WomeN for TrumP
<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">see kremer</font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">some pol op grifter will try to fill niche, but got crucial to have renta with Kavanaugh and grab em by the pssy, rape allegations
</font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">this started out as a generic for diff groups, see women for am 1st changed names 4x?
</font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1rem; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1rem; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">fyi</font></p><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">nyt mich statehouse</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...</font><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102); font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">Indeed, while the protest in April was loud and tense, it did not get violent, although one person was arrested after an altercation between two men outside. But the rhetoric in the crowds at protests in April and May was heated. One protester carried a sign that read, “Tyrants Get the Rope,” and another carried an American flag that had a doll made to look like Ms. Whitmer hanging from it.</span></div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);"><b>Meshawn Maddock, head of the national organization, Women for Trump,</b> and<b> in line to become the vice-chair of the state’s Republican Party,</b> helped organize that “Unlock Michigan” rally in April and recently organized busloads of Michiganders to travel to Washington. </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Photos and videos from the rally in the nation’s capital filled her social media pages and, while walking toward the U.S. Capitol, she praised the “most incredible crowd and sea of people I’ve ever worked with.”</span></div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>While she attended the rally outside the Ellipse, she said she was not at the Capitol when the mob of Trump supporters stormed the building, and <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">she later condemned the violence.</span></b></div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">On Wednesday, while Ms. Maddock was in Washington, several hundred people gathered outside Michigan’s statehouse to protest the election certification happening nearly 600 miles away. The statehouse was closed, though, to comply with Covid rules that it be shuttered when the Legislature is not in session. The rally, which featured Trump flags and hats and a<b> handful of men armed with weapons</b>, remained peaceful — and pointed. One protester waved a Trump flag that had four bobblehead <b>dolls hanging </b>from it: Bill and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.</span></div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Michigan is an open carry state, so it is not unusual to see armed individuals walking the halls of the state Capitol. The Capitol Commission, the body that sets rules and approves maintenance projects for the building, debated banning guns in the Capitol after that April protest, but no action has been taken.</b></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/are-blue-collar-white-women-trumps-red-wall/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/are-blue-collar-white-women-trumps-red-wall/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Are blue-collar white women Trump’s red wall?</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Anne Kim / Washington Monthly October 25, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Despite a nonstop onslaught of fresh and damning revelations about his misconduct in office, President Donald Trump has so far maintained his core supporters’ loyalty. As of the start of this week, Trump’s average approval rating holds at 42 percent—only slightly less than the share of Americans opposing the inquiry into his impeachment.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But for Democrats desperate to oust the president, either by impeachment or the ballot, breaching this “red wall” of support (if, in fact, it can be breached) is a matter of utmost importance. Democrats face two key questions: who are Trump’s most stalwart defenders, and can they be persuaded to abandon him?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">New research suggests an answer to the first of these queries. It’s a group that Democrats should—and could—be winning over: blue-collar white women. While Democrats made crucial gains among these voters in the 2018 election, these women may now be rallying to Trump’s defense.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Opinion polls have shown increased momentum toward impeachment since evidence came to light that Trump pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on the Biden family. As of October 21, Real Clear Politics’ average found that 51.0 percent of Americans support an inquiry, whereas 42.8 percent are opposed. Among blue collar white women, however sentiment is moving in the opposite direction, according to Trendency Research, which maintains a longitudinal panel of more than 1,000 Americans polled daily.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As of October 21, Trendency found that <b>a solid majority (54 percent) of non-college-educated white women either outright oppose or lean against impeachment, </b>while just 37 percent strongly support it. In fact, blue-collar white women are the strongest opponents of impeachment among all white voters (see chart below). This opposition is in stark contrast to college-educated white women, among whom only 26 percent indicated “no support” for impeachment as of October 21.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Blue-collar white women also seem relatively impervious to the dramatic developments shifting public opinion over the last month.</b> Trendency found that the share of non-college white women indicating “no support” for impeachment has dropped by only one percentage point since the end of September, when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally announced the inquiry.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Blue-collar white men, in contrast, have swung dramatically in favor of impeaching Trump.