Readers Write (Oct. 12): Trump and his voters, cases against Clinton, the goals of Everytown for Gun Safety

I saw the Donald Trump and Billy Bush video late in the evening on Friday, overcome by an all-too-familiar disgust and frustration. Disgusted by comments that are demeaning and coarse, though it comes as no shock to hear them from Trump's mouth. Frustrated that there are men and, unbelievably, women who still defend him. In these charged moments, I feel the ease of judging these supporters whom I do not know.

I do know two supporters, however, and I feel pause in judging them. Both are older men in my life — one a relative, one a former teacher — who have watched me grow from a little girl into a woman, supporting me in all of my major events, as recently as my wedding over the summer. Passing judgment on them feels unloving and disloyal. I have enjoyed and felt much gratitude for their consistent investment in me over the years. But from a more objective place, I sense the fruitlessness of judging them. Won't it simply divide us and solve nothing? Isn't their support of this man just one dimension of multidimensioned personalities and lives?

My intellect says yes to these questions, and yet their support of Donald Trump still incites a visceral response in me. Stunned by the recording released on Friday, I immediately wondered: Is this enough to change their minds?

In my attempts to reconcile intellect and feeling over the weekend, I realized it's less that I judge these men and more that their support of Trump feels like a judgment on me. Do they not think more highly of me, or their sisters or mothers or friends, to not be outraged by a would-be leader so gratuitously derogatory of us? Mocking our menstrual cycles, limiting our worth to appearances, viewing us as objects to be used, assaulting us sexually and verbally — every woman in Trump's line of fire is somebody's sister, niece, mother, wife, daughter. How can any man in our lives simultaneously stand with us and advocate for the power of a man who thus behaves?

I am a sister. I am a niece. I am a wife.

I am Hugh's daughter. I know that means something to these two men in my life. Will they be moved by my value, individuality, competence, respectability? I wonder, is Hugh's daughter enough to change their minds about Donald Trump and his brutish brand of misogyny?

• • •

The Star Tribune Editorial Board ("A desperate Trump goes lower and lower in debate," Oct. 11) was correct in observing that Donald Trump hit "a frightening nadir in American politics" by threatening to jail Hillary Clinton if he is elected president. However, the editorial overlooks an even more troubling nadir that was reached this summer.

In August, a Navy sailor was court-martialed and sentenced to prison for taking a few unauthorized cellphone photos in a classified area. He received this sentence one month after the FBI exonerated Hillary Clinton for her far more serious violation of the laws prohibiting the negligent handling of classified information.

• • •

I am a Democrat. I have voted for one Republican in my life. And I do not intend to do so in this case. However, within the kerfuffle surrounding Trump's various verbal blunders, it is well to remember that he did not allow the evisceration of our manufacturing sector over the last 30 years.

Trump did not allow the Chinese and the Russians to use the internet, and other means, to steal defense, economic and other secrets on a massive scale, threatening our national security. He did not allow those enormous balance of payments decisions that allow the Chinese to finance their belligerent, threatening attitude.

We are.

Hillary Clinton blames the Russians, but it was the U.S. that encouraged "rebels," most of whom were Islamists, in a war that caused the dislocation of millions and the deaths of hundreds of thousands.

With the exception of two administrations, it would be almost impossible to have done a worse job of running our country since the administration of John Kennedy.

Trump didn't do those things, but Clinton is responsible for part of that history.

• • •

• • •

Trump supporters can be compared to "Les Misérables" — the French patriots who were determined to take back their country from bureaucratic despots. And these Americans do so at the risk of being denounced as deplorables and irredeemables.

A famous song from "Les Misérables" — "Do you hear the people sing?" ­— includes this stanza:

Do you hear the people sing?

Singing a song of angry men?

Who will not be slaves again!

Many Americans are desperately "singing" — and believe that Trump genuinely champions their singing. That is, they feel enslaved by a metastasized federal government and are crying out for patriotic leadership and more personal freedoms.

The headline could have been better, at least for the print edition. It isn't "Anti-gun group pours cash into races" (Oct. 11); Everytown for Gun Safety is working to reduce gun violence, not to oppose guns. Those of us who grew up with guns in the household and yet support Everytown's policy goals are not anti-gun. The distinction is important, because the headline feeds the irrational paranoia of the small minority that blocks sensible gun legislation such as universal background checks. That minority gives cover to legislators like state Rep. Tony Cornish, who does the bidding not of Minnesotans but of the weapons manufacturers.

Contrary to what Cornish says, he can't kick "butts all the way back to New York City" because, in fact, it is not "Bloomberg types" who are demanding universal background checks. It is the vast majority of Minnesotans who demand sensible gun laws. And, contrary to what he apparently believes, Cornish should not be representing only that minority of his constituents who have been brainwashed by the profits-oriented propaganda of the NRA. As a member of the Legislature, his duty is to work to establish policies that benefit all citizens of the state.