Ever wondered why certain politicians keep bringing up ‘Black women’ in their Chicago rhetoric? It’s not just a casual observation. Experts are breaking down the deliberate political strategy behind these repeated mentions, revealing a calculated move to influence public perception. What’s the real motive when facts tell a different story?
President Donald Trump has consistently introduced claims about a “force of Black women” in Chicago advocating for federal troop deployment, a rhetoric that has drawn significant scrutiny and expert analysis.
During recent White House discussions, Trump reiterated these assertions, framing his proposed intervention in Chicago, despite a reported decline in overall crime rates, as a response to urgent pleas from this demographic. These claims often precede or follow his critiques of local Democratic leadership, including Illinois Governor JB Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson.
The specific identities of the “Black women” Trump references remain ambiguous, prompting several individuals and groups in Chicago to publicly suggest they might be the ones he alludes to. Among them, members of “Chicago Flips Red,” a group of Black Trump supporters, and Patricia Easley of “ChicagoRed,” have posited that their vocal opposition to Democratic policies at city council meetings may have captured the president’s attention. However, these groups typically comprise a small number of individuals, as reported by the Chicago Tribune.
Political scientists and communication experts view Trump’s recurring insertion of Black women into these contentious discussions as a calculated political tactic designed to lend legitimacy to his agenda. Alvin B. Tillery Jr., a professor of political science and African American studies at Northwestern University, emphatically states that the notion of a significant “force” of Black women in Chicago demanding military intervention is a “bald-faced lie,” given their historical and consistent political alignment.
Indeed, data from the 2024 presidential election starkly contrasts Trump’s narrative, showing overwhelming support for Vice President Kamala Harris among Black female voters nationally, with a significant majority in Cook County, which encompasses Chicago. This demographic has historically been a cornerstone of the Democratic party’s support base, making Trump’s claims particularly perplexing in their factual disconnect.
Experts like Tillery and Dr. Qing Zhang, an assistant professor of communication, highlight the exploitative nature of these statements. Alderwoman Jeanette B. Taylor, a Chicago city council member, pointedly noted that conservative leaders are “using people who look like us to steer a narrative that we all know is not true.” This strategic deployment of a perceived endorsement from Black women aims to create a false impression of broad public support for federal intervention.
Zhang further explains that Trump’s vague references serve a “symbolic purpose,” intending to suggest a dramatic shift in public opinion, where even traditionally Democratic-leaning groups are supposedly seeking his protection. This framing positions federal troops as “saviors,” portraying women of color as dependent on military intervention rather than community-based solutions. Ultimately, this repeated invocation of Black women by Trump is seen as a form of tokenism, reducing their political voice to a mere prop for his talking points. It disregards the majority sentiment of Black women who advocate for substantial investment, opportunity, and safety through community-led initiatives, rather than through military presence on their streets. This strategic communication attempts to undermine democratic processes by manufacturing a misleading narrative of broad-based public demand.
