Foseti points to John Derbyshires's summary of various points made about the much discussed women's vote by me, Whiskey, and Heartiste. Here's the latter's extract from a recent poll:
Married men: for Romney by 54-35, Romney's margin 19.
Married women: for Romney, 49-42, Romney's margin 7.
Single men: for Obama, 47-38, Obama's margin 9.
Single women: for Obama, 60-31, Obama's margin 29.
Of course, it helps to remove the effects of race and so forth, but the effect of marriage is still very much there. One way to sum up the demographics of the American party system is that the Republicans are the party of married white people, and the more different somebody is from that norm, the more likely they are to vote Democratic.
Or you could look at it on a continuum: the Republicans are the party of married white fathers and the Democrats are the party of single black mothers.
From the Man from Mars' naive perspective, the party of married white fathers really ought to be able to beat the party single black mothers. But, perhaps the former has such an obvious advantage that it gets hijacked by special interests more? Or, perhaps the cultural industry is so bored and disgruntled with the natural ruling party that it makes vast efforts to make people feel that voting for the party of black single mothers is cool.
From the Man from Mars' naive perspective, the party of married white fathers really ought to be able to beat the party single black mothers. But, perhaps the former has such an obvious advantage that it gets hijacked by special interests more? Or, perhaps the cultural industry is so bored and disgruntled with the natural ruling party that it makes vast efforts to make people feel that voting for the party of black single mothers is cool.
Posts
32 comments:
"Party of married white males" might describe who votes GOP, but that hardly means that their interests of average white married men are advanced by the GOP. Both parties actually represent different groups of multimillionaires' interest. "Creative class" millionaires are mostly married white men but strongly democratic, while resource extraction millionaires are solidly republican. The biggest group of millionaires, financiers, are powerful enough to be represented by both parties. As a result, financiers can safely vote social issues secure in knowing that their financial interests are protected by both parties.
This is the normal state of affairs in long lived republics. At one time Rome had one party for the military elite, another for the burghers and yeoman plebs. After a few hundred years, it denigrated like modern America into two parties of corrupt elites. Unlike Rome, we seem to lack ambitious and charismatic general eager for a coup, so we can look forward the current surprisingly stable system for a long time.
The main problem is too many whites vote Democratic because they get views and values from liberal media/academia.
But if cons were better at entertainment and intellectualism, this wouldn't be a problem.
Single women HATE HATE HATE White men.
"Or perhaps the cultural industry..."
Frankfurt School theory! - once again used (mostly) unironically on the right. Once again supporting my thesis: While critical theorists on the left have long since rejected the original Frankfurt School models as overly simplistic, critics on the marginal right have adopted these classic mid-20th century cultural-Marxist models almost unchanged.
Speaking of fraternizing: the moderator of Thurday's VP debate, Martha Raddatz, had as a guest to her first wedding in 1991, one "Barry Obama."
God, the incestuous relationship between pols and press makes me sick. You'd have thought she would have had enough integrity to withdraw her name or to have refused the job, but no........
She should be make to make a full disclosure right after she introduces herself.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/10/abc-news-scrambles-to-cover-up-barack-obamas-attendance-at-vp-debate-moderators-wedding/
Well here's one married white mom who I'm guessing will be voting Democrat: Vice Interview with Jemima Kirke of HBO's Girls.
Aaron in Israel said...
Frankfurt School theory! - once again used (mostly) unironically on the right.
Everytime I see a negro genious hacker or victorian black CSI or a black Arthurian princess on American TV I go "How unironic!".
by me, Whiskey,
Did anyone else had a scare there?
"Single women HATE HATE HATE White men."
And yet a third of them is planning on voting for a white man. Sorcery?
And what's up with half of single men planning on voting for Obama? Does logic compel one to conclude that half of the single men in America are gay and that they get anal tingles for a black man?
The single whites who'll vote for Obama are probably a younger group than the married ones. People are generally more gullible and naive the younger they are. That his policies don't match his image doesn't register; it's all image and showmanship.
The standard manosphere analysis is that women like the welfare state because they get the economic resources of beta males transferred to them without marrying them. This frees them up to chase the alpha males. It's an unstable system, though, because the beta males can eventually figure out what's going on. Then they either become slackers, read Roissy and become players, or leave the country like Roosh. In all these cases, they stop working so hard and then tax sources for the welfare state dry up. I think the swing vote is unmarried middle class white women. It's really up to them whether they are willing to take a more long term view and realize the current state of things can't be permanent or whether they'll continue thinking short term and keep voting for and helping to elect socialist politicians until they drive the country into an economic crisis.
