After “Roseanne” premiered last week, some conservatives balked at their side’s cheerleading, arguing the show isn’t really fair or helpful to the cause.
And they’re right— there are no conventional conservatives on the show, and the leading lady’s support for President Trump is coupled with her characteristic social progressivism. Some have argued that rather than doing Trump supporters any good, this dichotomy reinforces Hollywood’s message that to be an acceptable Republican one must embrace liberal social causes.
The problem with that argument is the conflation of Republicans and Trump supporters.
As many of the same people rankled by “Roseanne” have pointed out over the years, the president’s populist message allowed Trump to cultivate an odd coalition that brought conventional conservatives together with some Obama voters and working-class Democrats.
These are the people helped by “Roseanne.” And they deserve it.
Expecting Roseanne Barr to recreate her feminist sitcom in a way that somehow made Buckleyites look sympathetic would be silly. But redeeming the irredeemables is a laudable goal, whether they’re actually conservatives or just well-meaning centrists looking for someone to bring back jobs.
Trump’s win strengthened the GOP’s relationship with working-class voters, many of whom aren’t ideological, and many of whom feel it’s the ideologues that have left them behind. They may never go to CPAC or watch MSNBC, but Republicans will get their votes every now and then. Democrats like Rep.-elect Conor Lamb, R-Pa., might win their support sometimes too.
But their concerns about immigration and the economy and political correctness are real and well-worth helping others understand. So far, “Roseanne” has been a means to that end. And the show has also demonstrated a promising ability explore tough topics facing modern families (sometimes ones that are even less political than cultural, like surrogacy) with a lighthearted touch that acknowledges the weaknesses of both sides.
Plenty of the almost-63 million votes for Trump were cast by decent people who detest racism and sexism and discrimination as much as anyone. Hollywood and the broader media world assume the opposite, that it was racism and sexism, etc., that generally motivated Trump voters to support him over Hillary Clinton. This is why “Roseanne” is important.
There’s certainly an argument to be made that the show promotes social liberalism. The conservative conversation about whether “Roseanne” is worth celebrating, then, should probe whether its recycling of Hollywood’s progressive social message is offset or made more dangerous by its positive depiction of working-class Trump supporters.
For the sake of our social fabric, “Roseanne’s” debunking of the powerful but toxic narrative that working-class voters uniformly favored Trump for less-than-savory reasons is nothing to dismiss. And its monster ratings suggest many of those voters are still feeling pretty dismissed.
