There’s no reason to think that Donald Trump knows or would care that his book title, “Crippled America,” is deeply offensive to millions of Americans with disabilities. “Crippled” is a slur that has long been used to denigrate people with disabilities, especially with physical disabilities, and to mark them as weak, useless and unwanted. Trump might as well as used the R-word to describe an America that he sees as falling apart or picked some other stigmatizing insult. While “crip” and “cripple” are being reclaimed by activists, that’s no excuse for Trump to use it.

It would be nice to think that at least one candidate in the Fox Business Network debate tonight might call Trump out on his language, but I don’t expect anyone on the stage to champion the rights of disabled Americans. Although there are at least 56 million Americans who have disabilities, living in every part of the country and holding every conceivable political position, no presidential candidate so far this cycle has done anything but make the most cursory of overtures to this untapped, ignored constituency.

Every special interest group wants more attention from politicians, but the disabled are not a clearly defined segment of the American population. Rather, disability is a natural part of the human experience that ultimately confronts everyone. No one is more than one degree of separation away from disability. Only those unlucky enough to die suddenly might avoid disability. This universality makes addressing the needs of disabled Americans more than just a special interest issue.

At the same time, although people who identify as disabled are evenly spread across the American political spectrum, there are certain issues — employment and education opportunities, access to health care, discrimination — that unite them. Our best data demonstrate that despite accessibility obstacles, disabled individuals are highly motivated to vote and will vote for candidates who understand these issues. From the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 to the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, disability legislation has an unparalleled history of bipartisan support.

So here we have a huge group of Americans and a set of issues that politicians from either political party might address. And yet disability and the needs of disabled American voters have played almost no role in the election. What’s going on?

A poll sponsored in 2013 by United Cerebral Palsy found that 30 percent of disabled likely voters surveyed identified as Democrats, 23 percent as Republicans and 30 percent as independents. They know their issues and will vote for candidates who respect them. Voting-age Americans with disabilities are a population of 34 million up for grabs.

Academic research confirms this poll’s findings. In 2000, John Gastil, now at Pennsylvania State University, looked at disabled voters in New Mexico. He found that while there were distinct liberal and conservative camps, disability informs voting decisions across the board. Some come to resent government bureaucracy, while others strongly endorse a better safety net. And in 2013, Lisa Schur and Meera Adya published an article on political participation by people with disabilities, “Sidelined or Mainstreamed?” They determined that people with disabilities often do not perceive government officials as responsive and feel that they lack clout in the political system.