Video summary
In this discussion, Richard Reeves analyzes how the 2024 election has shifted from a presumed contest focused on women's issues to one increasingly defined by men and masculinity. He observes that while young women are moving further left under the Harris-Walz campaign, young men are drifting rightward due to feeling unrepresented in Democratic spaces. This demographic gap is exacerbated by the Republican Party's aggressive targeting of male-centric media outlets; Reeves highlights a stark contrast between Donald Trump being introduced at the 2024 RNC by Dana White and Ivanka Trump in previous years, suggesting Republicans have successfully branded themselves as "men's party." Conversely, he argues that Democrats are underutilizing Kamala Harris's historic status as the first female president to win an election or Tim Walz's unique background as a former public school teacher and coach. Reeves notes that even when positive imagery of fatherhood is presented, such as videos of Walz with his son crying in pride, it risks being dismissed by critics who fail to recognize this vulnerability as a strength rather than something "cringey." Reeves critiques the Democratic campaign's strategic failure to articulate a pro-men agenda without appearing anti-women or regressive. He points out that despite having substantive policies beneficial for boys and men, Democrats avoid seizing political capital on these issues due to fear of backlash regarding toxic masculinity or identity politics. A prime example cited is the Harris-Walz "Opportunity Economy" paper, which featured seven images of candidates interacting with voters but included not a single man; even when hard-hat imagery was used for factory jobs, it depicted pregnant women rather than men. Reeves argues that this lack of representation in visual media reflects a deeper mindset issue where Democrats assume they must explicitly prove their inclusivity to avoid accusations of sexism, whereas Republicans feel unable to discuss male struggles without seeming like they want to "turn back the clock" on women's rights. The conversation further explores how both parties mishandle working-class men through specific legislative examples and voting records. Reeves highlights that two-thirds of jobs created by the bipartisan Infrastructure Bill went to men in construction, transit, and manufacturing sectors, yet Democrats struggled to claim credit for this achievement without facing accusations from critics like Joy Reid who framed it as a bill solely for white men. In contrast, Josh Hawley voted against the infrastructure bill despite its direct benefits to working-class men of all races, citing conditions attached that he viewed as part of a "woke agenda." Reeves finds irony in this dynamic: one side creates policies helping these demographics but refuses to acknowledge them, while the other claims to champion workers yet votes down legislation that directly aids their economic interests. Reeves concludes by addressing why Democrats feel compelled to appear so liberal on identity issues despite having strong policy positions for men and women alike. He suggests that Democratic strategists may be avoiding direct engagement with male audiences because they fear appearing "stupid" or out of touch if they attempt to connect, whereas Republicans can easily secure warm hosts like Andrew Schultz or Theo Von who are forgiving and largely supportive. This avoidance creates a vacuum where progressive institutions fail to acknowledge real problems facing men, such as the gender gap in suicide rates which is four-fold higher for males but often denied by organizations like the CDC. By refusing to admit these struggles exist, Democrats inadvertently push struggling demographics toward negative voices that validate their pain without offering solutions, leaving significant ground open for opponents who can claim they understand and represent those left behind.
