Skip to main content

Moms Are Pissed

Evolution clearly teaches us that you do not want to come between a mother and her offspring. Which is exactly what Donald Trump is doing, and he will surely regret it.

Of all the shots currently being fired across Trump’s bow, the one most threatening — the one he least understands — is coming from mothers. It’s not just about the Wall of Moms, a tactic we’ll be seeing more of as he continues to test-drive his police state. It’s more about the simmering rage coming from moms, a rage that crosses all lines of race, religion, income level, geography, and party affiliation.

A working mother of my acquaintance once said “The hardest day at the office is easier than the easiest day at home.” Most mothers I know would readily agree. So would most fathers. And that was before the virus.

Being locked down with children of any age is hard enough. Having no choice but to school them yourself — while holding down your own job — is obviously harder, by an order of magnitude. Especially without a spouse. Especially when working a frontline job. Especially when you’re scared to death you’ll bring the virus home.

And those are the lucky ones, the ones with jobs. Imagine dealing with all that and not having a paycheck. Or health insurance.

I think we can safely say that mothers, across all strata of society, are taking it on the chin more than almost any other group. They’re exhausted. They’re frustrated. They’re scared. And it’s not lost on them that much of this pain could have been avoided.

So they are royally pissed off. And who can blame them?

Think what they just went through. They accepted a civic responsibility, an unstated but strongly implied covenant of the basic social contract. They would be good citizens, listen to their government, heed the experts, stay home, teach their children online, and take most of the education burden on themselves. In doing this, they would buy time for the medical system to catch up to the virus. The curve would be flattened. Things could slowly reopen.

In return for their sacrifice, the government would step up and give them a real school year this fall. They could send their kids back to a different but workable normal.

Instead, because a psychopath is running the country, not only will schools not be opening in the fall, but these same mothers will now have to fight tooth-and-nail to keep them closed. The psychopath wants them open. Of course.

So now they have to start over, from scratch. They have to keep their children home for an unknowable amount of time. And as long as Republicans are in charge, they have no reasonable hope of a better outcome. Either short-term or long.

This will surely be an electoral nightmare for both Trump and his flunkies in Congress. Because as angry as these mothers are, they’re still largely under the radar as voters. Polls are telling us plenty about women in a bunch of different categories, but as far as I can tell, nobody’s counting them as mothers. But the Wall of Moms makes it clear that they’re flexing their muscles.

As a voting bloc they will be huge this November. Single, married, Black, white, Republican, Democrat, urban, suburban, rural, college-educated, or not college-educated. They’re all moms. And they’ll all be turning out, preferably by mail, but if necessary at a high-risk precinct they’ll wait twelve hours to get into.

Because if there’s one thing most of them can agree on, it’s that Donald Trump needs to be strung up by his thumbs. Even if they voted for him last time. Even if their husbands intend to vote for him this time.

Trump has made their kids fair game. You don’t do that to a mom.


Berkley MI

Tuesday 07/28/20

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Decents, Deplorables, and the Conditional Mood

  F or my next trick, I’d like to indulge in a linguistic conceit of sorts. I’d like to use the current political nightmare to speculate about a matter of grammar, of all things, that has long intrigued me: Namely, why do so many languages codify the conditional mood — also known as the conditional tense — in their grammar? Why do we use ‘should,’ ‘could,’ and especially ‘would,’ in so much of our speech? Why do we hedge our conversations this way? Why is it more acceptable to say “I would like a cup of coffee” than “Give me a cup of coffee.” Why is one deferential and the other pushy? Why has history passed down this polite form to multiple language groups, in such a similar way? Why is it bad form to use “I want” in a non-confrontational situation? And why does the MAGA crowd insist on such bad form? I have a speculative answer to these questions, but first let me cavalierly divide the world into two groups of people: Decents and Deplorables . Goods ...
11 comments
Read more

Uncertainty is Ready for its Closeup

E very day, we learn a little more about the way the Trump junta operates. We might sum it up with the phrase “Shoot first, ask questions later,” but this is not entirely accurate. They do indeed shoot first, mostly with executive orders that are breathtaking in their over-reach, malicious intent, and criminal shortsightedness. But they don’t so much ask questions later, as they send stupid lawyers into court to defend stupefyingly illegal behavior. They tend to fail, but even in failure, the confusion they create works wonders for them. On what must be several dozen fronts since January, MAGA operatives looking to subvert the government have done so, first by launching whatever harebrained scheme they’ve come up with, then by watching for the fallout. The fallout could be in the form of a court ruling, or howls of protest from the victims, or even from Democrats calling them out. But the point is that they depend on that first launch to shake things up, to flo...
1 comment
Read more

Yet Another Mole in Need of Whacking

  I n a week when Israel attacked Iran, Trump invaded Los Angeles, four million Americans took to the streets, and a Minnesota legislator was assassinated, the news from the arcane world of digital advertising probably didn’t make it to your list of big concerns. By the time I’m done, it probably still won’t. But in this miasma of Trumpish distractions, it’s often hard to figure out what we’re being distracted from . It’s a constant game of whack-a-mole, and last week, we got the first inkling of yet another mole that will require whacking. Warning: This will take a while to explain, and might cause mild-to-severe boredom. Proceed at your own risk: As we’ve seen, the Trump gang has recently extorted large corporate law firms into defending its pet causes, an ongoing story still developing. Now, apparently, they are trying to do something similar with large advertising agencies. The immediate focus is on the approval, or not, of a major merger between two of...
Post a Comment
Read more