Dems want to spend $20 million to learn how to talk to men. Have they tried mansplaining?

San Francisco Chronicle​

31-05-2025

The national Democratic Party has decided to spend $20 million to figure out a way to talk to men.
Let me know if they find out anything that dating sites haven't yet.
On Wednesday night, the San Francisco Democratic Party weighed in, endorsing the idea as well. The resolution noted that Donald Trump got 56% of the votes of men aged 18-29, and that 'addressing the challenge experienced by boys and men is not only a moral imperative, but is essential to fostering a more inclusive and responsive political movement that truly speaks to the needs of all individuals, and countering the resultant rise polarization and disinformation.'
This Match.com-ish effort is intriguing to be sure. Polling after the 2024 presidential election showed former Vice President Kamala Harris coming up short with men as well.
According to Navigator Research, men voted for Trump, 54-43 against Harris, a four-point improvement from 2020, when the Democratic nominee, former President Joe Biden, came closer: Trump only won by two points. Women voted for Harris 51-46 in 2024, but Biden carried women by 10 points in 2020.
Let's factor in age. According to the Navigator polling 'Men under the age of 45 voted for Donald Trump in the 2024 election by an 8-point margin (44% Harris, 52% Trump), a 16-point shift from 2020, where the group voted for Biden by an 8-point margin.'
If you break the numbers down by race, Harris got 82% of the black male vote. Not bad, and close to the 86% Joe Biden got in 2020. What about Latino men? Here's where it gets more interesting.
'Trump made gains across the board. Of particular note, Trump won 47% of votes among Latino men, according to AP projections. He also produced double-digit gains in majority-Hispanic counties along the Mexico border in Texas and in Southern Florida.
According to a survey by Edison Research, 'In 2020, Joe Biden won among Latino men by 23 percentage points: 59%-36%. Our latest estimate for the 2024 vote among Latino men is Trump winning by 10 points, 54% to 44%. This change of 33 points on the margin is a rather extraordinary shift in four years' time.'
Rather.
What's the problem? Democratic support for trans youth in sports? Naw, not really. Democratic support for basic social service programs? Nope. Democratic support for a robust U.S. foreign policy? Unlikely.
It may be this simple: as unfair and irrational as it is, men like voting for men for president.
This country has never had a woman president, and now looks even further away from that goal based on the 2024 results.
The question is, how do the Democrats spend that $20 million?
The New York Times reported last week that the plan 'is code-named SAM — short for 'Speaking with American Men: A Strategic Plan' — and promises investment to 'study the syntax, language and content that gains attention and virality in these spaces.' It recommends buying advertisements in video games, among other things.
'Above all, we must shift from a moralizing tone,' it urges.
Well. God knows what those video game ads are going to look like. No moralizing in video games, I guess.
Fundamentally, according to the data, younger voters, be they men, women, Black or Latino, voted on the economy.
So, it's the economy, stupid, again. Younger voters have a particularly bleak worldview on the economy. Talk to any young person, and they don't really have IRAs, own homes, or have a lot of disposable income while they're working two or three jobs. The Biden economy worked well for some, and very poorly for others.
My guess is that Trump's performance on the economy will make Biden look like FDR, his hero.
The big, beautiful tariffs are already contributing to stock market uncertainty, likely inflation — or even stagflation, where prices rise while the economy stays flat. Oh, and interest rates are going to stay high for the time being, which doesn't help.
I was talking to two men the other day about Trump. One voted for Harris, reluctantly, because he thinks Trump is erratic. If the GOP had nominated a good ol' 25 years ago Republican, he'd probably have voted for that candidate. He never said anything about Harris being a woman.
'Oh, he's (bleeping) crazy.'
Well, that's the partial right answer.
But do the Democrats have a response to them? The next GOP presidential nominee (if there is one) will not be Trump, and then the world looks a bit different, and by that I mean, maybe the country is just shifting right organically, Trump or no Trump.
It happens. The country that elected JFK, Clinton and Obama also elected Nixon, Reagan and, gulp, Trump. Again.
Historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. wrote about a 30-year reset cycle in America that's been rather consistent: reaction begets over-reaction.
Bring on the video game ads, the outreach to men (without the 'moralizing tone,' whatever that means), the appearances on Joe Rogan, all of it. Can't hurt.
Maybe the Democrats need to mansplain to men.
After all, it worked for Trump.