Excusing Trump, vilifying clinton

My previous post, "Just what does 'telling it like it is' mean?" (below), talked about how I believe fear is driving Trump supporters, and that Trump is cynically exploiting that fear.

This morning, what's on my mind is future ramifications of Trump's pronouncements and his supporters' willingness to believe his lies. But I've been pulled up short on that, for a bit, anyway.

A fellow graduate of the MFA in Creative Nonfiction program at Goucher College, Nick Tabor, had an article in New York Magazine recently. It's a set of interviews with nine women who support Trump, and one who switched from Trump to Clinton. As I read it, I'm struck by some things in what many of them say: they're

• supporting the Republican platform (anti-abortion, anti-immigrant, get rid of welfare entitlements, etc.);
• excusing Trump's bad behavior and ugly rhetoric; and
• criticizing Clinton using the same language Trump and Republicans use and for the same old things (her husband's character, she lies, etc.).

There's a mix here I wasn't expecting. Setting aside for a moment ridiculous excuses for Trump's bad behavior that are cringe-worthy in the extreme (like the woman who avers that groping is what heterosexuals do, bring it on!), these women generally sound more Republican than they do Trump supporters, and that surprised me. I thought we had a cult of personality here, and that Trump's message didn't matter so much as his angry, 'tell it like it is' speech, and the allure of a TV star.

It's odd, because -- again, despite my horror at some of the things they say to excuse their candidate and the way they talk about Clinton -- I have more respect for them than I thought I would when I began reading Nick's piece. That gives me pause.

But first, hurrah for good journalism and unbiased reporting.

Second, I'm glad to be reminded that principle does play a part in national politics and in the minds and hearts of people I don't agree with. I know, how snobby and elitist does that sound? I was ready to write off a good portion of the nation's voters under the assumption that they didn't care about anything but hating Hillary and loving Trump. Yuck. I am really not proud of that.

New York Magazine admits this is an unscientific survey, so I don't extrapolate the results to all women Republicans and Trump supporters nationwide. But I'd been so very concerned about what I thought might be reactionary, thoughtless acceptance of Trump and who/how he is, that I'd begun to ignore the fact that people are passionate about principles and will vote those principles, some of them, no matter who's on the ticket. I know Dems who do that, too. i don't agree, and I still think some of those principles are fear-driven, yet I can respect a person who is passionate about her principles.

That still leaves what bothers me so terribly about conservative views, talk and reporting about Hillary Clinton. So much of what is believed about her is based on innuendo, judgment and fear rather than fact. 

But that's tomorrow's post.