Donald Trump

Donald Trump Declares Victory Over Hillary Clinton On Sexist Front

After Clinton goes one speech without mentioning him.



Last week, or a thousand years ago in campaign time, Donald Trump made a thing out of Hillary Clinton using the bathroom at the Democratic debate, and, separately, said she had gotten "schlonged" by Obama in the 2008 elections. As The New York Times described it, Clinton's aides "could barely believe their good fortune. Mr. Trump had just given them new fodder to galvanize women behind her candidacy—and they used it." The Clinton campaign said it wouldn't respond to Trump but that others should, trying to launch an #ImWithHer hashtag, about the same time #NotMyAbuela came up after the Clinton campaign's attempts to paint her as just like yours backfired.

Donald Trump, as he tends to do, declared that he'd hit back by bringing up the history of sexual misconduct allegations surrounding Bill Clinton. At a campaign appearance in South Carolina yesterday, he called Clinton "one of the great abusers of the world," driving chatter about Clinton on cable news.

Today, after Hillary Clinton didn't mention Trump at her own campaign appearance, Trump took credit. From a transcript of the comments at RealClearPolitics:

Although, I think last night I gave her a big headache. I can imagine those discussions. But you have to hit back hard and you can't let them push you around. Today she gave a speech and she never even mentioned my name—I  wonder why.

I was mentioned nine times in the [most recent DNC] debate. Everything, all of them, her. None of the other candidates were mentioned. And then she came out with the sexism, which is nonsense, but she is playing that card.  And then I had to hit her back and I talked about her husband and the abuse of women. It's horrific abuse. And I talked about that. And now today on the television they're going crazy.

She gets up, makes a speech, doesn't even mention me or sexism. I wonder why. I wonder why!

Later he asked the crowd if they remembered "all those people who are gone" that he had focused on. "I don't want to name names, but they are all the people who attacked me," Trump said. "Wouldn't it be nice if our country could have that same thing? You attack, boom, you're gone." At another point in the speech he said he used the word "stupid" because "there's no better word," and as a highly educated Ivy league graduate he has "the best words."

Your Republican frontrunner on the last day of 2015, at an average of 35 percent in the polls and rising.  Happy New Year!

NEXT: 2015: The Year in Religious Liberty Controversies

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Your Republican frontrunner on the last day of 2015, at an average of 35 percent in the polls and rising. Happy New Year!

    Goddammit Ed.

  2. What’s going on in Dubai is surreal.

    CNN is waiting for the tower collapse, and the fireworks are set to go off in ten minutes.

    There’s no word yet on whether this was terrorism, but they could be setting fireworks off to celebrate the New Year even as the tower burns and collapses with thousands of people in it.

    They say they’re going on with the fireworks anyway.

    1. Look, if they send first responders to help people, that’s just giving terrorists what they want.

  3. Sorry Reason, I guess everyone installed the TrumpBlock extension.

  4. I love that Trump swung at Bill.

    Look, statistically, its unmarried women who break Dem (most of whom are younger). That is where the big dem female advantage lies (married womem they can win or lose, and race is a big factor with all of this and is probably what you look at before marital status or gender). Well, women in their 20s and 30s were kids in the late 90s, and only have pretty vague memories of Bill Clinton (most of which are positive ).

    Still, those same women grew up in a world where feminism has said the shit Bill Clinton is accused of doing is horrible. College educated women of that age have definitely heard that version of feminsim, whether they agree with it or not (and single, college educated women break really heavily dem).

    All of this may not get any of those people to change their votes. But it does make them uncomfortable, and may depress turn out if it sticks because Hillary keeps fumbling it when asked.

    1. I will reluctantly accept 4 years of Trump if it comes with 6 months of raking Willie over the coals.

      1. Six months of raking Willie over the coals? I guess if that’s your thing…

        1. That’s taking desensitizing to new extemes. Try thinking about baseball first.

    2. Ed’s parting shot on this one is stupid. I have no issue with Trump attacking HIllary on this. She is pandering to progressives who preach the mantra of listen and believe. Hillary herself has used that line in her speeches. Meanwhile, when her own husband was accused, she immediately went on the attack and attempted to slander those individuals. She never cared if they were true or not.

      Beat her over the head with her own hypocrisy.

      1. How a married couple handles infidelity is their own fucking business, libertarian.

        1. Does Poe’s Law apply to Tony?

          1. Sometimes it’s misses the point so well I’m left stunned.

          2. Sometimes it’s misses the point so well I’m left stunned.

          3. Sometimes it’s misses the point so well I’m left stunned.

            1. I swear I only pressed once.

        2. Tony,

          When they put their personal lives on the plate, and serve it up for political purposes as they did during the “Clinton Frolics” era, it comes in play ethically. Just like the 5th Amendment right to not testify; if you claim it, but then toss in a few comments, you void your right as that counts as testimony. Now you may be asked and sanctioned for not answering. Similarly, claiming current PC Lib standards are right, and female accusers should be backed up and male accused shamed, she comes under legit fire for shaming the many ladies Bill “loved” and left-the ones the women supporting Clinton team classified collectively, as it was a large group, as bimbo’s. Stay classy, Clintons.

