June 12, 2016

Hillary isn't even playing the woman card well

The main theme of Crooked Hillary's campaign is that she's not just any corrupt Establishment next-in-line candidate -- she's the first one to also be a woman. In their lazy insulated minds, that would make her male opponent an enemy of women.

Even during the Democrats' own primary, voters showed little interest in this approach, either the "first woman" part or the part about "my enemy is a woman-hater for getting in this woman's way". During the general election, non-Democrats including independents will show even less patience for it.

Trotting out Pocahontas Warren was an even worse mistake, since doubling down on a tiresome and soon to be annoying tone will further alienate general voters. Also, it immediately deflates the tepid enthusiasm for Hillary being the "first woman" -- now that she's paired with Pocahontas, are they a first pair of women, or maybe part of a first larger movement of women? The "first woman" candidate would only stand out in stark contrast if those surrounding her were men.

The emphasis is no longer on Hillary being "first," which suggests reaching a historical milestone of fairness (for what that's worth), but rather on a broader "women vs. men" confrontation that has nothing to do with fairness but inter-group warfare. And the battle of the sexes is as old as mankind, therefore not a historical milestone, as originally billed just a few days earlier.

"Oh great, yet another brigade of nagging scolds is teaming up in the political arena -- get ready for Prohibition part 2."

The Trump movement can only rejoice at Team Hillary stepping on its own dick twice in the first week of its general campaign -- her status as "first" was immediately overshadowed by Pocahontas becoming a de facto "second," and then the "fairness milestone" thing quickly devolved into a "hostile battle of the sexes" thing.

Once Trump starts to really unload on her during his Monday speech, they're going to find out that this Republican candidate isn't the wuss that low-energy Jeb Bush would have been, sitting there and taking their "war on women" bullshit the entire time.

26 comments:

  1. OT: A Muslim shoots up gay nighclub and the SJWs are talking about how terrible Christians and gun owners are.

    ReplyDelete
  2. SJWs maybe, but this may be the thing that finally switches the normal liberals and fags into Islamo-skeptic mode.

    Reportedly after the San Bernadino attacks, some major celeb said what if there's another attack on the West Coast, maybe Trump isn't so bad after all. Blind Gossip ran it, speculation was that it was Katy Perry or some other ditzy person you wouldn't expect to react that way.

    Hollywood is also apparently pretty pro-Trump, perhaps for the same reason.

    Anyone with half a brain can understand that gay nightclubs and Muslim immigration cannot coexist in the same society. Now the non-retarded liberals and homos get to make a choice.

    ReplyDelete
  3. When it's an Islamic terrorist, it's easier to deflate the hysteria about ASSAULT RIFLES by simply reminding the audience that the scumbag would have just strapped on a suicide bomber vest instead.

    You won't convince the SJWs themselves. The point is to remind normal liberals and other homo-enablers of common sense. They don't have to parrot it back -- they just have to be willing to vote Trump without telling anyone about it.

    We can be the bad cop, normal people can be the good cop.

    ReplyDelete
  4. TV news is not reporting that it was a gay bar, only a "nightclub shooting". Shame that the club didn't have a more unambiguous name, like The Manhole, to add some cosmic black humor to our upside-down society.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I believe nationalist parties in Europe(where the Muslim population is larger) a get decent support from gays(granted a lot of the gays seem to actual fascists). If the shooter were Christian a bet they'd be playing up the gay angle and the religion of the shooter. Instead they're just talking about a shooting at a nightclub.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Meanwhile Slate claims that anyone who opposes the entire gay agenda must support killing gays

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2016/06/12/republican_are_erasing_lgbtq_people_from_their_own_tragedy.html

    ReplyDelete
  7. I mocked this absurd shitlib false equivalency: https://twitter.com/TyrsDisciple/status/742052709520396288

    ReplyDelete
  8. Overheard at the Wal-Mart gardening center, a middle-aged Asian queer talking to his negress fag hag:

    "Yeah, I usually go there to sing, y'know they have karaoke, but... after what happened last night..."

    Actual fags are freaked as shit now. Their fag hags are going to be concerned after hearing from their real-life gay BFFs.

    Homo enablers, most of whom aren't gay themselves and aren't friends with any, are the unknown quantity. Will they be able to empathize and say, "Gee, all this uncontrolled Muslim immigration... prolly not the best thing for my imaginary gay BFF"?

    Or will they double down on importing violent Islamic radicals, and then double down on being a "good ally"?

    #IllBugchaseWithYou

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Double down. The standard Prog response seems to be "He was marinated in homegrown homophobic hateful culture, which has caused this hate crime, and Islam has NOTHING to do with it."

      Delete
  9. Someone who's given away their phone number to the Jews, make that hashtag happen on Twitter.

    #GaysBreakTheInternet is trending, mix it in with that one. It's the predictable crap about not being intimidated. Be a good ally and let them know, #IllBugchaseWithYou.

    ReplyDelete
  10. On Facebook, a friend of a family member begins her somber post with something like:

    "Having survived a mass shooting myself, I..."

