FROM RAINING MEN TO HEMORRHAGING MEN.

No, that's not a Hallowe'en makeover of a Weather Girls hit from 1982.  Rather, it's Hill contributor John Mac Ghlionn having none of the Donks' latest effort to secure enough votes from guys to win a presidential election (perhaps that will spill over to the local elections that matter as well) without antagonizing the fractious Weimar coalition that comprises their base voters.

The Democratic Party is hemorrhaging men. Across the U.S., they are leaving in waves — from the unions that once powered the party’s muscle, from classrooms that once echoed with idealism, and from a movement that now talks at them rather than to them. Polls show young men flocking to the right in numbers not seen for generations.

The trend isn’t a blip but a brutal reckoning. And no amount of branding or beer ads will stop it.

The party’s latest efforts to woo men are almost painful to watch. The Democratic National Committee has poured money into influencer partnerships, podcast cameos and clumsy “masculinity” campaigns filmed in gyms. Spokespersons drone on about “kitchen-table issues,” as if men are sitting there waiting to be emotionally validated between spoonfuls of reheated stew.

Party elders have recognized that they were pushing men away for some time, although turning Olivia Julianna into their "male outreach coordinator" gave Townhall and Pajamas Media types lots of ways to mock her, but ultimately it was that fractious Weimar coalition that got her to call it a day.

“It is one of the most heartbreaking and difficult lessons you have to learn when you’re working in this space, especially as a young person, is that people are inherently imperfect,” Julianna said in an interview with The Texas Tribune. “Sometimes that imperfection means doing selfish or mean-spirited things with the intention of making positive change.”

She says problems included nepotism, a push for rigid agreement on a set of standard policies, and internal Democratic Party squabbles over strategy. Julianna also says she recognized that she needed to move beyond her political bubble.

Now, Julianna says she is stepping back from campaign work in hopes that speaking out in her newsletter and social media posts can help fix the problems and enable Democrats to eventually flip Texas blue.

Not much chance of that as long as the Donks have their intersectional purity tests that pretend to be inclusive and yet exclude anybody normal.

Partisan critics come with the political spotlight, but Julianna also gets attention from Democrats saying she was too supportive of Biden and that she has sacrificed some of her original progressive positions in order to fit in with the mainstream party.

While Julianna still describes herself as having progressive views, her positions are nuanced. She thinks that there should be a secure border but also that the government should expand pathways to citizenship, add more immigration judges and protect DACA recipients. Some people have criticized her for that stance, arguing that it is more aligned with Republican positions.

There's a lot more in the article, which runs in the Donk-friendly Texas Tribune.

Donks these days will turn on anyone who trims from the current party line, even if that means more rapid hemorrhaging of the men.

Democrats have mistaken attention for trust. They think a viral podcast clip can replace authenticity. They think a few “relatable” posts will fill the void left by decades of disdain. But men are not looking for content. They’re looking for meaning. They are tired of being told what’s wrong with them and desperate for someone to tell them what’s right. A party that once built bridges now burns them. A movement that once fought for workers now fights for abstractions no one believes in.

It wasn’t always this disconnected. The Democratic Party once inspired men to see themselves as part of something greater — families, unions and a country worth defending. Today, however, the same party mocks faith, discipline and fatherhood as punchlines. It worships inclusion but forgets loyalty. It preaches equality but forgets basic humanity.

That's been a long time in coming.  "The Democrats have done nothing but push men away for at least ten years and done so loudly and openly, backed up by the legacy press and Hollywood, where masculine men have been sidelined for the girl boss or intersectionality."  And Town Hall's Matt Vespa sees the reckoning.  "You cannot win national elections with just liberal white women and a bunch of gays, Democrats. It will never happen."

His colleague Brad Slager notes that Donk purity tests require women who are outside the intersectional critical mass also be denounced.

Whenever a woman becomes the first to reach an office or a milestone, the journalists stumble over themselves to highlight the “historical” nature of the event. That is, so long as the woman in question is from an approved political class. If it is a female who is conservative – such as Winsome Earl-Sears, the first-ever black female lieutenant governor in Virginia – then things become recalibrated and the historic nature needs to be tamped down.

In the case of [Japan's] Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, she has to be labeled as “a hardline conservative” to deemphasize her significance. Try for a moment the last time you have seen a Democrat or liberal described as “hardline” or other common terms used for conservatives, such as “extreme,” “right-wing,” “ultra-,” etc.

But call for the True Believers to back off, and brace for incoming.  "The range of views that one is allowed to hold or express while remaining a member in good standing of America’s center-left has gotten smaller. This means that fewer people are in it and Republicans are winning more elections."  That essay also invokes the "highly educated liberals," to the amusement of well-educated, or at least well-credentialed, John Hinderaker.

What Yglesias never pauses to consider is that the majority who believe it is unfair to allow men to compete in women’s sports may be right. If you start with the a priori assumption that “highly educated liberals” are right about all things, including their most indefensible prejudices, and anyone who disagrees is a bigot, then the question becomes: how can we get more of those bigots to vote for us?

On the Republican side, things are simpler. We think that our policies are good for the large majority of Americans, and we get more people to vote for us by tirelessly pointing out the merits of our policies and the foolishness of the Democrats’ policies. “Bigotry” doesn’t enter into it.

The Donks?  That omnium-gatherum of freakazoids is a bundle of squabbling factions united by little more than "Orange Man Bad."

This is why the “big tent” Democratic Party attracts disparate groups, such as environmental activists, eager central planners, redistributionists, anti-gun scolds, antifa goons, COVID tyrants, neo-New Dealers, radical Islamists, militant transgender moms, pride cultists, race hustlers, criminal coddlers, infanticide advocates, male-hating feminists, DEI zealots, busybodies, nannies, groomers, dancing geriatrics and raging protesters who have no idea what they’re protesting.

That article concludes, "[T]he Democratic Party, as constructed, does not want what’s in the best interests of the country, but instead wants what’s in the best interest of its political power."  Arguably, that is true of any political party, but in a constitutional republic a party manifesto ought offer a bundle that is attractive to sufficiently many voters to win the election.  At the national level, that bundle apparently includes secure borders, safe streets, competent education, and women's sports for women.