  5. Hillary was going to wipe that smug look off Trump’s face. Like with a cloth or something.

    1. Where does Trump stand on abortion?

      1. Used to be for, now he’s against. Reverse that and the two statements answer most questions about where Trump stands on an issue.

      2. I’m guessing he’s paid for more than his fair share.

      3. Ken,

        Why? Pro abortion groups can arrange via social media to arrange rides and hotel rooms and company for assurance to those wanting abortions and it the widely unavailable areas that keep getting reported as existing. So its resolvable without the Fed Gov forcing States to obey a pro or anti abortion Pres.

    2. Fist,

      Clever and oblique – what, are you a guest commentator from Commentary, or something?

  6. why is Reason shilling for Hillary now with its Anti Trump nonsense. Hard to tell this mag apart from the NY Times WaPo, Huff Post or the rest of the lefty establishment press these days. When did “libertarian” become effete leftist politically correct feminist

    1. Yeah, I know, being Pro-Trump or Anti-Hillary is what libertarianism is all about . . .

      Why don’t the libertarians understand that?!

      1. Listen Ken, real Libertarians will do whatever it takes to make sure Hillary doesn’t win. WHATEVER IT TAKES!

        And since the only two options are Trump or Hillary, well you can see what the obvious choice is.

        1. Trumpity Trump Trump. Trump Trump.



          TRUMP TRUMP.

          That’s what libertarianism is all about.

          1. Ken,

            Well heck, now that you explained, I’m onboard! Thanks, buddy.

        2. What are the other options at this point, if you actually want your vote to decide who will be president? I mean, Bernie could still beat Hillary, but that’s hardly preferable to a libertarian. I don’t see much in the Republican field that is going to beat Trump. Best hopes are Rubio and Cruz…

          I don’t vote, I won’t vote in this election. I just don’t understand the sarcasm being played here. This article is stupid. Reason should be attacking Hillary on the same hypocrisy Trump is. They cover the inanity of college feminist arguments as much as anyone. If Hillary wants to regurgitate that crap, use it as a cudgel against her. I don’t object to anything Trump has said on this particular matter.

          1. “What are the other options at this point, if you actually want your vote to decide who will be president?”

            I’ll treat this question seriously.

            1) Trump hasn’t won the nomination yet.

            Come see me after Super Tuesday, and if he’s still leading in the delegate count, then we’ll talk about choosing between the two.

            2) If he’s still leading in the delegate count after Super Tuesday, then whether we should dignify the election with our participation is still an open question.

            And they do use our participation in elections to try to legitimize the horrible shit they want to do to us when they win. Our best chance at delegitimizing the horrible shit both of them want to do to us is to encourage people to stop participating in the process. I believe there is a direct relationship between participation in elections and the quantity and severity of the things our elected representatives try to do. In Libertopia, hardly anyone will vote becasue what politicians want to do won’t matter, and the politicians will be too afraid to try anything–because they can’t claim a mandate with voter non-participation

            1. I think it is already preordained that Mrs Clinton wins in an Electoral College Landslide.

              The Democrats take back the Senate

              The House margin becomes more knife edge

              Within the first two years, Clinton is able to remake the “balance” on the Supreme Court.

              1. “The Democrats take back the Senate”

                If that’s what you’re hoping for, you better hope Obama doesn’t make gun control a big issue because those Republican Senate seats that are up for grabs are mostly in flyover country.

          2. 3) The purpose of libertarianism is not to seize the levers of power and force libertarianism down everyone’s throats by way of a libertarian emperor. We’re much smarter than that.

            Our job is to persuade our fellow Americans to become more libertarian. Once we get a critical mass of libertarians in this country, the politicians and Presidents will be falling all over themselves to please us. We didn’t get legal marijuana and gay marriage equality because we elected libertarian politicians. Politicians made gay marriage equality and marijuana legal because a critical mass of people became libertarian on those issues.

            Yer barkin’ up the wrong tree if you’re trying to make the country more libertarian through politicians. A good definition for a libertarian might be: Someone who doesn’t think politicians are the solutions to our problems.

            1. Politicians made gay marriage equality ….. legal because a critical mass of people became libertarian on those issues.

              Specifically 5 critical mass of people on the Supreme Court.

              1. How did it get to the Supreme Court?

                Did it have anything to do with ballot initiatives?

                Did any laws involved have anything to with a critical mass of voters supporting gay marriage in the eyes of the politicians who passed them?

                Change doesn’t happen from the top down. Jim Crow was the same way. Segregation didn’t end because politicians changed the laws. The politicians changed the laws because a critical mass of people came to believe that segregation was unacceptable. First comes the horse, then comes the cart. And the people are always way out ahead of the politicians on change.

            2. 3) The purpose of libertarianism is not to seize the levers of power and force libertarianism down everyone’s throats by way of a libertarian emperor. We’re much smarter than that.

