So we recently heard that the Dems are throwing down $20M to figure out why they cant connect with male (especially young male) voters, and this is apparently one of the early talks. Within this whole discussion we have (but not limited to):
Hiring a woman to tell them what men want (lol).
Dem's policies are fine, it is just bad messaging that makes people not realize they would like it.
A soyboy cuck declaring men want to be bad and do bad things like dominate and rape women, and Republicans do well because they indulge in that impulse.
She-Troll thinks that being an oil field roughneck and an Amazon warehouse worker are the same tier of job. Also thinks that said roughnecks are struggling to make ends meet despite being one of the highest paid jobs in the country.
Both are extremely dismissive of immigration and think that people only think it is a problem because they were told it is one.
Both think the problem Dems have connecting with voters is because they come off as "dorks" who are overly concerned with policies, instead of connecting emotionally with voters "like Trump does."
Ultimately, they conclude that the solution is to start pandering to male voters like they do other racial and gender groups, but make it so that it doesnt sound like pandering as that does turn off male voters.
Also thinks that said roughnecks are struggling to make ends meet despite being one of the highest paid jobs in the country.
I mean, if you see most of them you would think they were making peanuts. Its an extreme problem in the industry of the guys taking their absurdly high pay, and then spending it like new lotto winners until they can barely make their bill payments.
Most of my male family members were oilfield for life, and half of them could barely escape the trailer park despite coming home with easy multiple 5 figure monthly incomes. And the toll it takes on your body catches up fast, meaning they go from loaded to broke quickly because aforementioned poor spending habits mean zero savings.
So them saying this shows how little thought they actually put into anything, because while it looks like it at the end result, the life leading up to that is entirely different and filled with far more unique challenges.
They just thought "conservative, low IQ workers must be failing at life because that's how it works!"
I know, my point being is that its an observation that you can make offhandedly, and that the assumption you make for why it is so can say a lot about your implicit biases.
Such as the fact that their struggles are nearly identical to the common black guys (poverty backgrounds, sudden rushes of money, materialistic spending), yet they think extremely lowly of these men while fluffing the nigger.
A lot of people, maybe most people, will just make any amount of money they make vanish into thin air for absolutely no visible benefit to themselves except maybe a newer car once in a while. If we didn't have Social Security to set some of their money aside and give it back in carefully controlled amounts they'd be totally done for by retirement age.
Ultimately, they conclude that the solution is to start pandering to male voters like they do other racial and gender groups, but make it so that it doesnt sound like pandering as that does turn off male voters.
But they can't. Their pandering to other groups isn't just saying "We think you're better than white men", it's also backed up by policy discriminating in favor of those groups. You can't discriminate in favor of everyone, and at this point, even simply not discriminating against men is an extreme right-wing position and would never even be considered by any politically viable democrat.
You can't pander to a group in your messaging while actively discriminating against them at every level of society and expect them not to notice the discrepancy eventually. Especially if all your messaging up to that point was the opposite.
I will add this: the disconnect with Democrats is not recent. It goes back a long way, much longer than most of you are even aware. To illustrate, I remind everyone of one of Ronald Regan's famous one line zingers: "The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
He said that in 1964, while stumping for Barry Goldwater.
The same Barry Goldwater that the infamous "daisy" TV advertisement was created to attack.
Do you recognize the moral slander inherent in that ad?
Much as we like to think things have only recently gotten this divided, it is not a recent thing. New Yorker film critic Pauline Kael famously remarked in 1972 that she didn't know a Nixon voter:
I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theater I can feel them.
I've been conservative for over 40 years, and lived through Reagan and all that followed. In all that time, national level Democrats were always disconnected from regular normal people, but now this extends to nearly all of them.
Ultimately, they conclude that the solution is to start pandering to male voters like they do other racial and gender groups, but make it so that it doesnt sound like pandering as that does turn off male voters.
It would also turn off the groups they actually cater to since their whole brand is scapegoating the hated straight white male and giving everyone else free shit on his dime.