    Then goes on to only mention gun control, and standing with pride for the gays. Nothing about him being a 2nd-gen Afghan, Islamic radical.

    Ironically, the mass shooting she lived through was the Virginia Tech massacre -- committed by a 1st-gen foreigner (Korean).

    All these crazy "American residents" shooting up their *own country* -- it's just so baffling.

    Take a wild guess what the religion of this girl's ancestors is...

    ReplyDelete
  11. I hope Trump postpones his Hillary speech--the message will be lost in the Orlando shooting coverage.

    ReplyDelete
  12. He released a statement saying that his speech tomorrow will be about Islamic terrorism, national security, and immigration.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hmm, did her name echo ((()))? It seems the loudest voices on Twitter screeching about WHITE MALES, GUN LAWS, seem to have an echo.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The one good thing about the media playing up the gay angle more than the Islamic angle is that it reminds people of where the shooting took place -- gay nightclub. That will help them see that the jihadists aren't just attacking symbols of capitalism (WTC) and military imperialism (Pentagon), but lifestyle haunts.

    Slowly, or maybe quickly, ordinary people are seeing that Islamic terrorists aren't so motivated by political or economic grievances, a la national liberation revolutionaries. They are waging puritanical / fundamentalist war against Western culture and lifestyles -- rock concerts, cafes, airports (travel / leisure), gay nightclubs, and whatever else it will be next time.

    Certainly we would focus mostly on the Islamic / immigrant angle. But we already know the score.

    For ordinary Americans, including moderates and even liberals, seeing all these targets being part of culture / lifestyle / leisure, will do more to harden them against the Muslim immigrants who are attacking "our way of life" than if they were portrayed as political revolutionaries angry at our foreign policy (which many mods and libs would agree with).

    ReplyDelete
  15. Prediction: MSNBC and NPR will have relatively more honest coverage than CNN.

    Although both liberal, CNN is more openly globalist, so there's absolutely nothing that could dampen their cries for open borders. If it leads to irreconcilable conflicts (between gays and Muslims, or whoever vs. whoever), we'll just have to think up a social engineering solution to keep the volatile mix from exploding. We're smart, we can do it -- and it's a moral necessity anyway.

    MSNBC and NPR are more America-focused, albeit with an old-time-y liberal ideal of America. They actually want to feel good about America, whereas CNN is more cynically detached from this nation and see their role as managers of global interconnection.

    If unchecked immigration leads to a puritanical radical committing the deadliest mass shooting, at a gay nightclub no less, the MSNBC audience is going to cut the open borders crowd less slack.

    If Muslim immigration leads directly to the not just erosion, but violent explosion of their cherished American liberal ideals, maybe it's not totally insane to at least consider a pause on Muslim immigration.

    I don't care if they don't broadcast that message loud-and-clear over the airwaves (that'd be ideal), as long as they at least vote in private for Trump and related politicians.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Piers Morgan was prepared to reconsider his position on Trump, maybe other journalists will follow that example.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Piers Morgan is a wannabe gun grabber. I want him nowhere on side.

      Delete
  17. Wow, Joe Scarborough just gave my insight about the shift toward cultural targets, rather than pol/econ/military targets.

    It's good to know some of these ideas get out there, through however long a chain of transmission.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Funny how Afghanistan has some of the most pervasive pederastic traditions, even in the Muslim world. Muslims find the modern coequal homosexuality to be sickening. I agree that it's an astroturf identity, but it was probably inevitable with the reaction against the Victorian elite's pederasty.

    ReplyDelete
  19. advancedatheist6/13/16, 9:50 AM

    Many atheists don't like to confront the fact that atheism as such has nothing to do with social-justice ideology, especially regarding the gaslighting campaign to make us accept male homosexuality as a different kind of normal. (This shows how the field of "sexology" has become a corrupt and politicized pseudo-science.)

    The atheist apologists for sexual deviance especially don't like it when I bring up the example of the late Oliver Sacks, a gay atheist man who lived sexually abstinent for decades. Sacks shows how gay men would live in a healthy patriarchal society which shames sexually broken people from acting on their ridiculous compulsions.

    I don't know if a Trump Revolution would include this kind of cultural restoration in its agenda over the next generation, but I would welcome it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Libs are going crazy saying "he's a citizen". They are downplaying that he's a Muslim of course. I am more surprised that many TrueCons are also ignoring Islam's role in this slaughter. They are only interested in a gun control debate.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Funny how Afghanistan has some of the most pervasive pederastic traditions, even in the Muslim world."

    Anyone who thinks that unchecked immigration from these countries will restore a conservative sexual morality, just because they kill gays, is too blind or stupid to see how faggotized their people already are.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Sotadic morality: women for procreation, boys for recreation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sotadic_zone

    ReplyDelete
  23. One PC blog's response "we killed Indians over 100 year ago"

    http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2016/06/deadliest-mass-shootings

    ReplyDelete
  24. So homos are the new Indians? Village People were right?

    ReplyDelete

You MUST enter a nickname with the "Name/URL" option if you're not signed in. We can't follow who is saying what if everyone is "Anonymous."