G.L.Piggy [at] gmail.com
Recent Comments
- kanonymous on The Myth of Male Hideousness
- Ryu, Aryan Warrior Princess on The Myth of Male Hideousness
- Tori on The Myth of Male Hideousness
- Mohammed Chang on This is not The Jungle
- dan on The guns that killed Tamerlan Tsarnaev weren’t illegal
- dan on The guns that killed Tamerlan Tsarnaev weren’t illegal
GLP Approved
- Captain Capitalism
- Dalrock
- Dennis Mangan
- Econ Log
- Elusive Wapiti
- Foseti
- Hawaiian Libertarian
- HBD Bibliography
- Heartiste
- Lion of the Blogosphere
- Marginal Revolution
- Matt Forney
- Randall Parker
- Razib Khan
- Reihan Salam
- Roosh V
- Simon Grey
- SOBL
- Steve Sailer
- The Last Psychiatrist
- The Spearhead
- Thrasymachus
- Ulysses
- Vox Day
Tweet Tweet
Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
The press pretending that Romney slaughtered Obama in the first debate might be to try to get the sympathy vote.
Come on Chuck, I didn’t see this written elsewhere. Give yourself credit. No one dared to bring up the ‘alpha dominance’ bit and women despite the success of 50 Shades this year.
Depending on a white woman’s age, he is the successful, assertive man they all wished they married or the supreme Dad figure they wish they had growing up. I think Paul Ryan is working similar mojo but because he looks so young he’s the sexy smart guy they might get or the cute, smart type A they wish was their son. Someone in 1960 must have predicted after the 1960 TV POTUS debate that we’d devolve to a point where a party ran two handsome guys to manipulate the female vote.
“we’d devolve to a point where a party ran two handsome guys to manipulate the female vote.”
Clinton-Gore ’93
It’s much more simple than the perception that the media has created or Romney versus the perception of the Romney in the debate. It’s about power and dominance. No matter the policies at stake, the women want a strong masculine leader. Obama seemed masculine four years ago, but not in the first debate. That is what he has to reclaim–his masculinity.
As SOBL mentioned on Twitter, the Pew poll did have an R+5 balance which likely won’t be present on election day, but it’s still an interesting poll.
Tangentially, over the weekend I saw a smoking hot girl in her twenties with a Romney/Ryan bumper sticker on her car. She did have on a wedding ring, and married girls tend to move to Republicans, but there were no car seats in her car, so she apparently moved prematurely.
A 22-point swing among white females is nothing to sneeze at, but nobody is talking about the resounding 50% improvement Romney has scored with the black voters. In just one month, his 2% share has NEARLY DOUBLED to 3%. This trend obviously has the Obama camp petrified, as evidenced by the phony unemployment figures.
Socialist whimpering doesn’t really appeal to anyone. Blacks want Obama to be strong, tough, the determined black guy who gives them what they want against all odds and demands a reversal of current fate; not asks for, but demands.
Socialist whining may garner sympathy, but strength and confidence in a leader always gets the vote. This has been true from the very beginning. That aura of cool, calm competence always, always wins.
This is true in life ,too. Incidentally, women who can project this also become more popular as leaders. One of the reasons men are better at this and more regularly make good leaders is that both sexes look up to men like this, as well as women, but men are more naturally able to encapsulate these attitudes: divorcing from emotion, cool competence, etc.
This is why the socialist and left-wing Rule by Committee, where you control what’s done by shaming (typically female) and limiting debate (typically communalist), is so radically unpopular when given up to votes. Nobody wants night-long bickering sessions to turn into society-wide whimpering whining sessions.
This is the limitation of identity politics. It either devolves into tribalism and thence into confrontation or slithers around in contempt-inducing mediocrity.
It’s why socialist governments either dither and promote the bland and mediocre, crushing all that’s different and exceptional, or devolve into strongman governments because things just have to get done.
Oddly enough, there’s a straight road from socialism to dictatorship, as a result of this “flaw” in human nature:
The best recourse against a domineering leader is to admit that we admire and need leaders, and to choose among them, and to elevate individuals (and then tear them down); and replace them. We are apes.
Simply ruling by committee ultimately satisfies no-one and leaves the door open for strongmen to crush opposition.
