• N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    3 months ago

    I feel dirty saying good things about Sarah Palin, but she was brought on to fire up the base and did just that. Vance has managed to alienate the base. I don’t think the incels even like him at this point.

    • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah people forget how long people looked favorably at Palin. The response to Vance meanwhile was an immediate and visceral “no thank you”

    • Vittelius@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Of course the incels don’t like him. He argues that childless people should pay higher taxes. How did anyone think that would go over with the “never even had sex” constituency?

      • Yeller_king@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I think the incel crowd generally want to strip women of their rights because they see women’s liberty as a main reason they can’t get laid.

        So, I’d imagine the childless cat women thing could hit with them because they’d be like “yeah, women should stop being so up-tight and have my babies!”

        Or something like that.

        • Bennettiquette@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          3 months ago

          yeah, single women with no kids are childless cat ladies, but single men with no kids are just victims of the uncompromising selfishness of childless cat ladies. sounds about right.

      • collapse_already@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        The dumb thing is: they already do. I get a deduction for my kid.

        I am sure the calculus had nothing to do with what the incels want - it’s not like they are going to change their vote.

        • Vittelius@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          Sure, but you get rewarded, they would get punished. The outcome might be the same, but for a ideology built on grievances, the vibes matter

      • barsquid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        Incels would agree to pay more money if it harms women. All incels hate each other, men who aren’t incels, themselves, and women. That’s in ascending order. They are full of hate.

        • Vittelius@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yes they would. And yes they do. And yes they are

          BUT…

          Incels also hate the cruel world that made them and the politicians upholding it. The problem with women isn’t, according to incel ideology, that they refuse to pick a partner. It’s that they pick the wrong partners. That’s where the dreaded “nice guy” comes from.

          So according to incels this doesn’t harm women enough but rather creates a tax on “normal men” for being “normal”. (And then they turn around and call themselves degenerates because their ideology isn’t the most consistent)

          Also if you are in these communities for long enough, then it becomes part of your identity. That’s how we get stuff like wizardchan. (People who believe that still being an incel at 30 makes you a wizard). And this is an attack on that from the outside.