about 1,200 have pleaded guilty or been convicted at trial. About 600 were charged with assaulting police or rioting. Mr. Trump’s spokeswoman has said he’ll consider pardon requests on “a case-by-case basis.” Mr. Trump himself has declined to rule out clemency for members of extremist groups such as the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, whose leaders were convicted of seditious conspiracy.

Over the past four years, Mr. Trump has sounded an increasingly sympathetic tone for all of them. He evolved from referring to the Jan. 6 defendants as “political prisoners” to calling them “hostages.” He has said the real “insurrection” took place on Election Day. He contributed his voice to a rendition of “The Star-Spangled Banner” by the “J6 Prison Choir,” which he played at the kickoff rally of his 2024 campaign.

Mr. Trump himself faces criminal charges for trying to subvert the election. In an Oct. 2 filing, special counsel Jack Smith laid out forensic evidence to prove that Mr. Trump watched Fox News and scrolled through Twitter as he sat alone in the Oval Office on Jan. 6. When he was told that Vice President Mike Pence had been evacuated to a secure location after insurrectionists chanted for his hanging, Mr. Trump allegedly responded, “So what?”

Mr. Pence does not support Mr. Trump’s bid for another term. Should he win, Mr. Trump pledged last week to fire Mr. Smith “within two seconds” of taking office. In addition to retribution, the GOP nominee has promised not to be a dictator, “except for Day One.” If Jan. 6, 2021, was a day of love, it’s unsettling to imagine what that “Day One” of a second Trump term might look like, as well as the days after it.

Trump’s campaign may have launched the “October Surprise”–the game-changing event in the last days of the campaign–as a boomerang. The political columns, like Politico, are filled with reactions to the comedian’s line about Puerto Rico being “an island of garbage.” The outrage is loud and bipartisan, since Republicans realize the “joke” offended an important voting bloc.

The Archbishop of San Juan demanded a personal apology from Trump.

JD Vance said at a rally that people should not be so easily offended by a joke. But they are. Calling the island garbage means calling the people on it garbage. Why shouldn’t they be offended? Would Vance be so complacent if someone called Ohio “a garbage state?”

And the controversy revived memories of Trump throwing paper towels to people in Puerto Rico after a devastating hurricane, as well as Trump’s indifference to the island:

On the NBC website was news about the joke:

Apart from Bad Bunny, the Puerto Rican singer Marc Anthony slammed Trump for his actions during Hurricane Maria as he endorsed Harris, posting on Instagram: “I remember after Hurricane Maria devastated our island… Trump blocked billions in relief … while thousands died. I remember that when our families lacked clean water and electricity, Trump threw paper towels and called Puerto Rico ‘dirty’ and ‘poor.’” He added he was not “surprised,” because Trump “launched his campaign by calling Latinos criminals and rapists.”

After the 2017 hurricane, Trump repeatedly opposed disaster funding for Puerto Rico as he disputed and failed to acknowledge Maria’s death toll — almost 3,000 people in the U.S. territory, making it the deadliest hurricane in the U.S. in 100 years. Trump also drew attention for disparaging statements about Puerto Rico after Maria, including “they want everything to be done for them,” and for tossing paper towels in a visit to the island after the deadly hurricane.

During his presidency, Congress approved a total of $20 billion in federal housing funds for Puerto Rico’s post-hurricane reconstruction, a historic amount. But the Trump administration blocked Puerto Rico from receiving such funds and obstructed a government probe looking into officials who withheld the aid, according to a Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Inspector General report.

All good news for Kamala, who had just released her plans to help Puerto Rico’s economy.

Yesterday, Trump was interviewed by podcaster Joe Rogan, and as usual, he said crazy things. He said, for example, that there were people in this country who are more dangerous than the dictator of North Korea; they are “the enemy within,” whom he previously identified as Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff. He said days ago that “the enemy within” should be arrested and tried for treason. He also told Rogan that if George Washington came back from the dead and ran for president with Abraham Lincoln as his vice president, they wouldn’t beat Trump.

If Harris said crazy stuff like that, the press would go wild criticizing her.

