Election outcomes often lead to bizarre remarks and actions. Too many self-proclaimed pundits spew ill-conceived opinions. This recent episode was no exception. Let’s delve into some of the most egregious instances. The incessant cry of ‘The Patriarchy Strikes Back’ deserves addressing. Quite wrongly, Democrats and their media allies continue to claim that Trump’s presidency was a product of sexism. To shed light on this issue, let’s take a look at a discussion that took place on The View.
Alyssa Farrah, a former Trump Administration staff member who opted for a Democrat vote this time, highlighted how surprisingly Trump received greater support in Starr County, Texas, a highly Hispanic-populated region. This represented a significant shift from previous elections. Before Farrah could discuss this, her co-host Sonny Hostin interjected proclaiming it was all ‘Misogyny.’
Farrah strived to emphasize that the border security resonates strongly amongst the citizens in border counties such as Starr County. She argued that Trump’s insistence on securing the border became appealing due to four years of Biden’s mismanagement at the border. Hostin, however, dismissed Farrah’s point, insisting that sexism and misogyny were behind the voting patterns.
Interestingly though, in 2016, Starr County showed overwhelming support for Hillary Clinton, a woman, with a striking 79% to 19% margin over Trump. It’s intriguing to ponder whether between 2016 and the recent election, a massive sexist migration occurred, or voters were under the illusion that they voted for a male Hillary Clinton. Or could it be possible that Farrah’s argument carried weight, and the citizens along the border preferred Trump’s commitment to border security over Biden’s and Harris’s lackluster performance.
Recognizing the Farrah-Hostin debacle, the absurd claim of Kamala Harris’s ‘Perfect Boost’ needs addressing. The claim was Harris, despite being a woman of color, ran an impeccable campaign since the assumed challenge of her being elected. Such an assertion grossly ignores recent electoral developments. In 2008 America overwhelmingly elected Barack Obama, a black candidate, and he won the re-election four years later. Henceforth, it’s safe to say America is open to elect a black president.
Moreover, women have been consistently elected into substantial positions like senators and governors, and many are poised to be serious contenders for the presidency. Consequently, the idea of a woman of color as president shouldn’t be that far-fetched. Sadly, these facts seem ignored in favor of promoting a negative narrative.
Indeed, the collective obsession Democrats have developed with Joe Rogan, the renowned podcast host, doesn’t go unnoticed either. Giridharadas’s claim that the right-wing media operates like terrorist cells is alarmingly exaggerated. He paints a grim picture where they supposedly prey on individuals with trivial concerns and ‘indoctrinate’ them to champion ‘blatantly fascist politics.’ On the alleged ‘pro-democracy’ side, no one matches Rogan.
While it’s amusing to see such claims, it’s worth reminding that influence is held by those who rule popular culture, the glamour of Hollywood, the dynamism of the music scene, academia, and the media. Yet, despite this, we are to believe Rogan’s impact surpasses all these voices.
A contributor to the Daily Kos, Lucy Montrose, takes issue with a statement I made which sheds light on the ongoing male alienation problem within the Democrats’ tactics. Montrose doesn’t seem to realize that rather than offering constructive feedback, significant political gaffes by Democrats were demonstrated which irrefutably prove their estrangement from male voters. Consequently, in a stupendous mental wandering, Montrose questions my identity, pondering whether I am a female NY Post columnist or an AI creation.
Her confusion reaches new depths as she interrogates whether I might be a different individual, an AI, or perhaps even a phantom? Or merely a theoretical construct? It appears impossible to come to a definitive conclusion. Regardless, I do have some guidance for Democrats aiming to build rapport with male voters: Action is more effective than posture.
Attempting self-promotion on trivial accomplishments or staging publicity stunts to raise profiles doesn’t appeal to male voters. They may find it more constructive to focus on substantive issues and actions that tangibly improve citizens’ lives. Reference to trendy lifestyle occurrences like ‘I was at spin class when…’ also alienates male voters, pushing them further away.
Overly emotional expressions also fall flat. With a sense of reality crumbling all around due to mismanagement, often emotional reactions can contribute to the perceived instability of leadership and doesn’t resonate well with male voters seeking a strong figure to tackle pressing challenges.
Political outcomes and public response can be hysterical at times, often leading to knee-jerk reactions from the losing side. The recent shift in voting patterns observed in Starr County, an assertion on the inevitability of sexism, and the extraordinary assumptions drawn from Kamala Harris’s campaign all reflect an underpinning anxiety within the Democrats and left-leaning media.
Their explicit ignorance towards America’s welcoming attitude on electing a non-white president and the speculated invincibility of Joe Rogan over their stronghold sectors expose the irrational fear of losing their grip over narratives.
While it’s entertaining to watch these narratives unfold, there should be a sincere concern for the erroneous views that are propagated. These tend to obscure the real challenges making consensus building even more difficult.
As one delves into these outrageous claims and beliefs prevalent during this election cycle, it becomes clear that a more grounded and fact-based discussion is necessary for the health of our democracy. Unfortunately, from the window of reporting about ongoing political alienation to the fantasies spun about one’s identity, it’s apparent that the Democrats and their media allies are more than willing to sacrifice truth at the altar of narrative-building.