When the Kamala Harris campaign ran with the framing that J. D. Vance is “weird,” its goal was obviously electoral alienation. But of whom? That signaling, I believe, was intended for women.
Kamala HQ and the media doing its bidding have peddled the narrative, somewhat successfully, that Vance is at least skeptical if not contemptuous of women, after he claimed that “childless cat ladies” are ruining America.
Those committed to his ticket argue that he cares about family policy, given that our civilization’s survival depends on people becoming parents. But that defense has been drowned out by political figures and celebrities calling the GOP nominee and his running mate creeps. The Right has sadly gifted them ample ammunition in the culture wars.
For example, congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez claimed that Vance and Republicans have an “incel platform,” or a terminally online man who resents women because he cannot attract them romantically. New York Magazine called the GOP pair an “American Freak Show.”
It is a testament to the Left’s rhetorical adroitness that a destructive ideology that has inverted everything normal — from allowing male child rapists and predators into women’s prisons to allowing men of disproportionate strength into women’s sports — can get away with this. I know that many women notice the cognitive dissonance.
But since the 1980s, there has been a gender voting gap, with women voting for the Democratic presidential candidate in greater numbers than men, according to a Rutgers study. Democrats claim to have a monopoly on empathy. Perhaps they deduce better than Republicans that many women vote based on vibes.
Popular conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey said as much on her podcast this week, noting that her suburban Christian female audience is “persuaded by feelings as well as by policy.”
“I don’t say this pejoratively; this is a fact,” she wrote. “That’s why the ‘weird’ label works so well in this group (sadly).”
Similarly, Stuckey said this subset of women is sensitive to name-calling other women based on their quirks, e.g. cackling, perceived stupidity, or inability to achieve something on their own merit, i.e., “DEI hire.” Personally, I’m less offended by insults to a candidate’s demeanor than by said candidate’s promise to overhaul our institutions and constitutional norms. But I know many women who would like to see more gentleness in our politics.
Married moms, likely more concerned with feeding their family, might tolerate distasteful remarks more and vote for Trump-Vance anyway. As I previously noted, 24 percent of unmarried women lean Republican compared with 50 percent of married women who lean Republican, according to an April Pew Research study. But the share of never-married women in the United States increased 20 percent over the past decade, according to Wells Fargo’s analysis of U.S. Department of Commerce data.
In this tough dating market, this isn’t necessarily women’s fault, as I’ve said before. Speaking from experience, being a single woman can make one fiercely independent and distrustful of men. It might even make one receptive to a catchy female-forward album with a defiant aesthetic and the messaging, “Kamala is brat.”
The GOP should at least try to understand this group and recruit them, rather than dismissing them as a lost cause.