Eugene Robinson, a regular columnist for The Washington Post, is baffled by the disparate treatment of Harris and Trump. He spouts nonsense so often that it is not news. She tries to make the case for reasonable and responsible policies, and the media nitpick every word she says.

What’s going on? It’s not that the media is biased; the mainstream media understand what Trump is. As one commenter on this blog wrote yesterday, “It’s okay for him to be lawless, but she must be flawless.”

Robinson wrote:

Something is wrong with this split-screen picture. On one side, former president Donald Trump rants about mass deportations and claims to have stopped “wars with France,” after being described by his longest-serving White House chief of staff as a literal fascist. On the other side, commentators debate whether Vice President Kamala Harris performed well enough at a CNN town hall to “close the deal.”

Seriously? Much of a double standard here?
Somehow, it is apparently baked into this campaign that Trump is allowed to talk and act like a complete lunatic while Harris has to be perfect in every way. I don’t know the answer to the chicken-or-egg question — whether media coverage is leading public perception or vice versa — but the disparate treatment is glaring.
This week, it became simply ridiculous.

Retired Marine Corps Gen. John F. Kelly — who served as Trump’s homeland security secretary for six months, then as his White House chief of staff for a year and a half — said in an extended interview with the New York Times that Trump “certainly falls into the general definition of fascist, for sure.”

This followed a similar shocking assessment by retired Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for the final 16 months of Trump’s presidency. Milley is quoted in Bob Woodward’s latest book, “War,” as saying that Trump is “fascist to the core” and “the most dangerous person to this country.”

It is hard to overstate how extraordinary this is. Two of the nation’s most honored and respected warriors, both of whom worked closely with Trump for extended periods, warned the nation about the grave danger of returning him to the White House. Respecting the tradition of keeping the armed forces out of partisan politics, neither Kelly nor Milley went so far as to explicitly endorse Harris. But they clearly intended their remarks to be understood by those who might vote for Trump as flashing red lights and blaring sirens.

The Times published audio of the Kelly interview, in which he describes how Trump “commented more than once that, ‘You know, Hitler did some good things, too.’” In a separate interview with the Atlantic, Kelly recalled Trump telling him that he wanted obedient generals like “Hitler’s generals.” Trump “certainly prefers the dictator approach to government,” Kelly told the Times.

During Wednesday’s town hall, CNN’s Anderson Cooper asked Harris whether she believes Trump is a fascist. “Yes, I do,” she replied — and that was the headline from the event. But news stories and commentary also questioned her decision to pivot from questions about specific policy positions — almost all of which she has already spelled out in considerable detail — to attacks on Trump and warnings about the danger he poses to our democracy.

Let’s review: First, Harris was criticized for not doing enough interviews — so she did multiple interviews, including with nontraditional media. She was criticized for not doing hostile interviews — so she went toe to toe with Bret Baier of Fox News. She was criticized as being comfortable only at scripted rallies — so she did unscripted events, such as the town hall on Wednesday. Along the way, she wiped the floor with Trump during their one televised debate.
Trump, meanwhile, stands before his MAGA crowds and spews nonstop lies, ominous threats, impossible promises and utter gibberish. His rhetoric is dismissed, or looked past, without first being interrogated.

Imagine if Harris were promising to end the war in Gaza on her first day in office but wouldn’t say how. Imagine if she were proposing a tariffs-based economic plan that economists say would destabilize the world economy and cost the average family $4,000 a year in higher prices. Imagine if she were promising a “bloody” campaign to uproot and deport millions of undocumented migrants who are gainfully employed and paying taxes. And imagine if Harris were vowing to use the military to go after her political opponents, as Trump repeatedly pledges.

Kelly and Milley are hardly the only career servicemen to sound the alarm about a potential second Trump term. Two of Trump’s defense secretaries, Marine Corps Gen. Jim Mattis and Army Lt. Col. Mark T. Esper, and one of his national security advisers, Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, have also warned about Trump’s erratic performance as commander in chief.

They join a long list of civilians who worked in the Trump administration and say there should never be another one. Never has there been such a chorus of officials who served a president telling the nation that under no circumstances should he be elected again.

