Trump’s Insults at Female Reporters Aren’t Just Rude — They’re a 2024 Strategy

By DailyTrendScope Political Desk

Introduction: Another News Cycle, Same Playbook

Donald Trump’s latest clash with the press — reportedly calling one female reporter “ugly” after previously referring to another as “piggy,” according to coverage highlighted by CBS News — is being treated in some corners as yet another example of his familiar bad behavior. But for voters in the United States and Canada watching the 2024 race unfold, these moments are less about simple rudeness and more about a deliberate political and cultural strategy.

Trump’s attacks on female journalists fit into a decade-long pattern: use gendered insults, frame the media as an enemy, dominate the news cycle, and harden partisan lines. The question now is not whether this will hurt or help his image — that line is largely baked in — but how it will shape turnout, polarization, and the political conversation heading into 2024, especially among women, young voters, and suburban moderates in the U.S. and closely watching Canadians next door.

The Incident in Context: A Familiar Gendered Pattern

While the specific exchange highlighted by CBS News centered on Trump allegedly calling a female reporter “ugly” and describing another as “piggy,” the core dynamics are familiar. According to years of reporting by outlets such as CNN, The New York Times, and AP News, Trump has repeatedly used appearance-based, gendered language against women who challenge him, especially journalists and political opponents.

There is a clear lineage:

• In 2015, after a contentious Republican primary debate, Trump implied that then-Fox News moderator Megyn Kelly questioned him harshly because there was “blood coming out of her wherever,” a comment widely interpreted as a menstruation reference. Major outlets including CNN and The Washington Post documented the backlash.
• He has called actress Rosie O’Donnell “disgusting” and a “fat pig,” remarks that resurfaced in 2016 campaign coverage and drew widespread condemnation.
• In 2017, he tweeted that MSNBC host Mika Brzezinski was “bleeding badly from a facelift,” framing a media dispute around a woman’s body and appearance.

The current incident doesn’t exist in a vacuum; it slots seamlessly into this established pattern. What changes is not the nature of the insult, but the political environment in which it lands — a 2024 race shaped by post-Roe politics, deep distrust of institutions, and more women than ever mobilized around issues of respect, rights, and representation.

The Media As Foil: Why Trump Keeps Picking This Fight

From the start of his political rise, Trump has recognized that conflict with the press is not a liability with his base; it is a core feature of his appeal. Attacking journalists — especially female journalists — serves several strategic purposes:

1. Rallying the Anti-Establishment Base

According to repeated polling summarized by Pew Research Center, Republicans are far more likely than Democrats to distrust national news media. Trump taps that skepticism directly. When he publicly humiliates or belittles a reporter, he signals to his loyalists that he is fighting the “elite” media that they believe has long been biased against them.

In this logic, the more outrage his comments spark on cable news and social media, the more proof, to his supporters, that he is taking on the establishment. The attacks on female journalists become a kind of performance — a recurring show where he plays the blunt truth-teller and the media plays the offended villain.

2. Controlling the News Cycle

Trump has long understood that a vivid, offensive quote can knock almost any other story off the front page. When he calls a reporter “ugly” or “piggy,” that line becomes the headline, crowding out policy critiques, legal developments, or more substantive coverage of his record.

As analysts have repeatedly told outlets like The Hill and Axios, this “outrage priming” allows him to keep the media fixated on personality and conflict, rather than on issues where he may be more vulnerable, such as reproductive rights, January 6, or his various legal cases.

3. Reasserting Dominance in the Public Arena

Trump’s political style is rooted in dominance politics: belittling opponents, branding rivals with mocking nicknames, and framing every interaction as a contest of strength. Targeting female reporters’ looks is an especially pointed way of asserting power, tying into broader cultural scripts about men evaluating women on appearance and punishing women who confront them publicly.

This isn’t just incivility; it is a gendered assertion of hierarchy. In that sense, his language is not random — it reinforces a view of public life where certain people, especially women who question him, are to be put in their place.

