struck this deal and there is something interesting that popped up. my answer as to why the president did so well with non-college educated white women. the president likes to say he won women. he did not win women. among white non-college educated women, the president did well. if you look at all of these covers of the national enquirer during the trump campaign, look at all that negative attention that lots of women saw in newsstands as they were checking out in grocery stores. there was a clear mission looking at the covers to damage hillary clinton. now the question is, was that somehow in cahoots and part of some agreement that the national enquirer would be a campaign arm for the trump campaign in making its anti-hillary clinton argument. that will be huge.
i definitely was in the fetal position around 8:00. you re pretty young, but you have been through other elections where you thought you would win and you did win. it s not like 16 was the only election in history. just the most recent in history, so that s fresh. there are many complications with hillary. early on tuesday felt like 2016, but difference is women saw what happened in 2016 and they stepped up themselves. i think the big message from this election is not just that women won but that women chose to step up and run for office. we re seeing that in other context in american culture. we lived through a year of me too, a year of women standing together and telling their truth, being brave. in the burbs. correct. you can t generalize, because that s not the case in the west or the red parts of the country. i think the northeast is lost for the republicans because of women. the northeast. all the way out to ohio almost. but that handel/mcbath race is illustrious
course already been tried. and if you look at what happened to kavanaugh, this vicious smear campaign, this had nothing to do with kavanaugh. this was just another attack on president trump, our duly elected president and also the g.o.p. to write them off as antiwoman. as i said this has been tried. we november that they already tried to call trump a misogynist. sexist, anti women. homophobic, racist. that did not work for them in 2016. the idea that this is going to work for them now is ludicrous. trish: i look at it, stephanie, and i think about the fact that we all have husbands and fathers and brothers and sons. and as we watched the kavanaugh hearings. the whole idea of, you know, you are innocent until proven guilty. that kind of went out the window. and i think a lot of women saw that and thought, you know, what if that was my son. and we have this empathy chip, i think i can
operate and performing important functions for american consumers. the only correction would have been in the structure because it was a novel structure that was unlike every other independent agency that had been created previously. limits of it are uncertain. there s debates about what the women saw. those are not determined. i ve made clear in my writings that a court order that requires a president to do something or prohibits a president from doing something under the constitution or laws of the united states is the final word in our system. our separation of powers system. that s cooper versus aaron.
of other women considering whether they want to come forward and tell what happened to them? well, i think it s a real tsunami. i mean, once we opened our mouths and broke our silence and nothing bad happened to us and the world saw that, the world of women saw that we weren t assassinated, we weren t imprisoned, we weren t crucified, and instead we were empowered and more people were coming out and more people were coming out, and i think it liberated women and gave them encouragement and inspiration and they felt, yeah, me too. and they were ready to speak. after stuffing all of their stuff for years and years and years. maybe centuries. if you take it into an historical context. and so consequently i think women were really ready to speak. i mean, for our social structure in the united states we re