Oops, there I go again, dwelling on the existential peril we face. Instead, let’s parse every detail of every position Harris takes today against every detail of every position she took five years ago. And then let’s wonder why she hasn’t already put this election away.

Alexandra Petri is the humorist for The Washington Post. In her column, she endorsed Kamala Harris. She called her column “It Has Fallen to Me, the Humor Columnist, to Endorse Kamala Harris for President.” This is why I didn’t cancel my subscription to The Washington Post. I want to see many ways the opinion writers devise to torture Jeff Bezos.

She wrote:

The Washington Post is not bothering to endorse a candidate in the 2024 presidential election. (Jeff Bezos, the founder of Blue Origin and the founder and executive chairman of Amazon and Amazon Web Services, also owns The Post.)

We as a newspaper suddenly remembered, less than two weeks before the election, that we had a robust tradition 50 years ago of not telling anyone what to do with their vote for president.

It is time we got back to those “roots,” I’m told!
Roots are important, of course. As recently as the 1970s, The Post did not endorse a candidate for president. As recently as centuries ago, there was no Post and the country had a king! Go even further back, and the entire continent of North America was totally uninhabitable, and we were all spineless creatures who lived in the ocean, and certainly there were no Post subscribers.

But if I were the paper, I would be a little embarrassed that it has fallen to me, the humor columnist, to make our presidential endorsement. I will spare you the suspense: I am endorsing Kamala Harris for president, because I like elections and want to keep having them.

Let me tell you something. I am having a baby (It’s a boy!), and he is expected on Jan. 6, 2025 (It’s a … Proud Boy?). This is either slightly funny or not at all funny. This whole election, I have been lurching around, increasingly heavily pregnant, nauseated, unwieldy, full of the commingled hopes and terrors that come every time you are on the verge of introducing a new person to the world.

Well, that world will look very different, depending on the outcome of November’s election, and I care which world my kid gets born into. I also live here myself. And I happen to care about the people who are already here, in this world. Come to think of it, I have a lot of reasons for caring how the election goes. I think it should be obvious that this is not an election for sitting out.

The case for Donald Trump is “I erroneously think the economy used to be better? I know that he has made many ominous-sounding threats about mass deportations, going after his political enemies, shutting down the speech of those who disagree with him (especially media outlets), and that he wants to make things worse for almost every category of person — people with wombs, immigrants, transgender people, journalists, protesters, people of color — but … maybe he’ll forget.”

“But maybe he’ll forget” is not enough to hang a country on!

Embarrassingly enough, I like this country. But everything good about it has been the product of centuries of people who had no reason to hope for better but chose to believe that better things were possible, clawing their way uphill — protesting, marching, voting, and, yes, doing the work of journalism — to build this fragile thing called democracy. But to be fragile is not the same as to be perishable, as G.K. Chesterton wrote. Simply do not break a glass, and it will last a thousand years. Smash it, and it will not last an instant. Democracy is like that: fragile, but only if you shatter it.

Trust is like that, too, as newspapers know.
I’m just a humor columnist. I only know what’s happening because our actual journalists are out there reporting, knowing that their editors have their backs, that there’s no one too powerful to report on, that we would never pull a punch out of fear. That’s what our readers deserve and expect: that we are saying what we really think, reporting what we really see; that if we think Trump should not return to the White House and Harris would make a fine president, we’re going to be able to say so.

That’s why I, the humor columnist, am endorsing Kamala Harris by myself!

I have been puzzling over this question since the Democratic National Convention.

Like most people, I didn’t know much about Kamala Harris when she became Vice President. Now that I have seen her speak, now that I saw her debate Trump, I feel very energized to support her campaign for the Presidency.

She is smart, well informed, experienced, committed to the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law. She is thoughtful and composed. She laughs, she smiles, she seems like a kind and thoughtful person. She is well prepared for the presidency, having won election as the District Attorney of San Francisco, as Attorney General of the State of California, as U.S. Senator from California, and as Vice-President of the United States since Joe Biden and she were elected in 2020.

Her opponent is a bundle of equal parts narcissism and hatred. He likes men. He likes white men. He likes to play tough guy. He looks on women as sex objects and feather heads. He doesn’t respect women.