Read the full video transcript
talking about diminishing and the sort
of eraser which is a very popular uh
term that's used eraser of past
suffering so on and so forth what do you
make of the Harris waltz's campaign
around the groups the struggling groups
that they're trying to bring into their
camp and the ones that they've missed
off well I find it interesting that this
election which was I think supposed to
be about women's issues and now we have
a woman at the top of the ticket on the
Dem side has actually become in some
ways a bit of a contest about men and
masculinity and that's partly because
you see this gap opening up in voting
intentions at least among Young
Americans especially with young women
being much more like to be on the left
now and young men if anything somewhat
moving to the right so it's become uh
something that people are really talking
about a lot like what's happening with
men and then of course because of the
way that the Republican party has really
lent quite hard into lots of kind of
men's spaces and also just a certain
affect right the the in some ways the
data point I like best on that is that
in 16 Donald Trump was introduced at the
RNC by ianka Trump in 2020 he was
introduced by ianka Trump in 2024 he was
introduced by Dane Dana White Dana White
yeah uh I couldn't remember if it was
Dana White or Hulk Hogan no Hulk Hogan
came on later but like Daniel white so
like okay so from Vanka Trump like and
so that's a kind of that's not subtle
right that's a kind of clear bid I think
for to be the CO's men's party whereas
the Harris walz campaign are betting
very hard on winning off with women's
votes not least since Do's Reproductive
Rights being a huge part of the agenda
but what's interesting is they're not
really playing up at all correctly in my
view Harris as the first female
president glass ceiling Etc they're kind
of downplaying that and in Tim wal
there's an interesting figure there high
school teacher if he becomes a VP in
fact I think even running for VP first
career public school teacher to do so
we've had 27
lawyers uh as president of the United
States and I've got no idea how many
vice presidents but let's assume double
that right let's assume we've had 50
lawyers as president or vice pres we hav
had a single career public school
teacher so he would be the first to do
that but he was also a coach great
relationship with his son that video of
his son so I mean k Ben K Benjamin sagon
of a cad from Lotus eers somebody who is
uh not exactly a massive fan of the
Democrat Party as far as I can tell
defended that video of his son crying
and said anybody that thinks that this
is cring or worthy of critique this is
precisely the sort of masculinity that
you want like a son an adult son balling
his eyes out at his dad proud at his dad
oh my God awesome and I got to tell you
like as as the father of three sons um I
have yet to have any of them in tears in
the audience at least not deliberately
but um but I have there is something
about like of course Sons want their
dads to be proud of them but the thing
we don't say as much is I really want
them to be proud of me
and when they are proud of me and
they'll say something about that is like
it's like it's a thing and and so like
any yeah I agree any anybody that saw
that yeah and was unmoved by it
something is something wrong with them
but but I would also say that the the
Democrats actually haven't articulated a
kind of PR male agenda in a way that
they now really could I think they've
dropped some of the kind of they're not
really leaning on uh a very strongly
first woman president thing you don't
hear them talk about toxic masculinity
or the Patriot you don't hear them talk
that much about her minority status
either no I think that's got to be a
strategic thing because coming into this
I would have expected it Hillary Clinton
they definitely did try and go Hillary
they did and and then Hillary the bumper
sticker was like I'm with her that's all
you had and so they're not doing that
and they're trying to counter sign yeah
but but then then but then even though I
think there's a lot of substance to like
the things they're doing which actually
would be quite good for boys and men
they they don't seize the political
Capital around it so the the political
the political terrain for being proen
without being anti-women seems to be
still terrain that neither party is able
to kind of occupy for the Republicans
feel unable to be able to articulate in
a way that's really resonant the issues
of boys and men without coming across as
somehow wanting to go turn back the
clock on women meanwhile the Democrats
who I think have got had some really
good policies for men can't talk about
it and I just say this is I'll take an
example of something that will this the
reason I'm hesitant about this is it
risks sounding really trivial but I
think it speaks to something deeper so
the Harris walz campaign just put out
their opportunity economy paper which
talks a lot about jobs and inflation all
the stuff you'd want them to not about
identity it has seven
images of the candidates interacting
with a
voter of th in those seven images guess
which demographic doesn't appear
once no men not a single man and you've
got to think that couldn't have happened
