→ Next, imagine if Trump had a very cozy relationship with a brutal dictatorship, that abused all its citizens, but which was also the only country in the world where women were legally not allowed to vote or even drive a car (Saudi Arabia) closer to the Saudi regime than anyone other than -- and perhaps exceeding -- the Bush family in close ties to the Saudis..imagine that. "What a misogynist"! would be the cry of so many voters, particularly liberal/Democratic voters. But in reality it wasn't Trump, it was....Wait, there's more actually:Please try to imagine it, it's not a purely academic question. What names would you call him had he done that? Would you make excuses for him and his repeated actions in country after country (there are other cases, those are just the two most well known - a leading woman environmental activist was killed in the aftermath of a coup in Honduras that Hillary gave critical backing to when Central American countries didn't want to recognize the coup but Hillary chose to do so)
→ Imagine if Trump not only had such a close relationship with the medieval Saudi regime where people are literally decapitated in death sentences and then [link to crucified] or have their hands chopped off [link] under the barbaric regime's rules, but to add insult --and injury -- to injury, imagine if Trump had a huge "Trump Foundation" taking in tens of millions of dollars from the most totalitarian countries, all while he had been "Secretary of State Trump", and signed off on some of the largest weapons sales to those dictatorships at the same times..what would you think?
What would you call Trump or any a male or Republican candidate who had done that, even if he claimed, "I didn't sell any favors! I wasn't soft on those regimes. My Trump Foundation did receive millions from them, and I did at the same time as Sec. of State, sign and deliver some of the biggest arms sales, but that was separate, ya know?" What would you think? What woman-hating names would you call him and his policies, had he done those things? But, of course, it was not him but Secretary of State Hillary who did those [link record arms sales][link, CF gets millions from Saudi regime]
→ Any one of these by itself is so outlandishly anti-women that by itself it would be a 3-strikes Deal-Break for any candidate, male or female, if the media gave us a clear eyed honest summary of these things -- let alone a candidate who had done all three of these.
→ But to top it off, imagine if Trump had also signed off on a war based on lies that cost thousands of a lives in our armed forces, hundreds of billions of dollars, and along with it, directly led to the death of many hundreds of thousands of civilians, including hundreds of thousands of civilian women and children, left dead. What would you think if it were Trump who did that [links to Iraq war and HC vote]?
Don't answer yet, what would you think if Trump claimed it was "a mistake"? Would it make him an "acceptable" candidate on this issue by saying it was a "mistake"? No! We'd say that shows the worst judgment (if not outright cynical cold-hearted calculating political vote) we cannot afford in our next President.
But what if Trump called that first Iraq vote and catastrophe a "mistake" only to repeat the same "mistake" in Libya? Worse, not only giving his ok, but being the strongest voice in the current administration cabinet who was a hawk for the Libya war disaster, leading to thousands of dead including thousands of dead, displaced, and impoverished, women and children.
Taking away blinders, you'd have to hate women to want to vote for a candidate with this record; you'd have to hate women to vote for Hillary.
→ Hillary and her media backers have put reality on its head: the facts show that You've truly got to hate women to vote for Hillary who backs Saudis, viciously slashed aid to single mothers in U.S. & who bombs women (War and Peace section)
→ See also special Section on Hillary's "special relationship" with world's worst abuser of women: Saudi Arabia