The “Year of the Woman” is a popular mantra employed by the Media whenever American woman are perceived as disproportionately impacting an election cycle, either as candidates or swing voters (or both). The label first came into vogue in 1992 when a number of women were elected to the U.S. Senate and, again in 2018 when 103 women (including 90 Democrats) were elected to Congress. In the 2022 midterm cycle, American women – specifically those with college or post-graduate degrees – were arguably the difference makers when a post-Dobbs backlash turned the forecasted “red wave” into a relatively minor ripple.
Well, brace yourselves, ladies.
If the present indicators are accurate, 2024 may be the Year of the… Man?
I’m serious. We’ve all seen the data, either online or mixed into a liberal news program’s election analysis. Almost every presidential poll shows Donald Trump doing exceptionally well with men. All men. Pew, for example, recently reported a 12-point swing among men in Trump’s favor versus this same approximate point in the 2020 cycle. And it’s not just older married males and “working class” heroes who are rallying to his banner this time around; there’s strong evidence that Gen Z males are Donald-curious. A September NAACP poll even discovered 1 in 4 black men under 50 supporting the Republican nominee.
That’s potentially historic.
Yet, I don’t think it’s difficult to understand what’s going on. Here are just a few reasons (I think) for what’s probably happening out there:
- Kamala Harris is (ironically, if you believe the rumors about her past) male repellant. Her entire presentation turns off guys. The aging valley girl voice (!), the vapidness, the preference for emotive nonsensical slogans over substance. Men can’t connect with her, she isn’t trying to connect with them, and her choice of Walz appeared designed to appeal to young women with daddy issues, not men worried about the housing market, their 401(k)s, or whether they’d be sent to die in another quixotic overseas war.
- Democrats have campaigned almost exclusively on abortion for three years. Only recently has “democracy” supplanted “women’s reproductive rights” as the top issue of hyper-motivated Democrat voters. We’ll see what happens, but it may come to pass that focusing obsessively on an issue that’s primarily a motivator for only one side of the gender divide might make the opposite gender (men) believe Democrats aren’t working for their votes?
- The entire Democrat-led culture is at war with men. The entire Democrat-led culture is at war with men. We’re told masculinity is bad, tampons in boys’ bathrooms are good, and white males in particular are told from the moment of birth that they’re evil, patriarchal predators-in-training. Any attempt to point out how fucked all of this is is met with the demeaning “fragility” tag retort. I’ve told multiple people this cycle that I’m voting for my son. I even took him to drop off my ballot. Because I love my daughter any less? Nope. But it’s young American males who are clearly in the crosshairs here, and the polls suggest record numbers get it.
- Trump is an ordinary guy with gold toilets and a private jet. He doesn’t offend us, and his sense of humor comports with our own; we enjoy how he is blissfully immune to the slings and arrows of the perpetually offended AND the real slings and arrows being thrown at him daily by the Deep State. Real men are attracted to real courage, and the former president displays his strength every single day.
Now, even if Trump wins and the available postmortem data supports that a male surge cancelled out a Karen turnout, I don’t expect a single media outlet to report the “Year of the Man.” It’s completely off-narrative. They may cite a hypothetical male revolt and dismiss it as evidence of racism, xenophobia, toxic masculinity, whatever. The usual playbook. But Democrats may need to think hard about their strategies in 2025 and beyond which may be limiting their appeal to large segments of the electorate… including roughly half of the population.