"Or you could look at it on a continuum: the Republicans are the party of married white fathers and the Democrats are the party of single black mothers"
You could, but probably not if you had a triple-digit IQ.
Maya said, "'Single women HATE HATE HATE White men.'
And yet a third of them is planning on voting for a white man. Sorcery?"
I'm 99% sure that was a parody of Whiskey.
"And what's up with half of single men planning on voting for Obama?
Does logic compel one to conclude that half of the single men in America are gay and that they get anal tingles for a black man?"
The single black men are voting for Obama because he's black. The straight single white men who vote for Obama are following the lead of single white liberal women. Gay men, with the exception of a few diehard gay conservatives, vote Dem as a rule.
While critical theorists on the left have long since rejected the original Frankfurt School models as overly simplistic...
"Critical theorists" sit around in a locked room in another dimension playing with each other's dongs. Nothing that happens in that room leaks into the real world.
Back in the real world, however, the "simplistic" models of the Frankfurt School are used every minute of every day by vast, surging hordes of Orcs -- media Orcs, entertainment Orcs, journalism Orcs, education Orcs, government Orcs, etc. -- to inflict massive, sustained, ceaseless destruction on the American nation.
To some extent that's a function of age. A lot of the single people voting for Obama are also young, perhaps still in college. In the 2008 election the one age cohort of whites Obama carried was the 18-29 year olds.
I don't think anyone considers "black single mothers" to be cool. Rather the left depicts these poor creatures as objects of pity married to a "We shall overcome" story of surmounting adversity (with a little help from my friends - kindly liberal minded people in the caring professions). An adjacent and more angry narrative presents these women as victims of unjust persecution and oppression by a rather vaguely described crowd.
There is also the upper-middle-class liberated career woman theme of "My body, my rights, my life." Single motherhood becomes a choice. It doesn't feature too much when discussing black single mothers though who don't appear to be proudly asserting independence by having children alone.
The basic liberal stance is "I understand your pain." Sympathy for all that suffers - down as far as the animals, up as far as God.
The real problem is the meager share of the married vote for Republicans (compared to what it ought to be), not the votes of single women.
Geez... not another shout-out to Roissy.
"And what's up with half of single men planning on voting for Obama? Does logic compel one to conclude that half of the single men in America are gay and that they get anal tingles for a black man? "
Haha. And also what of the fact that the young single men who vote for democrats are (from anecdotal observation, I'm sure others will concur) generally much more politically vocal and dedicated to their views than young single women who vote for democrats- who mostly do it out of casual adherence to trends. Where does that phenomenon fit into all the hate hate hating of beta males?
Caplan's argument only shows what's been clear long ago: he is a dishonest hack.
Steve,
I think I mentioned the following suggestion about six months ago on one of the threads on this blog but nobody responded or even noticed.
The Conservative and Republican gap with single women, including single White women, is very noticeable.
Thank you Whiskey, Heartiste, Steve, and the Derb for bringing this fact to our attention again(Whiskey deserves special mention in this regard).
My suggestion is that Republicans should take Women's issues off the board by completely caving into them by offering cradle to grave security for all women regardless of race with special incentives to married women who are starting a family.
Since the Repubs are often associated with the patriarchy by the Libs why not go "all in" and adopt a paternaltistic "women first doctrine" as the offical party doctrine: generous bonuses for the first two healthy chidren; stay a home mothers who home school their children generously subsidized; generous loans for women who want to start a business...etc....
Since a lot of men who are Repubs fancy themselves traditionalists who are the protectors of the fairer sex they should not object to a women first policy.
The only other way I see to close the single women gap that Repubs have is to encourage them to get married ... maybe we need more financial incentives to young men and women to get and stay married.
I dunno ... well these are my thoughts albeit at the natal stage..
I do know that talking politics with single women feels like I am talking to a Martian sometimes.
For instance, despite the fact that many policies inniated by Clinton helped destroy the country years later (think NAFTA, GATT/Free trade with China, repealing Glass-Steagall, etc ..) they still think he is a saint...
I don't get it ... I guess it is because Clinton is an Alpha male who promised them a lot of goodies...?
Whiskey if you are out there please explain it to us... one more time.
Thanks.
"Geez... not another shout-out to Roissy."
Oh, come on. Roissy to the right wing bloggers is what Al Sharpton is to the black folks. Most of the respectable, coherent ones would be embarrassed to carry on like he does, but most of them still like the idea of revering him. Silly, bafoonish mascots play their small part in forming communities. It's cute.
P.S. most kids my age enjoy Homer Simpson, Peter Griffin and Eric Cartman.
"It's cute."
diminishment by assertion?
ps you sound afraid. and bitter.
