Independent women's votes have apparently shifted 34 points, they are now R+18.
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
Comments (49)
sorted by:
Why do they have votes at all? We don't need "voters" who are purely emotional and capable of wild swings.
Because if they don't vote, they'll argue they can't be taxed either. They also have a habit of going full terrorist when told no.
Who gives a fuck? You don't have the right to vote as an American male unless you sign up for the draft, while they get it free of any obligations.
Fuck em, take that right away, and slap the fuck outta them (perhaps metaphorically, perhaps not) if they complain.
I'd rather throw them in the draft than take their vote.
It'll do more good.
It does absolutely nothing, as the chances of a draft are 0%.
Of course, you're oblivious to that as to so much else, so you throw in your lot with the Dems.
laughs in Zelensky continuing to exist, Taiwan being relevant and Biden's increased interest in helping a feminist coup in Iran.
Make your prediction then.
Archive Link
I doubt it.
D+6 for female independents in the exit poll is my prediction.
Overall for women will be D+10 to D+15. In 2018 they were D+19. I bet I get closer to reality than FiveThirtyEight.
They will swing slightly away from voting for blind hatred as inflation bites, but not enough to change much.
Women will support whomever can provide for them with a minimal amount of work on their part. Usually, that means voting leftist so they can get government money with no strings attached. In an economy as bad as this, when their gibs are worth almost nothing due to inflation, they'll vote for the party they think is most likely to help men start earning money again, so they can have their wage slaves back.
Marriage rates at record lows and the majority of young men don't want kids either.
I think this tactic is going to fail hard. Their value is nowhere near what they think it is and is dropping fast.
Men always want kids. Young men aren't having kids, partly because they can't find a woman worth having them with, and partly because they're afraid, perhaps rightly, that they'll never be able to adequately provide for them.
I probably would have disagreed with you a handful of years ago, but in the end I think you're right. Probably influenced by a bit of my own change of mindset. I never wanted kids for years, I still don't like little kids much, but now I could at least say it wouldn't be all that bad.
The finding a woman worth having them with gets even worse as age and ability to adequately provide increase, as you really end up where the remaining women are nothing but mental cases and other people's problems.
Yeah I can think of some people I know well married with a decent size age gap and they certainly seem like the ones that are doing well with it.
Honestly I even get weird reactions from some people with just my guy friends because I'm spread out in age both older and younger, or that I have a pretty close relationship with my oldest nephew or cousin both around the early teenage years. It's always women that frown on stuff, seems like the rule now is everyone is in perpetual high school and you're only supposed to pay attention to those in your grade.
I'm lowkey getting worried I'm in that group. I fell for the "focus on your career and start seriously looking in your 30s" meme I got from my boomer mentors/relatives.
The women I see day to day now that im almost 30, getting into a career, and finishing school are personable enough but would they be women I'd want to start a family with? NOOooo 😯
Lol. Provide? You mean after she decides to take the kids, the house and his wages too?
How old are you guy? Do you have any male friends with divorce stories? How many of them made it out without having to sleep in their car while they hand over their wages or go to prison? How does that song go?
Show me a single, female college graduate between 30 and 35, and I'll show you a woman with a body count in the hundreds who is finding out that this is her last chance to settle for the best sperm donor she can get.
I must congratulate you on the comprehensiveness with which you didn't read what I wrote.
I read what you wrote. Did you read what I wrote? Want me to read it out loud to you? Or perhaps just help you with the big words?
I pointed out that our gynocentric society has revoked the social contract that is the foundation of western marriage and as a result the incentives for the majority of men to participate in marriage is at an all time low. The risk/reward is just shockingly bad for men.
If you are not aware, social competition between males for the privilege of breeding has been literally the primary driving force of civilization. Males compete with each other to provide resources to women in return for fidelity and knowing that their genes are being passed on. Historically that has been about 50% of males that get to have kids, and the rest don't.
One of the huge advantages of western society is that the social contract that sees enforced monogamy between partners (there are real consequences for cheating if you get caught) was singularly effective in increasing participation in society by young males; encouraging them to work hard and compete, because they had an excellent chance of securing a mate.
Well, now they don't. Women surf Tinder and order home delivered one-night-stands from a small percentage of the male population. Women attend college and fuck dozens of guys, and don't settle down. Even just four partners a year between the ages of 18 and 30 is 50 sexual partners. That is vastly more than I've ever had, and I am older than 30 by quite a bit.
