Elections often spark illogical behavior and imprudent commentary, and this recent one is no exception. Some of the most absurd comments have indeed been noteworthy. Much furore has been made, rather irrationally, about the alleged reappearance of patriarchy due to the election outcomes. Certain Democrats and commentators have jumped to the hasty conclusion that Donald Trump’s rise to power occurred solely because of sexism – a laughable notion.
The famous TV show The View sparked debate when Alyssa Farrah, a former Trump administration employee turned Democrat voter, discussed voting patterns in Starr County, Texas. This county, known for its largely Hispanic population, had an unexpected shift towards supporting Trump, an anomaly compared to previous elections. Before Farrah could explore the reasons behind this, Sonny Hostin interrupting with a drastic single-word explanation: ‘Misogyny.’ Farrah’s aim was to highlight the significance of border management in border counties like Starr County and to pointout how Trump’s emphasis on border security appealed to residents.
Hostin disregarded this and blamed it all on ‘sexism and misogyny.’ If only we had evidence of whether a woman presidential candidate would receive support from this county. Incredibly, the facts don’t align with Hostin’s claims. In 2016, the county favored female candidate Hillary Clinton, with a resounding 79% of votes. So, is it likely that hordes of feminists abruptly relocated, making way for an influx of sexists between 2016 and the recent election? Or were the people deceived into voting for a man named Hillary Clinton? Or possibly, more likely, the county residents found Trump’s border security plans more robust compared to Biden’s and Harris’s track record of border insecurity.
Reid suggested that electing a woman, particularly a woman of color, to the highest office would be an uphill task and hence lauded Harris’s campaign as ‘flawless’, regardless of her inevitable loss. This logic, however, is flawed when you glance at the data. The nation elected Barack Obama, a Black man, as president in 2008 and re-elected him in 2012. There is no doubt that the United States is prepared to support a Black Presidential candidate and has indeed done so. Women, too, frequently land senatorial and gubernatorial positions. Hence, the idea of America not ready to elect a woman or person of color is plainly misguided.
The left is further thrown into chaos with its inability to grapple with the influence exerted by people like Joe Rogan, a popular podcast host. It’s ludicrous to suggest, as Giridharadas did, that such media resembles terrorist groups that radicalize people and indoctrinate them into ‘full-blown fascist politics.’ Giridharadas lamented that the ‘pro-democracy side’ lacked a presence like Rogan’s, apparently ineffective in moving individuals towards feminist ideals.
This perspective overlooks the reality of influence today. Despite controlling vast cultural landscapes like Hollywood, the music industry, academia, and media, these voices seem to lack Rogan’s impact. It seems Giridharadas may be overlooking the power in his own camp. One must ponder why louder voices from these spaces failed to make similar impacts as Rogan’s.
Questions of identity popped up over at the Daily Kos, thanks to a certain Lucy Montrose. After dishing out criticism on one of my past columns where I contended that Democrats have deep-seated problems with men due to their political blunders, Montrose, in her confusion, accused me of offering no constructive feedback on how Democrats could better engage male voters. However, she soon descended into questioning whether I was a female columnist from the NY Post with the same last name, or perhaps AI was at work. A fine work of fiction, it was.
She eventually pondered whether I was simply a concept or possibly a ghost, a most amusing narrative. Deciphering identity can indeed lead us down amusing paths. To alleviate her confusion, perhaps some practical advice will help. I would propose three suggestions for Democrats looking to engage male voters. The key here is understanding men, not belittling or alienating them.
Firstly, perfecting your approach is crucial. Avoid staging ham-fisted publicity stunts that only serve to alienate your audience further. Instead, focus on sending a message that resonates with men on a real, individual level, rather than throwing out cheap gimmicks and buzzwords that you think they want to hear.
Secondly, never begin an anecdote with ‘I was at spin class when…’ It’s these sorts of detached, elitist remarks that only serve to highlight the clear disconnect that the Democrats seem to have with the majority of male voters. Such comments can be seen as an attempt to relate or spark a connection, but in truth, they only drive the wedge deeper.
Lastly, crying less will help you. Making emotional appeals might work in some circles, but it typically leaves most men feeling awkward and unsure of how to respond. Rather than focusing on making emotional pleas, why not direct the conversation towards concrete, tangible things that can be acted upon? This will help men to engage with the issues and feel like they are making an active contribution.
While some of these suggestions may seem facetious, they’re rooted in genuine observations about the ways in which Democrats, particularly the likes of Biden and Harris, have been failing to connect with different voter demographics. If they want to counter the negative impact of their current approach, they need to start diverging from their present strategy.
In conclusion, the Democratic narrative’s frequent missteps have been laid bare in these recollections. The visuals of Kamala Harris’s failed campaign, Biden’s failing border strategy, and how the juggernauts of media fail to connect with their audience firmly anchor the party’s ineptitude. They continue to push laughable theories of patriarchy and sexism instead of admitting the clear shortcomings within their strategies.
Addressing these concerns in the practical way outlined above may help Democrats regain respect from male voters and possibly even re-establish some lost connections. However, they must first come to terms with the reality of their present disconnect and the clearly flawed tactics of their current leaders. Only then can they begin to launch campaigns that appeal to all voters, men and women alike, and stand stronger in the face of future elections.