The Conservative and Republican gap with single women, including single White women, is very noticeable.
Then you should have no difficulty in telling me, how big IS this gap, exactly? Not the meaningless "single women" gap - the gap between single white women and single white men of the same age?
"Then you should have no difficulty in telling me, how big IS this gap, exactly? Not the meaningless "single women" gap - the gap between single white women and single white men of the same age?."
Don't know if there are such studies..
When I said noticeable I meant something that I noticed... anecdotally but seems to be borne out by the Pew study cited by Derb and mentioned in Steve's post which doesn't control for age.
Why would the gap cited between single men and single women be "meaningless" just because the gap doesn't specify the ages?
I guess you want to argue that the gap is due to age more than gender.. or at least could be.
I guess one way we could normalize the Pew study for our purposes is to figure out what the average ages of single men and single women are.
One study I looked at suggested that for every decade of adulthood a higher percentage of men than woman are never married. This makes sense to me, becuase I know several guys who have been married and divorced three times, thereby taking 3 ladies out of the never married pool, while at the same time knowing only one or two guys who were never married. I am not sure if there are studies which show which gender is more inclined to have had multiple spouses and divorces, but I suspect it is men with the trophy second or third wife.
If the average ages of singlehood are roughly equal, than the Pew study cited by Steve and Derb and others would suggest that the gap is a result of gender (or sex if you want to be less PC) and not age related.
I don't think the gender gap can be explained by age differences ..., but I am a little lazy so I hope somebody else can prove it.
"diminishment by assertion?
ps you sound afraid. and bitter"
Oh no, Roissy. How could anyone ever even attempt to diminish you? You are so impressive, intelligent and Alpha. Like a proud eagle soaring in free skies.
I was talking about all these nerds who link to you and give you a nod, now and then. Obviously, you are their leader and they sense your superiority. These chumps are so insecure, they actually read the studies that they use to support their assertions. What can you do with these sad betas? It's down right omega how some of them can argue without resorting to logical fallacies.
But, hey, not everyone can be a winner like you with self-reported stories of success to back you up, now can they? You, Sir, are like a religious text- so powerful that you get to contradict common sense, observable reality, sciense and your very own self. I bow to you, Sir!
"The Conservative and Republican gap with single women, including single White women, is very noticeable." - Republicans can't really out democrat the democrats, they are still the uncool party on top of everything else, and won't get the votes. though they will and are driving people away.
" These chumps are so insecure, they actually read the studies that they use to support their assertions."
These chumps are so insecure, they actually read the studies that they use to support their assertions.
Damn, Maya callin' fools out, Son!
Seneca,
It's not just the age, but the race of these sigle people that's under scrutiny.
Several people seemed to have looked at the "single women" statistics and decided that "single white women" would correspond to the same statistical values. Seeing how so many black women are unmarried and also, since the number of single black men able to vote is significantly smaller than that of eligble black women, it's very reasonable to assume that the gender numbers are scewed by race.
Anecdotally, I'd say that young, educated white women are, on average, only slightly more liberal than young educated white men. I'd also say that white millenials are more accepting, but less idealistic than the baby boomers. I think that if I were to poll everyone in my extended circle of peers, most people would be pro-gay marriage while over half would be against affirmative action. Also, I'd say that my generation is less obsessed with gender/sex issues/wars. Perhaps, unlike the boomers and the Xers, we've had the benefit of seeing just who exactly gets the most involved with sex greivances groups, and who wants to resemble them? Besides, they might have overdone it with all those annoying assemblies and after school specials. From mid high school on, sex partisanship has had the feel of something boring and vaguely embarrassing among the Honors/AP crowd, at least. And we are the generation that grew up within the flood of divorces, so most of the people my age that I've met feels strongly about fathers' rights sinse they or people they were close to had been affected by the skewed laws. Also, everyone I know in my age group and white (even the conservative men with lots of guns) understand that the contraceptive pill is often used for medical purposes and thus should be covered by insurance. Oh, and preventing accidental pregnancies is a good thing among my peers, and I've never ever met anyone who claimed otherwise. Ditto birth control pill for men. However, a significant number of my peers seems to be pro-life, lots of debates on that topic in high school, college and even now. Personally, I've met more pro-life young women than men.
Tl;dr: It seems to me that the ideological differences between the young white men and the young white women are very much exaggerated.
My suggestion is that Republicans should take Women's issues off the board by completely caving into them by offering cradle to grave security for all women regardless of race with special incentives to married women who are starting a family.
So... surrender our principles and become just like the Democrats. I'm sure for Congressmen and consultants and all the DC hangers-on this is a perfectly acceptable solution. But I don't see what it does for people who would like to see a smaller government and lower taxes.