AFAIK, the demographic for women with highest chance of being married for life is zero sexual partners before marriage and strong church attendance. Met any of those? Ever?
So young men can't find a high quality female to marry; All of them are standing line for a night with Chad or Tyrone. Chad and Tyrone are not willing to marry because they have a long line of willing partners. If a man is willing to pick up some left overs at 30 or so, his risks of utter financial and relationship catastrophe are very high, and there is basically no effective way to mitigate these risks. This situation eclipses the '[fear] ... that [the man] will never be able to adequately provide for them."
Men don't want kids, actually.
Bullshit. Young men always say they don't want kids until they hit 30, and then suddenly they do.
The fact is that men's biological urge to protect and provide for a family is every bit as strong as the female urge to bear children. To say that it isn't is to buy into one of the biggest feminist lies.
No, the biggest feminist lie is that we can't ignore biology to avoid a shitty deal. We absolutely can and should.
You can't ignore biology.
This is the major difference in opinion between us. We certainly agree that women are to blame for the overwhelming majority of societal problems. But while you seem to believe that the reasons for this are societal, I believe they are biological, which is why I don't agree with you that women's behaviour can be moderated by simply renegotiating the social contract. In any society with as much material abundance as ours, women will always behave the way they are behaving.
At the same time, and for the same reason, it will never be possible to convince most men to leave the reservation and go their own way. More men are doing it now than ever before, but biology means there will always be a legion of simps. It's inevitable.
I think that study conflates not wanting to have kids ever with not wanting to raise kids under current (and predicted) circumstances.
How come 44% of female independents are voting against torturing and killing you?
D+10 sounds ballpark right. Too bad, you should have predicted 95% Democrats so I could mock you for it later on.
~8% CPI.
I would have predicted D+25 or more if it wasn't for the fact that even they can't pretend inflation doesn't exist.
Inflation doesn't care about your female privilege, it'll still destroy your income.
You're so close. Almost as if people vote based on performance, not "to inconvenience men as much as possible". But you won't let anything get in the way of your professional victim complex.
Inflation is way worse here in Europe... cause you have your own sources of fuel and we have to rely on the folks whose economy our regimes tried to destroy with sanctions.
No, it just proves that emergencies can overrule the desire to harm.
We all have to make sacrifices for
the More Feminine WayUkrainian democracy.8% is not an 'emergency' and you have never established any 'desire to harm'...
8% inflation is 4x the recommended number. It is an emergency.
Europe is suffering under far worse.
This could be the ones that swing with 'popular opinion' and sense the pendulum swing coming so want to be on the winning team than be associated with the side that brought the hard times
In Machiavellian terms, these are the people you immediately kick out of positions when you gain power as they are the ones most likely to backstab you for personal gain.
At the risk of sounding like Imp, you are describing virtually all women. Truly based women are so rare that they almost immediately become gigantic political figures a la Kari Lake or that blonde chick from the Netherlands. It’s always a “man bites dog” situation.
Hey you're talking to a guy who's perfect partner is the reincarnation of Olga of Kiev, I know unfortunately 99.9% of women aren't like that.
But one of the reasons we are in such a bad position in the west is we have a lot of 'weathervain voters' that don't vote based on logic or morals and in turn we get our current list of degenerates as 'leaders'.
A degenerate society will have degenerate leaders.
Hypocritical grifter.
Remember, one of her best friends was a drag performer and she attended many shows.
Of course, because she won, we have to support her, but I'd be getting a Kevlar backplate for the inevitable backstab.
Kari Lake will be a huge star in the Republican party whether we like it or not.
The MAGA base loves her.
People who are the biggest proponents of Trump 2024 like famed pollster Richard Baris and historian Larry Schweikart seriously believe that Kari Lake will be Trump's successor in inheriting the MAGA movement.
I personally hope DeSantis will take the mantle but I understand that Lake will be a huge force in the future GOP.
She has a lot of people behind her.
I think it is a combination of moms starting fighting against school groomers and the complete dehumanization of women via trans ideology.
The good news is that as soon as enough women change their opinion the rest will follow it because of popularity. It may even give them that virtue signaling rush they crave so much. Fight the system but from a safe distance.
They fixed the voting problem so it will match their polls.