the other way around and I've got to
think that someone up there has a blind
spot that you would produce a
publication which doesn't feature a
single male vote it's a single man out
of all the seven right just have one
just one out of seven right and so I
don't think that was intentional but I
do think it was indicative of just a
mindset issue here which is that there's
one p there's one picture in a warehouse
with hard hats and probably someone went
oh better make sure that's a woman it's
actually a pregnant woman right so so
it's like really like so it's like and
you could see that like we want to make
absolutely sure that people don't think
that we you know factory jobs are just
for men so let's make sure that's a one
but then all the others are women I me
look I don't like talking about that
kind of stuff because I think it sounds
it sounds silly and trivial and like why
is he talking about a public pictures in
a publication when he runs a think Tech
but the answer is because I think
representation matters yeah and I think
if political parties want people to feel
like they see them they should show them
well if we look at the uh it is really
funny someone brought this up the other
day a lot of criticism around Kamala
Harris going on call her daddy very sort
of female focused podcast biggest female
podcast in the world female Joe Rogan
and basically saying well look what are
you going in there for her how how many
call her daddy Watchers do you think
well how he's going to vote for Trump
but now that I've seen CA Harris on call
her Daddy it's really going to change
quite liberal I got I it's yeah it is
it's I would say pretty liberal it's
like Hollywood so whatever that is which
is probably pretty liberal but I mean
the the primary talking point on that
was uh women's bodies and and uh
abortion you think she was preaching to
the choir there I mean absolutely but
then on the flip side of that you know
like Trump going on uh Andrew Schultz's
show Theo Von's show Shawn Ryan's show I
would guess sha Ryan has maybe 98% met
it's a sort of um military veteran uh
podcast you know five hour episodes
about the Battle of fujia and stuff like
that it's like not a massive like that
the most
Trump like cohort that you could think
of so it kind of got me thinking because
they're not stupid the people that run
these campaigns aren't stupid so I
wonder what they're doing I wonder
whether they're going on so that they
have a warm audience and a warm host who
is forgiving and largely on their side
uh so that it's just a good press up
opportunity and they can take the box of
I did unscripted interview I'm wondering
whether or not they actually genuinely
feel like they need to shore up this
base I'm wondering whether or not they
think that if they tried to do it in the
other direction that it would just have
no impact and there's the potential for
them to come across as being Sil so I'm
like really trying to sort of this is my
world right I'm thinking right okay what
would what would happen you know who I
really wanted to bring on the show I
really wanted to bring uh the two VPS on
I really wanted to have separately no
separately uh I really wanted to speak
to them separately I thought that that
like be interesting JD and Tim would
have just been like in some ways
actually more interesting than the two
people that were leading because their
debate was way better and certainly on
this in certainly on this question about
the role of men in society I mean
they're both very interested in it uh
and where JD broke the what whatever it
was called the beard ceiling did you see
this right I did yeah um so this was uh
one of the one of that means that means
you could run President right because
you're British I couldn't uh Joe Rogan
and Haynes said they'd vote for me if I
did run for president though so this is
Scott Galloway on Ryan holiday's podcast
recently this should make sound if I
play it I think the election is going to
be decided by masculinity what do I mean
by that the voters that are kind of up
for grabs right now are not young women
they're going Harris it's not old people
yeah old men they're going Trump young
men aren't really going towards the
Republican party as a lot of people
would say or the manosphere young men
actually are supportive of gender rights
any demographic what they're doing is
they're moving away from the Democratic
party because they don't feel seen on
the DNC site there's an explicit section
that says who we serve and it lists 16
different demographic groups from people
of Faith the immigrants to Asian
specific Islanders blacks women disabled
veterans I tried to calculate it my best
estimate is it covers 76% of the
population they have the same issue that
universities have or the Dei apparatus
has at University when you are
explicitly advocating and favoring 76%
of the population you're not advocating
for them you're discriminating against
the 24% so unfortunately these
individuals feel shunned by what I'll
call more Progressive or the
establishment they're very drawn to
anyone who feels their pain and
unfortunately that void has been filled
by some very negative voices what do you
make of that well the example of like
who we serve from the DNC site which
does list all those demographics but not
men is kind of on the nose H and I