And who will pay the taxes? Are you planning to offer this cradle-to-grave security only to women? I sure as hell ain't getting up for work in the morning if doing so gives me only a marginal increase in my standard of living.
"My suggestion is that Republicans should take Women's issues off the board by completely caving into them by offering cradle to grave security for all women regardless of race with special incentives to married women who are starting a family."
This would make me even less likely to vote Republican. I'm looking for a political party that doesn't pander to crazy whims of special interest groups. GOP would make itself more attractive to the taxpayer by dropping the religious fringe, not by adopting the feminist fringe. Can't we have a party with a practical, sensible platform, instead of an emotional one geared towards leeches and followers of dogma?
Personally, here are some things that the Republican party could change about itself to get my vote:
1. Abortion- because without it we'll have even more feral and disabled children running around ghettoes and trailer parks.
2. Gay marriage because the opposition to it is based solely on emotion and dogma- 1. God said no 2. Eww 3. It will lead to people marrying baby birds and the apocalypse.
HOWEVER, I might have been inclined to vote Republican regardless of the 2 issues listed above if the Republican party actually stayed conservative on other issues:
1. Take a stand against harmful immigration.
2. Stand up for fathers' rights (Yes, girls have daddies too, we aren't produced asexually. Some of us even have brothers and sons along with a basic sense of fairness.)
3. Take a stand against affirmative action.
4. Take a stand against the ridiculous disparate impact law suits.
Here are some things up for grabs- not even sure which party was supposed to have been more likely to hold these positions:
1. Quit getting us into useless wars.
2. Tell the truth about the role of public education and what it can and can't fix. Quit wasting money trying to solve problems that public education was never meant to and will never be able to solve. End the costly, counter-productive and annoying reforms.
As far as alienating women, specifically, all the GOP would have to do is quit trolling us by pretending to hold retards in high regard:
1. Sarah Palin (who is a bigger affirmative action embarrassement than Obama) wanted women to pay for their own rape kits.
2. Some radio retard who's apparentally popular among the republicans puts a foot in his mouth all the time, most recentely by demonstrating that he doesn't know how and when oral contraceptives are commonly used.
3. Some dumbass elected to public office in some village with three horses and two dogs went on record to demonstrate that he doesn't know how female anatomy works and where babies come from.
Dumb stuff like that. But as annoying as that crap is, it's not why so many people stay away. A lot of us could deal with random clowns if GOP had anything substantial to offer. It doesn't.
"special incentives to married women who are starting a family."
Oh, and I almost forgot, how are special incentives for married women starting families different from special incentives for married men starting families?
The most annoying part of the gender partisanship machine is the pretense that our interests aren't completely interwined.
Maya, while I like some of your past comments, it doesn't behoove you to attack Roissy. He's clearly one of the most talented writers on the alternative right. He is up there with Sailer, Derbyshire, and Mencius in terms of those who have been most influential in shaping the alt-right worldview, which is a fair contender to become predominant after the coming complete collapse of the US dollar.
Indeed, Roissy might be the single biggest reason why said worldview is now waxing among young men, and alarming the more intelligent members of the left:
http://midwestballadreview.tumblr.com/post/20860366027/derbyshires-firing-is-an-ideological-matter
Leave aside whether or not you believe his conquests are legitimate; clearly he has a female fan club on the internet (look at his followers), so that can be verified. More important than his personal scoreboard is how he teaches legions of young men to unchain themselves and rise up.
You can boil down game into a few key principles:
1. Always retain higher status. Be the center of attention in some arena, whether that is playing guitar, giving speeches, or simply having your friends speak highly of you in unsolicited ways.
2. Women do not want you to do what they say immediately. Never be servile.
3. Never apologize; women do not want to hear an apology even when you are in the wrong.
4. Take command of the situation. You don't need to order for her, but don't ask her opinion.
5. Always have options. To close one, she must know that you have the ability to attract other women.
6. Stay in good physical condition and dress reasonably well.
7. Keep her safe from physical assaults by other males. This goes without saying, but takes numerous forms, including acting on the knowledge that Truth's favorites have little future time orientation.
8. Never tolerate any form of verbal abuse. If she sees that it gets results, she will lose respect for you. She wants you to stand up to her.
There is more in this vein, but ultimately the issue is that until women themselves are retrained to be more like their mothers and grandmothers and less bitchy/hostile, modern men *must* -- for the good of the species -- learn game. It is absolutely the only way that the average intelligent college graduate can find a reasonably attractive woman before 30 and reproduce.
Post a Comment