BRUTAL: Here's the Line That Perfectly Captures the Dems' Failed Male Voter Outreach Strategy
‘Ban all the mens,’ right?
That’s been the wry cry for the progressive sect of the Democratic
Party for years, and the results have been beyond predictable: the total
and complete collapse of male voter support. It’s also not coming back.
John Mac Ghlionn had a damning op-ed in The Hill about how this
collapse will be election-altering. They’re not going to come back for
numerous reasons, the least of it being the pervasive demonization of
men by unhinged leftists and academics who have taken reins of the
Democrats’ messaging strategies (via The Hill) [emphasis mine]:
The party’s latest efforts to woo men are almost painful
to watch. The Democratic National Committee has poured money into
influencer partnerships, podcast cameos and clumsy “masculinity”
campaigns filmed in gyms. Spokespersons drone on about “kitchen-table
issues,” as if men are sitting there waiting to be emotionally validated
between spoonfuls of reheated stew.
None of it works because it
isn’t real. Men don’t want to be sold to. They want to be spoken to. The
problem isn’t packaging but posture. A party that has spent years
pathologizing masculinity can’t expect gratitude from the men it has
spent so long diagnosing.
There was a time when Democrats didn’t
need to perform masculinity because they personified it. Franklin
Roosevelt, Harry Truman and John Kennedy all spoke the language of
strength, duty and sacrifice. Even Bill Clinton, for all his flaws,
employed charisma as a form of command. Barack Obama combined intellect
with authority. These were men who carried themselves with a quiet
confidence that others respected because they aspired to it.
But
somewhere along the line, that current of conviction faded. The virtues
that once defined Democratic leadership — resolve, discipline, fortitude
— were recast as remnants of a primitive past. The same movement that
once celebrated builders and breadwinners began to sneer at them.
Masculinity became something to manage rather than to honor
[…]
It
wasn’t always this disconnected. The Democratic Party once inspired men
to see themselves as part of something greater — families, unions and a
country worth defending. Today, however, the same party mocks faith,
discipline and fatherhood as punchlines. It worships inclusion but
forgets loyalty. It preaches equality but forgets basic humanity.
[…]
The irony [in the failed outreach] is almost poetic. Democrats
say they want to reconnect with men. Yet every strategy they devise
sounds like it was written by someone who’s never met one.
They’ve turned politics into therapy and wonder why men don’t show up
for the session. For all their algorithms and analytics, they’ve
forgotten something simple. Men don’t want to be managed. They want to
be moved. And no amount of focus groups can teach a party how to speak
to the soul.
That’s the line right there, and it echoes what James Carville has
been saying about his party for years, which is that it’s too female.
You cannot win national elections with just liberal white women and a
bunch of gays, Democrats. It will never happen.
The first step is
admitting you’re wrong. We can’t talk about the rest, because
liberals—with their self-righteous disposition—would rather burn at the
stake than admit their brand and agenda is unpopular, uninviting, and
totally insane.
No comments:
Post a Comment