              From my admittedly outsider viewpoint, I’ve seen several number of people here seem perfectly happy with the Idea of a “Libertarian Emperor”

              If some hypothetical libertarian majority Supreme Court were to strike down Social Security or rein in the federal government to its Pre-New Deal powers, would not ideological libertarians rejoice?

              Of course there will never be any be anything remotely like a libertarian on the Supreme Court as seemingly all future Presidents will be Democrats, but there you go.

              1. If the courts were to do those things in defense of our rights, I doubt many libertarians would complain. And if people who wanted to start some private and voluntary version of social security, they would still be allowed to do so. You’re simply talking about striking down forced participation, am I right?

                Regardless, the Supreme Court upholding our rights is hardly an example of forcing libertarianism down everyone’s throats by way of electing a libertarian emperor to the White House.

                You see the difference between not being forced to participate in Social Security and the President forcing other people to do things, right?

                We’re not trying to elect a President that will force other people to do what we want or stop other people from doing what they want to do.

                We’re trying to persuade other people to stop trying to use the force of government to inflict their own will on the unwilling.

                1. If the Supremes who said effectively: “As if we are Emperors, we declare that the US must now accept Gay marriage, and let folk get high, and buy and sell weed. Smoke that, or don’t, and like it! Out!”- it would have had two benefits. It would have been clearer, and we would see how wonderful it is to have Emperors just declare that what we want must be done. See? It worked!

            3. Reading Hoffer conviced me that the only path to libertarianism is political apartheid. Establishing a small territory populated solely by libertarians, where those who decide it sucks are entitled only to leave.

              People abdicate power to the state for the same reason congress abdicates it to the president, who abdicates it to the bureaucracy, which abdicates it to policies and procedure. They’re terrified of knowing that they are responsible for their own problems. If their life is going to be shit regardless, they’d rather be able to take solace in having someone to blame.

          3. “I just don’t understand the sarcasm being played here.”

            Sarcasm is the appropriate response to the suggestion that we have to support Trump becasue Hillary is awful.

            I should help Trump build a gallows to hang me with because Hillary wants to march me up against a wall?

            1. I do think you are giving libertarians far too much credit with regards to pot and gay marriage. At the very least, both issues have been largely co-opted by progressives who will still enact policy infringing on other key rights supported by libertarians. If libertarians are succeeding, I’m missing it myself.

              In regards to this particular article, it looks a lot more like reflexive Trump bashing than anything else. Is there anything about THIS particular story that you find objectionable, with regards to Trump?

              1. “At the very least, both issues have been largely co-opted by progressives who will still enact policy infringing on other key rights supported by libertarians.”

                Having issues co-opted by the big parties is what success looks like when you have single member districts. I remember when Barack Obama was elected on the slogan “Marriage is between a man and a woman”.


                As far as legalization of marijuana is concerned, I don’t believe that’s been completely co-opted by progressives. Progressives are among the biggest opponents of legalizing marijuana. Hell, progressives in the northeast don’t think we should be allowed to consume sugary soft drinks, much less marijuana. The only reason progressives in the northeast would support legalizing marijuana is because they might think doing so would drive social conservatives crazy.

                I hope the major parties co-opt all of our issues and being libertarian becomes completely unnecessary.

          4. What are the other options at this point, if you actually want your vote to decide who will be president?

            Good God, it’s not even 2016 yet. Can we wait until the primaries are over before we begin the inevitable campaigns of “You Must Vote for This Shithead or else The World Will End!”

            Also, unless you were an elderly moonbat and/or pollworker in Palm Beach County, Florida, in 2000, your vote has never decided a Presidential election.

            1. I know nothink! MMMNOTHINK!!

              1. 1) Do you realize what kbolino wrote was NOT a response to what I wrote but a response to what someone else wrote?

                2) Do you realize that was kbolino wrote about waiting for the primaries to end is similar to what I wrote about how ’bout we should wait until after Super Tuesday?

                3) Are you Tulpa?


    3. Our language requires capitalization of the first letter of words that begin sentences, the use of commas to separate items in a list of three or more, and question marks to distinguish interrogative sentences.


  7. Over-under on the first mention of “right-wing conspiracy” by either Hill-bitch or her minions?

    1. Before or after War on Women?

  8. “I don’t want to name names, but they are all the people who attacked me,” Trump said. “Wouldn’t it be nice if our country could have that same thing? You attack, boom, you’re gone.”

    Are we talking about foreign enemies or Trump’s critics here? I don’t think he makes a distinction.

  9. Donald Trump fucking sucks. I believe we can all agree on that one, no? OK then….that said, is there some reason why I’m supposed to be any more concerned about his presence in a presidential race than Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama or Marco Rubio or Mike Huckabee or whoever else? Because the rest of them try to hide how awful they are while Trump actually flaunts how awful he is?

    I just don’t quite see why Trump is purportedly a sign of the coming apocalypse. Wealthy egomaniac who’s hungry for power seeks high office, film at 11.

  10. Trump is a three year old. Film at eleven.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.