The third, and nastiest, of the 2016 presidential debates. Image by Getty Images

“Nobody has more respect for women than I do” is, coming from Trump, the sort of lie that can’t be fact-checked. It’s like when the pizza place on the corner, the one with no customers, puts up a sign declaring it has the “best pizza” in New York.

By the time Donald Trump got around to muttering “Such a nasty woman” at-and-about Hillary Clinton, the third presidential debate had long since reached the point where it didn’t seem anything would have the power to, as Trump would put it, “surprise.” Trump was all about surprises, having already, by that point in the WTFiest yet of these debates, announced that he would surprise the country with whether or not he’d accept Clinton as the winner of the election, should she, uh, win the election. So, yeah, there was the part of the debate where we learned there might be a civil war, but then it calmed down again and they were sort of wrapping up and then, interrupting Clinton discussing Social Security, out it came: “Such a nasty woman.” I didn’t quite believe what I’d heard. Did he really just say that? Because it seemed like the sort of thing he’d say, so maybe I was just imagining it? No, not imagining it.

It would be inaccurate to describe that moment as the debate’s low point. Once Trump announces he’s prepared to see abortion made illegal; once a presidential debate is rife with discussion of one candidate’s sexual assault history, which he deflects by praising himself for having not apologized to his wife; and oh, once the American democratic project is kaput – that is, once we’ve segued from a flirtation with social conservatism to full Trumpian fear-mongering – what’s a little insult between rivals?

Forwarding the News

Thoughtful, balanced reporting from the Forward and around the web, bringing you updated news and analysis each day.

Terms(Required)

I agree to the Forward's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Email(Required)

The “nasty” remark was, well, nasty. But it also brought with it a satisfaction akin to when someone’s being terrible to you in private – say, a bigoted colleague or classmate – and you’ve been telling people and no one has believed you and then, boom, they say the thing in public, and everyone’s finally on your side. Which is maybe why “nasty” has gotten so quickly re-appropriated by Clinton supporters. If standing up to Trump with Hillary Clinton’s courage is “nasty,” what good is nice?

Phoebe Maltz Bovy edits the Sisterhood. Her book, The Perils of “Privilege”, will be published by St. Martin’s Press in March 2017.

The Forward is free to read, but it isn’t free to produce

I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward.

Now more than ever, American Jews need independent news they can trust, with reporting driven by truth, not ideology. We serve you, not any ideological agenda.

At a time when other newsrooms are closing or cutting back, the Forward has removed its paywall and invested additional resources to report on the ground from Israel and around the U.S. on the impact of the war, rising antisemitism and polarized discourse.

Readers like you make it all possible. We’ve started our Passover Fundraising Drive, and we need 1,800 readers like you to step up to support the Forward by April 21. Members of the Forward board are even matching the first 1,000 gifts, up to $70,000.

This is a great time to support independent Jewish journalism, because every dollar goes twice as far.

—  Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO

2X match on all Passover gifts!

$90 → $180 $180 → $360

$360 → $720

Other amount