So we recently heard that the Dems are throwing down $20M to figure out why they cant connect with male (especially young male) voters, and this is apparently one of the early talks. Within this whole discussion we have (but not limited to):
Hiring a woman to tell them what men want (lol).
Dem's policies are fine, it is just bad messaging that makes people not realize they would like it.
A soyboy cuck declaring men want to be bad and do bad things like dominate and rape women, and Republicans do well because they indulge in that impulse.
She-Troll thinks that being an oil field roughneck and an Amazon warehouse worker are the same tier of job. Also thinks that said roughnecks are struggling to make ends meet despite being one of the highest paid jobs in the country.
Both are extremely dismissive of immigration and think that people only think it is a problem because they were told it is one.
Both think the problem Dems have connecting with voters is because they come off as "dorks" who are overly concerned with policies, instead of connecting emotionally with voters "like Trump does."
Ultimately, they conclude that the solution is to start pandering to male voters like they do other racial and gender groups, but make it so that it doesnt sound like pandering as that does turn off male voters.
I mean, if you see most of them you would think they were making peanuts. Its an extreme problem in the industry of the guys taking their absurdly high pay, and then spending it like new lotto winners until they can barely make their bill payments.
Most of my male family members were oilfield for life, and half of them could barely escape the trailer park despite coming home with easy multiple 5 figure monthly incomes. And the toll it takes on your body catches up fast, meaning they go from loaded to broke quickly because aforementioned poor spending habits mean zero savings.
So them saying this shows how little thought they actually put into anything, because while it looks like it at the end result, the life leading up to that is entirely different and filled with far more unique challenges.
They just thought "conservative, low IQ workers must be failing at life because that's how it works!"
Fair point, but that is a consequence of poor spending habits and not necessarily poor policy like it would be with what the Left wants to do.
I know, my point being is that its an observation that you can make offhandedly, and that the assumption you make for why it is so can say a lot about your implicit biases.
Such as the fact that their struggles are nearly identical to the common black guys (poverty backgrounds, sudden rushes of money, materialistic spending), yet they think extremely lowly of these men while fluffing the nigger.
A lot of people, maybe most people, will just make any amount of money they make vanish into thin air for absolutely no visible benefit to themselves except maybe a newer car once in a while. If we didn't have Social Security to set some of their money aside and give it back in carefully controlled amounts they'd be totally done for by retirement age.
Ironically, the government already spent the Social Security fund. The only "assets" in it are Treasuries, i.e. glorified IOUs.
That's because they're retarded. Oil fielders could retire in half a decade to a part time gig if they didnt have negative IQ
But they can't. Their pandering to other groups isn't just saying "We think you're better than white men", it's also backed up by policy discriminating in favor of those groups. You can't discriminate in favor of everyone, and at this point, even simply not discriminating against men is an extreme right-wing position and would never even be considered by any politically viable democrat.
You can't pander to a group in your messaging while actively discriminating against them at every level of society and expect them not to notice the discrepancy eventually. Especially if all your messaging up to that point was the opposite.
*Some disgusting blob
Do 👏 better 👏 sweaty
You pretty much nail it.
I will add this: the disconnect with Democrats is not recent. It goes back a long way, much longer than most of you are even aware. To illustrate, I remind everyone of one of Ronald Regan's famous one line zingers: "The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
He said that in 1964, while stumping for Barry Goldwater.
The same Barry Goldwater that the infamous "daisy" TV advertisement was created to attack.
Do you recognize the moral slander inherent in that ad?
Much as we like to think things have only recently gotten this divided, it is not a recent thing. New Yorker film critic Pauline Kael famously remarked in 1972 that she didn't know a Nixon voter:
https://www.commentary.org/john-podhoretz/the-actual-pauline-kael-quote%E2%80%94not-as-bad-and-worse/
I've been conservative for over 40 years, and lived through Reagan and all that followed. In all that time, national level Democrats were always disconnected from regular normal people, but now this extends to nearly all of them.
Are you that goofball that killed an albatross?
It would also turn off the groups they actually cater to since their whole brand is scapegoating the hated straight white male and giving everyone else free shit on his dime.