Chelsea Clinton Condemns “Presidential Look” Remark

1233

At a Women for Hillary campaign event in Carlisle, Pennsylvania last week, Chelsea Clinton was asked about something Donald Trump said in an ABC interview. In that interview, broadcast on the network Tuesday night, Trump questioned whether Hillary Clinton looked like someone who should be sitting in the Oval Office.

“Well, I just don’t think she has a presidential look, and you need a presidential look,” Trump said.

Chelsea said the comment was offensive and that she hoped that “everyone can see that as the sad, misogynistic, sexist rhetoric that I hoped we had moved beyond in the 21st century, certainly in 2016.”

To which we have a few questions. Questions like, “What’s worse: Sexist rhetoric or sexist actions?” Because it wasn’t that long ago that we had a president who believed that the world was his sexual playground, and he wasn’t afraid to use his power to bend women to his will whenever the mood suited him. For some reason, we think Chelsea might remember that guy.

But that’s just the usual surface-level hypocrisy that we’ve come to expect from the Democratic Party and this family, in particular. Nothing new.

So let’s forget about that and talk about something more interesting. Namely, was Trump wrong to say that? If your answer is no, then we can move on. If your answer is yes, then what’s your justification? Why was it a bad thing to say? Because Hillary is a woman or because presidential candidates should not discuss physical appearances at any time? In other words, if Trump said that Bernie Sanders did not have a presidential look, would that be just as wrong? Or would that be okay?

In any case, it wasn’t the best line. It’s the kind of line that serves no purpose, other than to give feminists and liberals something to squawk about. Of all the many reasons that Hillary should not be president, her appearance is the least of them. And if there is such a thing as a “presidential look,” it’s hard to see exactly how Trump would fit into that category, either. Nor Obama. Nor Richard Nixon. Nor LBJ. Really, anyone who doesn’t bear a passing resemblance to George Washington.

But spare us the victimhood, please. Trump’s appearance has been mocked with more frequency and more viciousness than any other presidential candidate in American history, so no one is going to fall for the misogyny card this time around. When comedians and TV pundits can go one week without mentioning Trump’s hair, his “small fingers,” or his bronzer, then we can have a serious discussion about what’s off-limits and what isn’t.

Until then, what’s good for the gander is good for the goose.