Democrats may ask: How could anyone vote for an accused rapist and 34-time convicted felon?
The short answer: Most voters care more about the direction a leader takes the country than about his or her personal transgressions. Any personal failings will be rationalized and overlooked.1 For this reason, there's little to be gained by arguing with the other side about a leader's moral character.
In this case, the rationalization goes like this...
The Jean Carrol accusation is from 20+ years ago and has a similar ring to it as the Anita Hill accusations from 10 years prior against the conservative supreme court justice Clarence Tomas, and the Christine Blasey Ford accusations from 36 years prior against conservative supreme court justice Brent Kavanaugh. Given the amount of time that had passed, and the timing of the accusations, at a minimum these seem politically motivated. How much of them were exaggerations or fabrications, we'll never know.
The 34 felony convictions of one of the highest profile individuals in the world help demonstrate that no one is above the law. But justice must also mean equal treatment under the law. When a case receives unprecedented resources, relentless focus, and a noticeably lowered legal threshold, it's not hard to imagine that many prominent business leaders and politicians could be found guilty of similar — or even more serious — offenses, if subjected to the same scrutiny. That double standard should concern anyone who cares about the integrity of our legal system.
These may seem like unparalleled times. But to a student of history, maybe not so much. Some interesting parallels can be found for example between Donald Trump and the Democratic President Grover Cleveland.2
Just months before Grover Cleveland's presidential run of 1884, a story came out claiming that he had raped a woman named Maria Halpin 10 years prior, and fathered an illegitimate child with her.4 The story had some believability because Cleveland was single and liked to frequent saloons, and drink and gamble. The real story was complicated. The public attack was filled with half-truths, many of which were related to honorable actions on the part of Cleveland, with some outright falsehoods. The story however was run regularly in the newspapers with the slogan, "Ma, Ma, where's my Pa?" Cleveland won the election, not because voters approved of his behavior, but because they preferred his platform and saw the attacks as politically motivated. After Cleveland's win, the opponents' slogan, “Ma, Ma, where’s my Pa?” was met with the retort: “Gone to the White House, ha ha ha!”
1. See Understanding the Other Side, Bias Toward Political Leaders
2. "A Man of Iron: The Turbulent Life and Improbable Presidency of Grover Cleveland", Troy Senik
3. ChatGPT: Who were Tammany Hall Democrats and why did they oppose Grover Cleveland?
4. "A Man of Iron," Chapter 6: Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion, pg 89 forward in the kindle book. For a summary, ChatGPT: Please describe the half-truths and false allegations surrounding Grover Cleveland and Maria Halpin.