Obama looks weak. he looks like a conciliator. He backs down in a fight. He concedes to other peoples’ strong opinions. He has few of his own that he defends with any vigor.
He’s a wet towel. This is his biggest problem; He’s weak. Hopelessly weak.
All else is irrelevant, really.
Black Americans vote for him solely because he’s black. In fact, many are extremely displeased with him (understanding that he’s weak, ineffectual, a puppet on strings at the best of times); they vote for Blackness, not for Obama.
The other thing that struck me was 10 point improvement for Romney with under-30s. These are the people who have been hurt the worse by the economy and even they are starting to value competence over coolness.
Gorby,
Black Americans vote for him solely because he’s black. In fact, many are extremely displeased with him (understanding that he’s weak, ineffectual, a puppet on strings at the best of times); they vote for Blackness, not for Obama.
I do note that when a black Republican runs against a white Democrat, even then, the black Republican gets at most 25% of the black vote.
Herman Cain against a white Democrat would NOT get more than 25% of the black vote.. If a black Republican could actually get black votes, everything would be very easy for the GOP.
So blacks appear to be Democrats first and blacks second… that is how thorough the lefty brainwashing is.
If the GOP were a little less stupid they would run a long con. train some black conservatives (yes they exist) to pretend to be liberals in order to get elected in black districts. have these imposters rail publicly against whitey, but vote for republican bills when it counts. then when the liberal media is astounded at the contrary vote, they give a who-whom speech and they say yeah i know this goes against liberal principles but i genuinely think it will be better for black people in our struggle against white oppression. ideally they would even spell it out and quote lenin in the explanation.
There are plenty of other black men who are more masculine than Obama, they just aren’t as smart as he is. I would say Romney and Obama are about equal in their levels of male charisma.
The more extraverted and dominant black politicians like Sharpton, Keyes, or Cain do abysmally, including with female voters. This fact goes against Whiskey’s gently understated point about white women’s voting preferences.
I disagree that Romney and Obama have anything close to similar type of charisma. Obama is an introverted sensitive type and his political charisma is largely manufactured. If he were an emo band vocalist like Morrissey or Robert Smith instead of a politician, his natural charisma, such that it is, would have had a more natural home.
Romneys is a natural alpha, both in the leader of men sense, as well (as far as I can tell) ladies’ man sense — but as a Mormon patriarch, he had sublimated the latter into the former.
The more dominant and extraverted black leaders come across as too black. I might recognize their dominance and charisma, but it doesn’t have a strong hold on me.
I do think Mitt has some charisma and he is definitely energetic. For as wholesome as he is, I get a little bit of a ladies’ man vibe from him, but I guess he’s learned to control it.
People seem to have no idea what the Presidency is all about. In a Constitutional sense, the President is mainly there to provide a single focal point for diplomacy with other nations, and to ensure there is one commander-in-chief during wartime, rather than trying to run a war by committee.
A long string of Presidents have expanded the powers and responsibilities of the office to such an absurd extent that people expect the Pres to do EVERYTHING. Somehow he is supposed to run the economy, balance the budget, determine the right level of money supply, safeguard the environment, act as head union steward/negotiator for all unions in the country, pick and choose which businesses get bailouts and which don’t, ensure proper racial quotas in all businesses, and hand out free Obama phones too. Plus do the stuff he is SUPPOSED to do like guard our borders and defend the nation militarily.
Small wonder he won’t guard the borders and is letting our asses get kicked overseas. When you try to do every task, you end up doing none of them very well.
Americans should look at Obama’s sad debate performance, and be worried. Because if this is how he acts under Romney’s gentle, humorous chiding, how does he act when he’s alone in a room with Putin? Or the Chinese premier? Or Ahmadinejad? Does Obama just keep nodding his head submissively and accept whatever deal they demand? Can he even look them in the eye? Guys like that can smell a mark a mile away; in their eyes Obama is nothing but a mark to fleeced.
The American people think the President is supposed to be a rock star, their boyfriend and someone who hands out free stuff. In reality he is supposed to protect us from the worst dictators and terrorists out in the world.
I wrote today that the problem with voting for the messiah is eventually you find out he’s not.
That and Obamas biggest talking point is taking credit for Bill Clintons economy.
Way to get out and there and lead bucko.
Pingback: LIGFY – Oct 14 | Society of Amateur Gentlemen