Why are Young Men Shifting Right?

A couple weeks ago I was listening to an episode of Derek Thompsons podcast, Plain English, which discusses how young men in America are “falling behind–and shifting right.” As a young man in America, I was interested in not only the how, but the why?

Why is it that Donald Trump, an out of shape, McDonalds loving old man appeals to gym loving, chipotle habituating young men?

A lot of leftists will say it’s because they relate to his “toxic masculinity”, but I find that too dismissive. Instead, I think the issue stems from the alienation of the Democratic party towards this seemingly inconsequential demographic. An alienation that exists because of the Democrats purporting a hyper-inclusive identity that is interested in those who have long been neglected, NOT those who have been overrepresented. While this inclusion is important and beneficial to many, it leads to groups which are no longer being talked about (young men) questioning their place in the party. Another option I will discuss, which I find much bleaker, is that young men might just…like Donald Trump.

Regardless of what you think the most accurate story is, since 2020 men ages 18-29 have shifted nearly 30 points to the right. A change that can’t be discounted as a mere anomaly, rather a fundamental shift in the way this demographic feels in America.

Let’s begin with the Democratic neglection. This election cycle the GOP banded together a coalition of Elon Musk, Joe Rogan, Dana White, Hulk Hogan, and others. The left countered with Oprah Winfrey, Cardi B, Bill Gates and Liz Cheney. While celebrity endorsements tell very little of the story, and I’ve cherry picked more masculine ones for the Republicans, this paints a good introductory picture for places young men might’ve looked for familiar faces. The Republicans, whether through a concerted effort or not, gave young men a surplus of options.

This is well before any considerations of policy or social justice matters because the Republicans, for better or worse, prioritized relatability over inclusivity. The Democrats, on the other hand, prioritized clarity on issues regarding gender, women’s rights, immigration, and the environment. In their preciseness of this clarity, they hoped to pick up men along the way. They hoped the importance they expressed on these issues would be of enough interest to men that they didn’t have to make as direct appeals as the Republicans. They were wrong.

While many young men might be sympathetic to the loss of rights women might face, the reality is for a lot of them it would be merely part of their choice of who to vote for as a young man. That part, however, is only taken seriously once they’ve been sufficiently appealed to directly. Young men are concerned about hearing from the potential face of their country about what will be done for them, and they want to believe it. This requires two things:

1.     Persuasive rhetoric

2.     A personally relatable candidate

Trump has both while Harris, at least to young men, struggled to grasp either. This is where I will move to discussing the positive case for Trump.

Maybe the reason young men are continuing to shift rightward is because they find Donald Trump genuinely appealing. Anecdotally, this reigns true amongst my peers. Trump knows that many young men, and Americans generally, are still deeply interested in the American dream of (exploitatively) climbing your way up the ladder. He also knows he represents a figurehead of that very ideal, regardless of its achievability. Whereas Harris not only doesn’t represent that, but she actively campaigned against it. She did so by outlining the exploitative methods used by the likes of Musk and Trump to get where they are and, thanks to being born into wealth, always have been. Young men see the wealth, hear Trumps demeanor, and believe in the false reality of that American dream.

That American dream, however, comes from the mouth of men. So, regardless of its achievability its immediately more appealing to young men than any version the Harris campaign is touting. Needless to say, misogyny is alive and well in our country.

I heard consistently from my peers that Kamala Harris’ womanhood is a damning factor in their nonsupport of her. They usually add the qualifier that they would be willing to vote for a woman, just not that one. While that might be true in some cases, for many, it’s the immediate realization of her womanhood that removes any possibility of their support.

I don’t think it had to be the Harris campaign explicitly talking to young men and outlining their futures ad nauseum, rather, a visual representation akin to Rogan or RFK could have at least implicitly messaged to these men that there is a place for them in the party. However, I don’t want to be dismissive of the rational capacities of this group, the positive account made by Republicans might have been compelling in and of itself, not just in contrast with the opposition.

Which might mean the unfortunate fact that young men truly do find trumps masochism, misogyny, and narcissism appealing. Maybe it’s found especially appealing in contrast with a smart, reasonable, self-aware woman. In a time where the Democratic party isn’t overly interested in appealing directly to young men, that neglection was especially pronounced given the two candidates. Instead of touting their endorsements from Taylor Swift, Quavo, and others, as the Democrats did, the Republicans insisted on their politicians doing the talking and making it direct.

I don’t want to pretend to know why the Democrats lost, instead I’ve tried to outline why I, as a young man, think young men are shifting right. It was happening before the election but became especially pronounced on November 5^th. The Democrats have a lot of soul searching to do the next few months and I hope deep considerations as to why young men no longer feel a place in their party are involved, hopefully with some solutions.