</b> While just 26 percent of blue-collar white men showed “strong” support for impeachment as of September 28—with 59 percent who outright opposed—40 percent of these men now strongly support impeachment as of October 21 and a minority of 47 percent now oppose it. (<b>College-educated white men show a similar and even more dramatic swing,</b> as the chart below shows.) Among all adults, Trendency found that 52 percent supported impeachment as of the same date, a figure in line with polling averages maintained by trackers like RealClearPolitics and FiveThirtyEight.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trendency CEO Stefan Hankin told me his<b> firm has not yet conducted research to understand the seeming divergence in blue-collar white women’s attitudes toward impeachment compared to every other group.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s a question worth urgent exploration.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">By sheer numbers, blue-collar white women are the nation’s biggest voting bloc. </span> According to Democratic political research firm Catalist, non-college-educated white women made up 25 percent of voters in 2018 and 26 percent of voters in 2016. These women outnumber both non-college white men, who accounted for 22 percent of the 2018 voters, and college-educated white women, who comprised just 15 percent of the 2018 electorate.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Luckily for Democrats, blue-collar white women are still a potentially winnable group. Catalist’s analysis, for instance, found that while Democratic candidates lost among both blue collar men and women in 2018, the margin of defeat among non-college-educated white women was half that among non-college-educated white men. (Democrats lost by 36 points among blue-collar white men and 18 points among blue-collar white women.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>These women have also shown more willingness to cross the aisle. </b>Although college-educated suburban white women won much of the credit for delivering House Democrats a majority in 2018, blue-collar white women have shown some shifting allegiances, even if not of the same magnitude. Democrats’ performance with them in 2018 was still a three-point improvement over 2016, according to Catalist. (By comparison, Democrats gained 11 points among college-educated white women, solidifying their new status as a core constituency of the party.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>One potential explanation for Democrats’ gains among white women—a traditionally loyal GOP constituency—is that both college-educated and non-college-educated white women have similar economic priorities, despite major differences on cultural issues such as immigration.</b> A November 2018 poll by Expedition Strategies for the Progressive Policy Institute found that both groups of women cited health care, Social Security, and Medicare as their top three concerns.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Both groups are also economically anxious. The Democratic economic message, with its promises of a broader safety net, may appeal to many of these women. Post-election focus groups conducted by pollster Stan Greenberg for the American Federation of Teachers found that Democrats’ messaging on health care was especially appealing to non-college-educated white women.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">All of these findings, however, predate the inquiry into Trump’s impeachment. The question now is whether the specter of impeachment has catalyzed renewed support among blue-collar white women for the president and erased the gains from the 2018 election.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For Democrats, regaining their toehold among these voters means two things. First, and most significantly, it means investing more resources in understanding what’s happening with blue-collar white women—and why. Democrats cannot afford to overlook this vital constituency; they should neither write them off, nor take them for granted. Second, Democrats should continue to push their message on health care and other kitchen-table issues that matter to all voters. The party leadership’s current instincts are correct that impeachment should not overtake the entirety of the political conversation through next fall.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ultimately, though, Democrats can’t view this challenge as a test of Trump’s resiliency with the white working-class voters that comprise so much of his base. Rather, Democrats have to see it as a test of whether they can devise a durable economic message that outweighs Trumpism’s appeal and unites women across all socioeconomic lines. It’s a challenge they should tackle now, before it’s too late.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Anne Kim is a Washington Monthly contributing editor and the author of Abandoned: America’s Lost Youth and the Crisis of Disconnection, forthcoming in 2020 from the New Press.</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1rem; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1rem; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">AN</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> news broke that Christine Blasey Ford—a 51-year-old professor of psychology at Palo Alto University in Northern California—had accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of attempting to rape her at a party back in 1982, many of the responses were fair-minded and even-handed. A long list of people have stressed that while Kavanaugh hasn’t been convicted of anything, they definitely want to hear, in detail, all that Ford has to say—especially in light of the fact that Kavanaugh is up for a lifetime appointment on the highest judicial body in the United States.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But on the far right, some wingnuts have been quick to either demonize Ford or turn her accusation into a Republicans-versus-Democrats argument. Kavanaugh is their guy, the GOP is their party—and Ford’s accusation, they immediately assume, is nothing more than a Democratic conspiracy.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Here are five of the most appalling reactions to Ford’s accusation that have come from the far right.