He is crude, vulgar, without a shred of the dignity we expect from a president. The language he uses to ridicule and insult others is vile.

He is a racist, a misogynist, a xenophobe, and a Christian nationalist (without being a practicing Christian).

He is a sexual predator. He is known for not paying people to whom he owes money for services rendered. He has gone through six bankruptcies.

He is ignorant. His former aides say he has never read the Constitution. He is driven by his massive ego. He wants everyone to say he’s the best, the greatest, and there’s never been anyone as great as him.

He is a convicted felon, convicted on 34 counts of business fraud in New York. He was found guilty by a jury in New York of defaming E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of sexually assaulting her many years ago. He was ordered to pay her more than $90 million for continuing to defame her. That judgment is on appeal.

Other trials are pending.

When he lost the 2020 election, he refused to accept his defeat. He schemed to overturn the election by various ploys. He summoned a mob of his fans to Washington on January 6, 2021, the day that Congress gathered for the ceremonial certification of the election. Trump encouraged them to march on the U.S. Capitol, “peaceably….(but) fight like hell.” They did fight like hell. They battered their way into the Capitol, smashing windows and doors, beating law officers, vandalizing the building and its offices, while hunting for Vice President Mike Pence and Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The outnumbered law officers held them off to protect the members of Congress. Many of them were brutally beaten. Some later died. What if the mob had reached the members of Congress? What if they had captured Pence and Pelosi?

It was the most shameful day of our national history. A President encouraging a mob to sack the Capitol and overturn the Constitution.

Ever since that disgraceful day, Trump has reiterated that the election was stolen from him, even though it wasn’t close. He has undermined faith in the electoral process, faith in the judiciary, faith in the law.

These are the two candidates: Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.

Why is this election close?

Arab-Americans, Muslims, and some young people are threatening not to vote for Kamala Harris because of the Biden administration’s support for Israel in its war against Hamas and Hezbollah in Gaza and Lebanon.

This would be a mistake. Kamala has said she would press vigorously for a ceasefire and for a two-state solution.

Trump has made clear repeatedly that he stands with Netanyahu. He has said nothing about a ceasefire or a two-state goal. He has pledged to impose a Muslim ban as he tried to do when he was first elected.

He made his firm position clear recently.

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump expressed support for Israel’s offensives against Hamas and Hezbollah in a recent call with the country’s prime minister — a position that could complicate his campaign’s outreach to Arab Americans claiming he opposes the war.

Trump told Benjamin Netanyahu in one call this month, “Do what you have to do,” according to six people familiar with the conversation who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive and confidential information. Trump has said publicly that the two have spoken at least twice in October, with one call as recently as Oct. 19.

“He didn’t tell him what to do militarily, but he expressed that he was impressed by the pagers,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), who was on a call this month with Trump and Netanyahu, referring to the Israeli operation that killed Hezbollah leaders with explosive batteries inside pagers. “He expressed his awe for their military operations and what they have done.”

Graham added: “He told them, do what you have to do to defend yourself, but we’re openly talking about a new Mideast. Trump understands that very much there has to be change with the corrupt Palestinian state.”

Trump had a town hall for Republican women to address women’s issues. He sought to reassure his audience that he would protect them. This is the town hall in Georgia where he claimed that he was “the father of IVF.” No one asked him to define IVF. I wonder if he could.

Jill Filipovic wrote for Slate about Trump’s efforts to calm women voters. He needs their votes.

What, most politicians ask themselves, do women want? American women vote in larger numbers than men. Issues that affect our lives are routinely diminished as “women’s issues,” even as we make up more than half the population. Both parties, but Republicans much more than Democrats, have a male dominance problem. There has never been a female president.

So, what do women want? Last week, Republican presidential contender Donald Trump took a shot at answering that question when he sat down with Fox News host Harris Faulkner and a female-only audience for a town hall event that aired on Wednesday. Trump’s answer to the age-old question? Bizarre ramblings about safety, nonsensical talking points about reproductive rights, and strongman promises to just fix things, democratic processes be damned. What was clear, though, was how Trump and his team approach women: As dependents in need of protection, and as a special interest group that doesn’t particularly interest him outside of the fact that he needs them to win.