Gender, Power, and the Press: Why This Hits Differently in 2024

In the decade since Trump rode down the escalator in 2015, the cultural landscape in North America has changed. The #MeToo movement, massive women’s marches, and the overturning of Roe v. Wade have all moved questions of gender, power, and respect to the center of public debate. That shift makes his attacks on female reporters more politically charged than they might have been even a few years ago.

Women Voters Are Paying Attention

Polling throughout recent cycles — reported by outlets including NBC News, Reuters, and AP VoteCast — has shown a widening gender gap in U.S. politics, with women, particularly college-educated and suburban women, shifting away from Trump-aligned Republicans. Trump’s rhetoric is not the only reason, but it is emblematic of a broader sense among many women that their concerns and dignity are not taken seriously.

Each time Trump publicly insults a woman based on her appearance, it risks reinforcing that perception. For some women who have been on the fence or drifting away from him, these incidents serve as stark reminders of what they disliked about the Trump era in the first place.

Post-Roe Politics and Respect for Women

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade transformed abortion from a mostly theoretical issue in many swing voters’ minds into a concrete, immediate reality. Since then, ballot initiatives in states from Kansas to Ohio, widely covered by AP News and CNN, have shown voters — including many moderate and conservative women — pushing back on sweeping abortion restrictions.

Against this backdrop, Trump’s public disparagement of female reporters is more than a bad sound bite; it forms part of a broader picture about how women are valued, respected, and listened to in public life. For voters already uneasy about reduced bodily autonomy, hearing a would-be or current leader casually deride women can reinforce unease and fuel turnout.

Canadian View: A Neighbor’s Cautionary Tale

In Canada, where Trump is deeply unpopular according to years of polling reported by Global News and CTV, his rhetoric is watched as a warning about the fragility of norms. Canadian analysts frequently note that while Canada’s media environment and party system are different, the culture-war style of politics and contempt for institutions can easily cross borders via social media and aligned conservative movements.

Canadian commentators often frame Trump’s attacks on women and media not only as an American problem, but as a live case study in how language from the top can license harassment of journalists and minority groups more broadly. The latest incident merely confirms a trajectory they have been pointing to since 2016.

How Social Media Reacted: Outrage, Fatigue, and Dark Humor

The public response online to Trump’s reported “ugly” and “piggy” comments has followed familiar lines, but with some subtle shifts.

Reddit: Pattern Recognition and Media Ethics

On Reddit, especially in U.S. politics subforums, users focused less on the shock and more on the pattern. Many pointed out that this is a continuation of Trump’s long record of insulting women, arguing that the political system has effectively normalized this behavior. There was also debate about media strategy: some users questioned whether outlets should continue to lead with Trump’s most inflammatory lines, arguing it gives him the attention he seeks.

Others countered that downplaying the sexism embedded in such comments would be a disservice to voters, especially younger audiences who may not recall his 2015–2017 controversies in detail. The core Reddit thread sentiment: this is familiar, but still dangerous.

Twitter/X: Polarization on Full Display

On Twitter/X, reaction appeared heavily polarized. Many critics expressed renewed disgust, using the incident to highlight what they described as Trump’s longstanding misogyny. Some journalists and media advocates emphasized the safety issues female reporters already face — from targeted online harassment to doxxing — and argued that this rhetoric emboldens abusers.

At the same time, many Trump supporters appeared to either defend the attacks as “jokes,” argue that the reporter “provoked” him, or insist that the media is weaponizing political correctness. Others in his camp echoed Trump’s own narratives about “fake news,” suggesting that the exact wording or context was being distorted to hurt him.

Facebook: Moral Framing and Personal Stories

On Facebook, comment threads on mainstream news pages often took on a more personal tone. Some users, especially women, shared their own experiences of being insulted over appearance in workplaces or schools, linking Trump’s language to the everyday normalization of disrespect toward women.

Older voters — a key demographic in both the U.S. and Canada — frequently framed the issue in moral terms: whether a commander-in-chief should speak that way in public at all, regardless of policy preferences.

