by Stephen Green
The party of Sam Brinton — the mustachioed cross-dressing luggage thief that Democrats trusted with the nation’s nuclear waste — spent a day or two trying to convince the world that JD Vance was too “weird” to be vice president. Then they went and topped themselves (is that a genuine Lefty kink?) with the cringiest Zoom call ever.
Featuring celebrities you probably saw in movies no less than a decade ago, the #WhiteDudesForKamala Zoom call was billed as [feelings], and the New York Times was eager to play along, saying the group “showed the breadth of Democratic support for her candidacy.”
Harris is black(ish), you see, so white dudes wouldn’t normally vote for her because literally everything is racist. When a white dude votes for a black(ish) candidate, it’s a world-shattering event. Also: Barack who?
The diversity was off the charts.
This is what Democracy looks like. White Dudes for Harris is letting every kind of white man speak. White men in Hollywood, and White men governors, and White men actors, and White men running for Senate, and White men singers, and White men Union leaders, and White men…
— Dave Mason (@EvadMason) July 30, 2024
“The Lord of the Rings” supporting actor Sean Astin — most often seen these days on X — set the tone, explaining that the call was a chance to show “that men can gather to talk about how we feel.” My old friend, Arizona Central columnist and undisputed king of stuff Jon Gabriel, put the proper dude spin on that message.
https://t.co/pbDEG4r4cd pic.twitter.com/yJoJccPrYg
— Jon Gabriel (@exjon) July 30, 2024
While I didn’t attend the call myself, based on everything I’ve read and watched, “Iron Man” (2008) costar Jeff Bridges set the tone.
Jeff Bridges!
lol. He's such a boomer he has mic on mute and no one can hear him talking.
mic comes back on, speaking to previous guy: "That's terrific, your'e a black man here with us." pic.twitter.com/Ew5dmPBON8
— Lomez (@L0m3z) July 30, 2024
Mark Hamill, having completed his part in the effort to destroy Star Wars, was there, too.
The Zoom call started with an estimated 60,000 attendees which eventually grew to 160,000 or more before it was over. But since so much of the coverage on X came from conservatives mocking the attendees, I’d wager that a decent-sized fraction of the attendees weren’t exactly there to show their support.
And, dude, was there ever plenty to mock. Here’s the organizer of the call, explaining how he’s been thinking a lot lately about men and how he wishes we didn’t have to be so manly — not that he’s at much risk of that.
There is absolutely no way he could:
-make a woman cum
-protect a woman from a male threat
-teach a son how to be a manHim and all men like him are revolting. My ovaries committed seppuku after watching this video. pic.twitter.com/uVofLTSYcS
— Sam (@Samantha_SN1) July 30, 2024
There’s not one of my gay friends who couldn’t beat up three of this guy. He is no dude.
Republican pollster Whit Ayres warned the BBC that it “backfires when you start attacking people because of their identity. Because everyone else who shares their identity feels like you’re attacking them.” And that’s true enough, which is why last week I cautioned men against attacking Harris on her personal history. But as a bona fide white dude, my privilege extends to mocking these wanna-be white dudes.
Cringe is their thing.
“Masculinity has been coopeted by the MAGA right”? Well, apparently, that’s where all of it is. The left has to make it a social justice statement to support Kamala because there is no other reason to support this false facade. Faced with nothing but failure and disaster, everything is a gimmick with Democrats.
I though I was going to see the members of The View in beards.
Is a man “gelded” if he votes for a woman?
Sorry you will never understand manhood, I dont have the crayons nor the will to help you.
No but they may suffer anorchia.
Your deeply internalized misogyny and self-loathing will never cease to amaze me.
Watch a MINUTE of that You Tube Kamala’s White Men for Kamala call.
The soy boys say it themselves.
You are uninformed.
https://x.com/watchTENETnow/status/1818077978179289511
No, I wanted to be sure that I correctly understood kitt’s point, and that’s why I asked for clarification. She says that voting for a woman makes a man less of a man. Not voting specifically for Harris—voting for a woman. That’s plain old misogyny.
Where, exactly, does she say that?
She never said that. Michael is unable to understand meme humor. Typical stupid democrat.