If you’ve watched a Trump debate or a Trump rally, very little of what he said on The Faulkner Focus will come as a surprise. His talking points are well-established, if they tend to come out in streams of gibberish and have little relationship to reality. He had the best border; Biden had the worst border. He had the best economy; Biden had the worst economy. This time, he added a few newer ones: He had the best child tax credit, although, he said, it was mostly his daughter’s idea, and Biden turned it into the worst tax credit. (In reality: Joe Biden expanded the child tax credit; Republicans, aided by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, then refused to renew it; and this summer Senate Republicans blocked a bill that would have expanded it.) Trump’s Republican Party is also the best on IVF, he said, better than Democrats—and in fact, he, Trump, is the “father of IVF,” an absurd claim he boasted three separate times.

Setting aside how offensive and stomach-roiling it is to hear that phrase out of Trump’s mouth, the claim that Republicans are good on IVF couldn’t be more false. Republicans have opposed Democratic efforts to protect IVF nationally and have introduced bills that could ban it nationwide. But it’s really clear that Trump knows how bad Republicans look on this—and he credited the “fantastically attractive” Sen. Katie Britt of Alabama with teaching him so this year after the Alabama Supreme Court effectively made it illegal in that state.

How he learned what IVF was this year and still became IVF’s father was left a mystery. But this Big Daddy posturing was his central theme.

It was clear from the start that Trump’s team had told him to emphasize safety—that the pro-Trump women in the audience (and they were almost all pro-Trump) wanted to hear about how Trump would protect them. Faulkner kicked off the conversation by complaining about Democratic “prebuttals” to the town hall, playing footage of Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock telling voters to get out and cast their ballots because Trump is a threat to democracy. Trump responded by bragging about his endorsements from the Border Patrol and the Fraternal Order of Police—not exactly organizations with tons of women in their ranks—and continued, “So when you talk about safety …” (Faulkner had not talked about safety). But Trump did want to talk about safety or, to put a finer point on it, to convince suburban Georgia women that they are imperiled by undocumented immigrants and criminals, and that Trump is the only one who can save them.

Trump also played the protector when asked about the child tax credit, which has become far less generous thanks largely to Republicans. Always careful to maintain a macho posture, the former president actually gave someone else credit for once—his daughter Ivanka, who he said begged him to do something to support struggling families. He suggested he didn’t have any great desire to take on the issue, but, well, his daughter demanded it, and Daddy wasn’t going to say no.

The same theme showed up in Trump’s answer to a question about transgender girls playing sports. The solution, Trump said, was simply to ban it. How would he prevent trans girls from playing sports, Faulkner asked? He would just ban it, Trump said. That’s it—he’ll be the president, after all. Just ban it.

The audience cheered.

On the campaign trail, Kamala Harris has rightly been emphasizing the threat Trump poses to democracy (it is actually Democrats, Trump said in this town hall, who are the real threats to democracy). And many voters are certainly persuaded that democracy is worth defending, and that Trump imperils it. But for Trump’s loyalists, his authoritarian tendencies are part of the draw. He won’t mess around with the separation of powers or slow process of democratic lawmaking. He’ll be the president—if he doesn’t like something, he’ll just ban it. Like the women in the Fox audience, his supporters love it. And if women are good to Daddy, maybe he’ll take their problems into consideration, too.

Women are more than half of the population. There is no one thing we all want. Except, I suspect, the right to bodily autonomy when our lives or health are threatened by a situation out of our control. Trump’s pitch to women is that they won’t need autonomy. They can just trust in the man who promises to bend the country in their favor, even if he winds up breaking it.

Last night, I read the hundreds of letters to the editor of the Washington Post about Bezos’ decision not to endorse. By now, there are probably thousands. Almost all of them said: I have canceled my subscription.”

Good for them.

I am NOT canceling my subscription.

I enjoy reading Dana Milbank, Jennifer Rubin, Eugene Robinson, Alexander Petri, and other columnists.

I applaud them for dissenting from Bezos’ mandate.

They will vent their rage for the next 10 days. At Bezos and especially at Trump.

And of course there will continue to be hard-hitting investigations.

I want to read what they write.