Julia Roberts, Kamala Harris and Democratic supremacism

In the final throes of the presidential campaign, Vice President Kamala Harris and the group Vote Common Good released an ad starring a voiceover from Julia Roberts. The ad begins with a married couple at a polling place. The couple seems to have a good relationship, they smile at each other and appear to be two free citizens enjoying full rights under a democracy. At the moment they separate to go to their respective ballot boxes, he says to her, "Your turn honey," and she walks away. Then Julia Roberts' voice is heard saying, "In the only place in America where women still have a right to choose... You can vote any way you want." Yes, yes, Julia says it's "the only place" and implies that in the U.S., women are not free to choose. But let's move on.

In the next shot, the woman sees another woman voting in front of her; they don't know each other, but they exchange a knowing glance in an apparent moment of sisterhood. Then Julia's voice again lashes out, seeming to explain to two ladies in their 50s that: "You can vote any way you want" and finishes off with "and no one will ever know." In the next shot, the main character in the ad checks the little box next to Harris's name. After voting, her husband asks her, "Did you make the right choice?" She replies, "Sure did, honey."

The ad concludes with Julia Roberts' voice saying, "Remember, what happens in the booth stays in the booth," encouraging wives to keep their votes secret from their husbands who, according to Julia, Kamala and those who made the ad, was trying to force her to vote for Trump.

"When Democrats evaluate the data that married women overwhelmingly voted for Trump in 2020, they think it's out of fear of their husbands."

Really, what century are Julia, Kamala and the publicists of this campaign living in? Do they think they are at the dawn of the 20th century? Or, perhaps it is not anachronistic, but geographical confusion. Do they think they are in Afghanistan or Iran, the countries so fervently favored by the Democratic Party where women wear burkas, are tied to their husbands and don't have the right to even speak their own voice?

Do Julia and Kamala know the laws that govern their country? Isn't Kamala ruling the country right now? Does she consider that women under her rule are afraid of their husbands and that they are unaware of their most basic freedoms such as the right to vote? What supremacist bubble do Julia and Kamala live in?

Three insults in one

Several insults compete in the ad at the same time. The first and most obvious is the insult that American women, having lived to adulthood in the freest country in the world, don't know that they can vote for whoever they want. To make matters worse, they don't know that their vote is confidential. It seems that Julia and Kamala think they are smarter than the rest of American women, who have to be reminded of the most obvious things.

The second insult is towards husbands (men vote too, advertising geniuses), whom Julia and Kamala treat as oppressors, of such caliber that their wives dare not contradict them even to choose a candidate. That affable gentleman seen in the ad turns out to be a dark monster who treats his wife poorly, and she feels she must lie about her vote in a presidential election. If this is so, Julia and Kamala surely think that those wives lie in all other aspects of daily life as well. Is the American dream a martyrdom for Julia and Kamala?

This brings us to the third insult, which is to the marital relationship. If the women looking at each other complicitly at the polling place are actually poor downtrodden people, why show them as a smiling, happy couple in the ad? Are all marriages a sham? What kind of marriages do Julia and Kamala have?

Why women vote Republican

Julia and Kamala have a very poor conception of women, to the point of infantilizing them, minimizing them and disregarding their struggles and accomplishments. Julia and Kamala think women have to pretend and hide what they feel and think. "Silly women, stop trusting your oppressive husbands, believe in us and our superior understanding!" When Democrats evaluate the data that married women voted overwhelmingly for Trump in 2020, they believe it is out of fear of their husbands. It's a perverse and inaccurate bias about why women might elect Republicans. But the ad says a lot about what the Democratic Party thinks about women, men, marriage and politics.

Analysts often talk about the gender gap, since it represents one of the Democratic Party's key strengths. Women have registered and voted more than men in every presidential election since 1980, and in every presidential election since 1996, a majority of women have preferred the Democratic candidate. The same divide that shows up in the presidential vote appears in polls on issues such as gun control, reproductive rights, welfare and affirmative action policies, etc. But married women vote Republican more than single women, and this is what disturbs Julia and Kamala and the Democratic Party.

"It's antiquated and sexist for the Harris campaign to argue that her eventual arrival in the White House would represent enormous progress only because...she's a woman!"

Julia and Kamala's superiority complex doesn't allow them to think that perhaps that choice relates to the socioeconomic and political maturation of married women and how certain ideologies relate to having greater responsibilities. One of the main concerns of married people is the future of their children. People become conservative when they have more to lose; for example, wealth, inheritance and child rearing. Ideas like opening the border without control, defunding the police and attacking family savings with taxes do not seem to be attractive ideas for those who love their children and care for their safety and future. The last four years with Kamala at the helm of the federal administration have been dire in those areas. A woman doesn't need a husband to realize that her family is more insecure and poorer since Harris has been in office.

Like any American citizen, women have been affected by the economic realities created by the Biden-Harris regime. A survey by Independent Women's Voice shows that more than 90% of women fear for their jobs and retirement. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that those over 75 are the fastest growing segment of the workforce. Retirees have had to go back to work because the savings they thought would be enough for retirement have been eaten up by rising inflation. Will Julia and Kamala think women are so dumb that they won't relate all of these indicators to the fact that Kamala is the vice president right now?

Kamala Harris, an ornament for the Democratic elite

It is strange that politicians in the Democratic Party with long-term marriages like the Obamas, the Bidens, the Clintons or the Pelosis don't understand that people tend to marry those who share their political visions. Isn't that the same thing that happens to them? Marriages in which one spouse is a Republican and the other a Democrat are statistically marginal. According to a study by the Institute for Family Studies, they account for only 4% of marriages. What is common is to have marriages in which both spouses have the same partisan identification. It is not a fear of husbands; it is a communion of ideas and interests, dear Julia and Kamala.

Using the banner of feminism and at the same time insulting women as if they were little animals who do not know their rights and fear their master is quite contradictory, but it does not draw attention to Kamala. After all, she is a woman with no experience in management, foreign policy, economics or any other field, who has managed to reach the highest level of power by the design of the caste that manages her party. It is the leaders of that party who tell the citizens that Kamala should not be judged for any failure of the current government because the poor woman "was not in the room." Kamala Harris is like a kind of ornament that can be put on and taken off depending on whether she can be made part of the successes, but it is important to note that she was absent from the failures. Did she or did she not play an important role in management? Does she or does she not have experience at the helm?

These contradictions that emerge from her profile designed by the party elite make Kamala backtrack on all these positions. However, at the same time, she maintains that she is a person of firm convictions. This permanent back and forth of arguments results in a merciless condemnation for a woman who is not even able to articulate an idea without a teleprompter.

Supremacist, old-fashioned and sexist

Interestingly, one of Harris' main supporters, Mark Cuban, condescendingly insulted women by claiming that Donald Trump is "never" surrounded by "strong, intelligent women." Are strength and intelligence exclusive to the Democratic Party? If strong, intelligent women are "never" with Republicans, then are they "always" with Democrats? But then, if they are so strong and smart, why should they hide from their husbands how they vote, and why do they need Julia Roberts to warn them that they can vote however they want and that the vote is secret?

The ad is patronizing, sexist and absurdly old-fashioned. Just as it is outdated and sexist that Kamala Harris' campaign is loaded with clichés that her eventual arrival in the White House would represent enormous progress for America only because...she's a woman! That whole narrative is demeaning to women.

This is a supremacism typical of those who know they are at the top of the social pyramid and believe that those who disagree with their positions are corrupt or manipulated, so stupid and weak that they cannot appreciate what a healthy, free and transparent marriage is... like that of the Clintons or that of Kamala and Doug Emhoff.