Does This Actually Move Votes?

One of the central questions hanging over incidents like this is whether they have any electoral impact left. Many analysts and voters assume Trump’s support is “baked in” — that everyone already knows who he is and either accepts or rejects him accordingly.

Hardening the Base, Alienating the Middle

According to trendlines observed in 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2022 elections and summarized by outlets like NBC News and FiveThirtyEight, Trump-aligned Republicans have tended to overperform in deeply red areas while underperforming in suburban and swing districts, particularly among college-educated women.

Trump’s gendered insults may reinforce that dynamic: they rarely cost him much with the base, but they appear to compound problems with moderates and suburbanites, especially in swing states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona. Even if each individual comment doesn’t shift millions of votes, the cumulative effect helps define his brand for swing voters.

Turnout Effects, Not Persuasion

At this stage, incidents like these are less likely to change minds than to change motivation. For his base, another media “pile-on” can stimulate a rally-around-the-flag effect, energizing turnout. For his opponents and those uneasy with him, the same incidents can rekindle anger or fear, pushing them to register, donate, or simply show up on Election Day.

Analysts quoted in The Hill and Politico have suggested that this is increasingly how modern U.S. elections work: not as contests of persuasion in the middle, but battles over whose supporters feel more intensely about voting. Trump’s insults are fuel for both sides — but in opposite directions.

The Risks: Legal, Institutional, and Long-Term Cultural Damage

In the short term, Trump’s strategy of public confrontation with the press may energize core supporters and dominate headlines. But there are at least three serious long-term risks for the broader political and media ecosystem.

1. Normalizing Harassment of Journalists

Reporters — especially women and journalists of color — already face a steady stream of harassment and threats. Organizations such as the Committee to Protect Journalists and Reporters Without Borders have documented rising hostility toward the press in democracies, including the United States, over the past decade.

When a former or sitting president publicly denigrates a named journalist’s looks, it can act as a signal to online followers that this person is fair game for more aggressive targeting. Even if Trump does not explicitly encourage harassment, the power imbalance and visibility of his comments can indirectly legitimize such behavior.

2. Eroding Trust in Institutions

The more Trump frames the media as corrupt, biased, or worthy of ridicule, the more space he creates for conspiracy theories and alternative information ecosystems. According to repeated surveys highlighted by Pew, trust in U.S. institutions — from Congress to the courts to the media — has declined significantly in recent years.

Every high-profile clash like this nudges a portion of the public further toward a worldview in which no mainstream source is credible, and only partisan media or social media feeds are trusted. That’s a dangerous place for democratic decision-making.

3. Entrenching Gender Backlash Politics

Trump’s comments sit at the intersection of gender and grievance. For some supporters, his willingness to flout “political correctness” around women’s bodies and roles is a feature, not a bug — a pushback against what they see as elite feminist norms.

But this backlash politics can deepen cultural divides for years beyond any given election. Younger generations in both the U.S. and Canada are growing up in a media climate where public humiliation of women is repeatedly modeled by top political figures. Even if many reject it, the constant exposure shifts the Overton window of what is seen as acceptable speech.

Press Strategy: Should Journalists Change How They Cover This?

Inside newsrooms, Trump’s latest remarks reignite a familiar debate: how to cover behavior that is both newsworthy and, by now, deeply repetitive.

To Amplify or Not to Amplify?

Some editors argue, as has been reported in media trade press and commentary on platforms like Columbia Journalism Review, that leading with Trump’s insults risks playing into his hands. It keeps him at the center of the conversation, allows him to cast himself as a victim of “woke outrage,” and crowds out discussion of policy or his legal issues.

Others counter that failing to highlight the sexism and hostility in his rhetoric would sanitize the reality of what a Trump presidency means, especially for women and journalists. From this view, the public has a right to see the full, unvarnished picture.