actually think that you had Dan Cox on
and Dan I think was the person who
actually first identified that um great
and we've all been picking it up kind of
since again it's a bit like my example
of the opportunity economy PDF like not
very many people are actually going to
those places and noticing that thing but
I do think it's indicative uh of a
problem that the Democrats have and that
the center left generally has and that
Center left institutions have with just
acknowledging these problems like
getting the CDC to admit that there's a
gender gap in suicide just it's like
banging your head against the war that's
like but but you know there is a
four-fold difference right you bang bang
they won't uh and so that has has
created a vacuum uh because if there are
real problems and they're not being
acknowledged then of course someone's
that someone's then going to come in and
say yes you're struggling the question
is whose fault is that and what do we do
about it so I do think there there's a
lot of ground being left open here um
particularly on the the center left by
their failure to acknowledge that these
problems are real what's interesting
about this is that when you actually
kind of turn to areas of
policy you actually find that there's
probably more policy energy around some
of these things on the center left than
there is on the center to write right
and so my favorite example of this is
the infrastructure Bill have we talked
about this probably probably hadn't
happened so so the bipartisan
infrastructure bill you know creating
millions of jobs in construction Transit
and summon manufacturing Etc two-thirds
of those jobs are going to go to men are
going to men we know that because a very
good women's Think Tank did the analysis
showing that because those occupations
skew male there is going to men and
challenged on that the Democrats just
apologize for it or run away from it so
you know a clip of Pete butter jedge
being asked about Joy Reed and bter
jedge is a consumate political
communicator and so watching him
struggle was you know that was worth a
watching it on himself she this is just
a bill for white men isn't it what he
should have said was well it's it's a
bill that will help workingclass men but
actually it help Black and Hispanic men
at least as much as white men joy and
you know what given the recent economic
Trends I actually don't think helping
workingclass men is necessarily A Bad
Thing isn't that maybe a good thing
given what's happened to working-class
Men by the way we're also doing the
these other things for kind of women but
why do you think that a piece of
legislation that's helping workingclass
men of all Races is a bad thing right he
didn't say that he said well we're
working on that and we're trying to get
more women into them and it's all bit
difficult and um everyone uses Bridges
uh so it's like it's a it's a unusually
bad interview from Budaj because he's
just like ah de in yeah meanwhile Josh
Hy who is the Tribune of The Working Man
by his Reckoning voted against the
infrastructure bill which is the only
major piece of legislation that actually
been directly going to out working-class
men that we've seen for probably decades
and so on the one hand you've got a
party that's actually doing some stuff
to help working-class men but my God
trying to get them to admit it oh my God
they' never admit it and then you got
another group over here who say ah we're
For the Working Man but well in that
case why did you vote against
infrastructure investment which creates
for working men why do you think they
did um Holly would say it's because
there were conditions attached to the
Investments which you would say were the
part of the woke agenda Etc and I I
don't want to say that his arguments
against it were entirely without Merit
but nonetheless here you've got this
bill it's for the working guy right
above all and one side won't take credit
for it and the other side won't isn't it
funny in other news this episode is
brought to you by function you probably
want to know what's happening inside of
your your body but getting your blood
work comprehensively analyzed can cost
thousands which is why I've partnered
with function because for just $500 you
can receive extensive lab work and over
100 carefully selected biomarkers giving
you an insight into your hormone profile
cardiovascular health organ function and
much more they've got a team of expert
Physicians that'll analyze the data and
then give you actionable advice to
improve your health and lifespan
monitoring things like your testosterone
can make a massive difference to your
energy performance and happiness and
being able to see that data charted out
over the course of a year with
actionable insights to improve them is
precisely what you get with function
they've got a 300,000 person wait list
boo but every Monday they open a few
spots for modern wisdom listeners yay
right now you can get the exact same
blood work panel that I get by going to
the link in the description below or
heading to function health.com slod
wisdom that's function health.com slod
wisdom thank you very much for tuning in
if you enjoyed that clip with Richard
you will love the full length three hour
long conversation which is available uh
just here if you press it on