[From "New York Times Admits All Would be Well If Only White Men Could Vote"]
A New York Times writer with a Jew-sounding name has admitted that America would still be doing fine if only white men could vote.
The term “gender gap” has a clinical sound to it, like it’s an intrinsic condition of our politics. But it did not always exist, and with each recent election cycle, it has become more extreme.
We’d likely have a Senator David Duke from Louisiana. The entire U.S. Senate would look far different — with Democratic senators from just a handful of the bluest states. And there would never have been a President Barack Obama.[…]
Interestingly, women were once more conservative than men.
Religion kept women in line. This is, no doubt, one reason why the Jews attacked it so relentlessly. They knew a coalition of grievance-wielding minorities could not, on its own, be enough to defeat white people. Only by peeling off women and gays from the white voting bloc could the Jews ever hope to prevail. Contraception helped them do this.[…]A childless woman, on the other hand, has no natural outlet for her nurturing instincts and instead often seeks to fulfill them by embracing foolish idealistic causes that bring ruin on the society she lives in.
In evolutionary terms, women have basically survived by sucking the dick of the invaders throughout history. If you analyze the genetic make-up of many nations, you see the same pattern: female DNA goes back to the initial settlement of the country after the last Ice Age, while male DNA only goes back to the last successful invasion.[…]This is evident today in attitudes towards immigration or what the New York Times writer with the Jew-sounding name calls women’s “rejection of force and violence, and concern with interpersonal relations.”