Memes are generally posted to make some kind of point—particularly political memes. Is that not the case here?
Where did she, either in statement or meme, say that men do not vote for a woman? Or, are you lying, as you have done so often before?
I dont, Simpering males that cant stand Trump because he had side chicks are now voting for the side chick, Desperation to be part of any herd. Harris isnt a woman she is a childless, mindless communist.
Then what did you mean when you wrote that men who vote for women “may suffer anorchia”?

I simply made the point they were not technically geldings. A Woman should earn votes not have them awarded to her because she sexually satisfied a powerful political member of the party. She is well beyond that ability now at her advanced years.
You should have the courage of your convictions. Saying something and then pretending that you didn’t say it is a child’s approach to things.
You wouldn’t know courage if it kicked you in your labia.
Obviously, unless they intentionally misrepresent what is said, they have nothing to complain about. So, they make up lies about what is said and then put on their pussy hats and feign outrage. This one here, in particular. He’s known for adding his own personal interpretation, then whining about it
You know that falling back on “misogyny” to avoid discussing the obvious failures of Kamala is your last line of defense, right? Isn’t a bit early to be committing all your reserves?
No. Just Kamala.
There’s a reason Kamala attracts weak men.
She’s pro-equity.
It’s the E in DEI.
Here’s what she said about it, what manly man would be for this?
1956 called. It wants its vision of gender roles back.
Ah yes 1956 when a home, car and putting kid through college all on one income, the home a wonder of modern appliances. A high-school diploma meant you were prepared for life in the middle class. What a horrid time.
Do you understand what the phrase “gender roles” means? Your comment suggests that you don’t.
In 1956, just as today, just as in 1856 or 1056 or 56 or 56 BC, the gender situation was exactly the same as they are right now. Gender is not fluid, gender is not tangible, gender is not multipliable. Gender is what it is and it is set in stone at conception. Gender has not changed simply because a mental illness has become popular and profitable.
She was talking ECONOMICS, not sexuality, mike.
And economically, someone who is striving and taking risks DESERVES a higher reward, IF his enterprise succeeds.
Is someone else is content with a job that requires no thinking, no abilities, he has no reason to even think he DESERVES the same as a hard working striver.
I wasn’t referring to Harris. You were talking about gender when you wrote “what manly man would be for this?”
You will receive a multi interpretation when the politics entwines itself with mental illness. If that confuses you tough you are a hopeless democrat, just vote for who you are told to, you get zero to say about it, none of you have for a very long time.
The “politics” part is about whether or not to vote for Harris. The “mental illness” part is caring about how your outdated vision of a “manly man” would cast his vote, or suggesting that only a man without testicles would vote for Harris.
Kamala has done nothing in her career to even suggest she could be qualified to be President of the United States. In fact, as Vice President, she made a strong case that she is utterly incompetent to serve as VP, much less President. So, anyone voting for Kamala is voting for her because of her sex. Nothing more. There is nothing else to promote her.
Any “man” voting for President of the United States based on that is not only not a MAN, but is also no American.
And what year is Kamala putting forth with her, “White Dudes for Kamala,” call?
It’s her positions on issues that is the turn off for independent men who take on responsibilities.
Men like these would happily vote for a Maggie Thatcher whose position was, “Socialism only seems to work, it only succeeds until you run out of other people’s money.”
It is entirely the fault of the person if they are not in an equitable station with others in life. It is not governments role to make people equal in what ever aspect or criteria. That is the problem with democrats. They have a misguided view of the purpose of government.
This simply shows how stupid she is. Equality is not everyone winding up at the same place; equality is everyone having the same opportunities to end up where they truly deserve to end up.
I can’t believe that you’re actually going with “guys who vote for Harris must be gay.” It’s not 1978, and you’re not eleven years old.
Well, YOU’RE voting for her, so… case closed.
Jesse “Mr. Recto-Fossal Ambiguity” Watters.
What has he been ambiguous about?
So, who came up with this “White Dudes for Kamala, thing?
“Judge” Merchan’s daughter, Loren Merchan, her partner at the political firm is the one who contrived the White Dudes for Harris.
No wonder the “judge” won’t lift Trump’s gag order on speaking about him or HIS DAUGHTER!