Re-Centering Substance

One compromise approach that some outlets have experimented with is contextual coverage: report the insult, but quickly situate it within:

• a documented pattern of similar remarks,
• analysis of what he may be distracting from, and
• clear reporting on the policy stakes in the background.

In other words, instead of treating the “ugly” or “piggy” comments as isolated gaffes, frame them within Trump’s broader political strategy and the real-world consequences of his leadership style.

What This Signals About the 2024 Campaign

The fact that Trump is still using this language in late 2024 and heading into 2025 tells us several things about his campaign strategy, his risk calculus, and the broader state of U.S. politics.

1. No Pivot Is Coming

For years, commentators periodically predicted a “pivot” — that Trump might moderate his tone to win over suburban moderates or women. That pivot has never come. If anything, episodes like this show that he sees no political benefit in softening his image. His team appears to believe that energizing his base through confrontation and perceived authenticity matters more than broadening his coalition.

2. Culture War Over Policy Debate

Trump’s choice to focus attention on personal attacks instead of policy signals a campaign prioritizing culture war narratives over technocratic proposals. Rather than detailed economic plans or health-care reforms, the centerpiece becomes identity, grievance, and rhetorical combat.

This suits a media ecosystem — and social platforms — that reward conflict and emotional engagement. But it also means that voters in the U.S. and observers in Canada may see less substantive debate on issues like climate policy, trade, and social safety nets, and more battles over language and respect.

3. The Stakes for Women’s Political Engagement

Incidents like this have a paradoxical effect: they can be demoralizing yet also galvanizing. Many women, including young voters, express disillusionment when they see a leading political figure treat women disrespectfully without apparent consequence. At the same time, backlash to similar episodes has helped power women’s marches, candidacies, and local organizing since 2016.

Whether this latest case sparks renewed mobilization or deeper cynicism may hinge on how political organizations, advocacy groups, and media outlets respond — whether they connect the rhetoric to concrete stakes like workplace equality, reproductive rights, and safety for journalists.

Looking Ahead: Five Plausible Trends to Watch

While precise predictions are impossible, current patterns suggest several likely trajectories as incidents like these continue to surface.

1. Further Gender Polarization in Voting
   We can expect the gender gap in U.S. voting behavior to persist or widen, with men remaining more open to Trump-style politics and women, especially educated and younger women, continuing to drift away. Canadian observers will watch this as a barometer of cultural division just south of the border.
2. Increased Safety Concerns for Journalists
   Women in journalism may face heightened harassment cycles after each high-profile insult. News organizations may invest more in digital security, mental health support, and safety protocols for their reporters.
3. Entrenchment of Alternative Media Ecosystems
   As distrust of mainstream outlets grows among Trump supporters, more people may migrate to partisan platforms and influencers who echo his language and frames, deepening information silos and making shared facts harder to sustain.
4. Normalization of Incivility in Politics
   If behavior like this continues with limited electoral penalty, future politicians — in the U.S. and possibly in Canada’s more populist corners — may see open contempt for journalists and gendered insults as viable tools, not fringe tactics.
5. New Media Literacy and Respect Campaigns
   In response, we may see more initiatives in schools, universities, and civic groups focused on media literacy, respect in public discourse, and the role of a free press. This has already been a growing theme in North American civil society and is likely to expand.

Conclusion: More Than an Insult, It’s a Warning Signal

Trump’s reported decision to call a female reporter “ugly” and refer to another as “piggy” is not a random outburst; it is a small, sharp expression of a broader worldview — one that treats women who challenge power as legitimate targets for humiliation and casts independent media as an enemy to be mocked, not an institution to be engaged.

For voters in the United States and Canada, the real question is not whether this particular phrase was worse than something he said in 2015 or 2017. It is what it means to normalize this level of contempt at the top of democratic politics — and what kind of culture, and leadership class, that normalization will produce in the decade to come.

Whether this latest incident becomes just another 24-hour controversy or a deeper catalyst depends less on Trump and more on how the rest of society responds: voters, parties, newsrooms, and the platforms where citizens increasingly live their political lives.