</font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-bottom: 20px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">1. Sen. Mitch McConnell Turns Ford’s Accusation into an Attack on Dianne Feinstein</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As Senate majority leader, Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell has been a ruthless, vindictive partisan whose top priority is sticking it to Democrats—not the wellbeing of the country. And he made that abundantly clear when, after learning that Ford had accused Kavanaugh of attempted rape, his <a href="https://splinternews.com/the-gops-dirty-war-against-brett-kavanaughs-accuser-has-1829118350" style="text-decoration-line: none;">knee-jerk response</a> was to attack Sen. Dianne Feinstein (the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee) rather than wanting to hear what Ford has to say. McConnell views Ford’s allegation in strictly partisan terms, faulting Feinstein for not coming forward with the information she had on Ford and Kavanaugh sooner. But Ford, at first, had requested anonymity. And McConnell, always a Republican first and an American second, fumed, “Now, now, at the 11th hour, with committee votes on schedule—after Democrats have spent weeks and weeks searching for any possible reason that the nomination should be delayed—now, now, they choose to reveal this allegation.” </font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">2. Donald Trump Jr. Mocks, Belittles Christine Blasey Ford</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">After Ford decided to reveal her identity, it didn’t take Donald Trump, Jr.—vice president of the Trump Organization—long to begin ridiculing and belittling her. In an Instagram post, the president’s 40-year-old son posted a mock “letter” that was <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/09/17/brett-kavanaugh-allegations-donald-trump-jr-mocks-sexual-assault-claim/1333520002/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">written in crayon</a> and labeled “Judge Kavanaugh’s sexual assault letter found by Dems.” The mock “letter” read, “Hi, Cindy, will you be my girlfriend? Love, Brett,” with boxes for checking either “yes” or “no.” And in a mocking tone, Trump, Jr. said of Kavanaugh, “Oh, boy, the Dems and their usual nonsense games really have him on the ropes now.”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">3. Matt Drudge, Grabien News Attack Kavanaugh Accuser by Confusing Her With Someone Else</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Matt Drudge’s The Drudge Report attempted to smear Ford on Twitter by linking to a <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/drudge-report-christine-ford_us_5b9ff404e4b04d32ebfb2c91" style="text-decoration-line: none;">hit piece</a> on her that had originally been published by Grabien News. In the article, Grabien tried to paint Ford as a bad professor who had received a lot of <a href="https://news.grabien.com/story-somethings-wrong-her-christine-fords-students-savage-her-rev" style="text-decoration-line: none;">negative online reviews</a> from her students. One of the reviews, posted on RateMyProfessor.com on September 25, 2014, said, “Christine Ford is the worst educator I have experienced. Avoid taking her class and avoid any interaction with this person.” But the Christine Ford in that review is Christine A. Ford, a licensed social worker who taught at California State University, Fullerton—not Kavanaugh’s accuser Christine Blasey Ford, who is employed by Palo Alto University. In fact, Fullerton is in Orange County south of Los Angeles, and is well over 300 miles from Palo Alto. Grabien has since retracted the inaccurate story that the Drudge Report was so <a href="https://www.thewrap.com/drudge-report-christine-ford-brett-kavanaugh-accuser-christine-ford/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">quick to promote</a>.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4. Women for Trump’s Amy Kremer: Democrats Want to ‘Gin Up the Hysteria Machine’</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Republicans had no problem with Sen. Feinstein when, in late 2017, she demanded Democratic Sen. <a href="https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/12/06/al-franken-urged-to-resign-kamala-harris/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Al Franken’s resignation</a> in response to sexual harassment allegations. Franken didn’t get a pass from Feinstein simply because he was a Democrat: Feinstein wanted him to step down, party affiliation be damned—and the Minnesota senator resigned. But the minute Feinstein has legal concerns about a Republican Supreme Court nominee, Republicans view her as a one-woman hit squad. </font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">During a September 17 interview with CNN’s Chris Cuomo, Amy Kremer (co-founder of Women for Trump) had the same knee-jerk reaction to Ford’s accusation as McConnell: she viewed it in strictly partisan terms, insisting that Democrats are trying to “gin up the hysteria machine” with a “<a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/09/18/kavanaugh-accuser-testimony-amy-kremer-cpt-sot-vpx.cnn" style="text-decoration-line: none;">dog and pony show</a>.” Kremer also asserted that there should be no public testimony from Ford, only closed-door hearings—which is ludicrous. Considering that Ford is making a very serious accusation and that Kavanaugh, if confirmed, could still be on the Supreme Court 30 years from now, anything the Palo Alto University professor has to say on the matter should be heard publicly.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5. Joe Walsh Attacks Democrats for Waiting to ‘Drop This Dirt’</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Even former Rep. Joe Walsh (a Tea Party wingnut) called Donald Trump, Jr. out for mocking Christine Blasey Ford, correctly denouncing him as an “<a href="https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/406989-joe-walsh-trump-jr-is-an-uncaring-narrow-minded-idiot" style="text-decoration-line: none;">uncaring, narrow-minded idiot</a>” on Twitter. But Walsh, like McConnell and Kremer, has turned Ford’s accusation into an opportunity to play partisan politics, posting on Twitter, “So Dems waited until the very last minute to drop this dirt, and now they want to wait again to hear from her? You don’t think they’re trying to drag this thing out, do you?”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Walsh likes to see himself as a law-and-order man, but when a Republican Supreme Court nominee is accused of attempted rape, it’s all the Democrats’ fault, in Walsh’s mind.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1rem; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">==</font></p></div></div></div></div>