If a Female gets elected President of the USA, Feminism wins

libertas4x1 · 2019-10-08T05:13:39+00:00

If feminism "won", that could be the best thing to happen to the world. It would be a phyrric victory for society and beckon the greatest shit show humanity has ever seen. Like the fall of Rome but on steroids. To be honest it may be the only way to finally shut clown world down and hopefully rebuild some semblance of a functional society.

MoneyOverHoes3 · 2019-10-08T05:23:16+00:00

[deleted]

WaywardStag · 2019-10-08T06:42:51+00:00

The problem is, a decent percentage of women would vote for a coked up Kim Kardashian if she was the only female running. It wouldn't even matter if she ran democrat or republican, all that matters is that she's a woman and these feminidiots just want their side to get a cheap win no matter what it would do to the US in the long run.

White men voted in Obama because they thought he was the best candidate and would represent them fairly, and would do the same for a woman. That would be a mistake. Men need to start sticking together more and looking after our selfish interests, because playing fair only works when everyone is doing it.

Ricky584 · 2019-10-08T05:49:28+00:00

All civilizations rises and fall. We are no exception. Once the old one is completely destroyed / perished , the world will be reborn.

As far as I’ve seen humanity is not worth fighting for so I’ll just observe it.

gtowerthrowaway · 2019-10-08T05:46:22+00:00

Female president is only a matter of time.

Feminism won the moment women got the vote.

[deleted] · 2019-10-08T07:31:07+00:00

Once there's a female president, there will be no more male president I'm afraid so gentlemen...

Switching from a female to a male president will be seen as "sexist" hahaha

HONK HONK

iwillandican · 2019-10-08T05:32:43+00:00

USA will be fucked. Our female pres wasted all her money like in half year on travel and now she needs 200k thats what news on the internet said. I just loled.

DigitalScetis · 2019-10-08T14:00:23+00:00

Gentlemen, gone are the days of the feminazi, ball-busting dykes like Mary Daly who wanted to pass legislation to limit men to 10% of the population.

All feminists care about these days are optics. They do not want the presidency to pass an agenda. They only care about symbolic victories, and look at a female president as nothing more than as a series of selfie moments, for they honestly believe that symbolic politics is more powerful than legislation.

They think that putting a female president in there, having her on TV, and having everyone call her "Madam President" will "inspire young girls" to finally close the STEM gap, close down the wage gap, usher in an era of body positivity, save the planet, and finally, in their estimation, "force society to take women seriously" (as if we don't already take every irrational fear and unscrupulous motive from them far more seriously than we should).

They do not think this will come via legislation; misandric legislation has always come via men trying to placate women, more than the women themselves.

This is the Harry Potter generation of women, the Charmed and Hexed generation of women, the generation of women who believe that "positive energies," "high vibrational levels," and Twitter retweets and Instagram likes are all that's needed to change reality. Hence, why they are so wedded to this idea of "changing the culture"; they think that thoughts are things, image is reality, and the mere presence of a woman president is enough, even if she doesn't pass a damn thing.

The old feminazis of our grandfather's generation dreamed of a time when their daughters would be cutting the balls off of their countrymen. These new feminists only dream that their daughters could take selfies with Madam President to share in their timeline.

ijnenak · 2019-10-08T06:25:41+00:00

Doubtful, almost every significant female world leader is fired or in jail for corruption.

DangZagnut · 2019-10-08T14:24:14+00:00

I'm not sure feminism "wins".

It's only a powerful job because they can, legally, order nuclear attack, which comes into question as to whether those orders will be carried out.

A legal order, does not mean that order will be followed.

As an example, nukes used to be free form dropped by anyone. Bombers in constant rotation could simply release armed weapons whenever they wanted, but a legal order was required. Nothing technically stopped them. Nothing technically stops them now either.

Then they added codes for the bombs, however, because the military isn't entirely stupid, they set all the codes to all zeros, so they could still arm and drop them whenever they wanted regardless of whether the order came through or not.

It doesn't matter what a president wants, the bombs can still go off. It's like dynamite with a fuse, a bunch a red tape doesn't prevent dynamite from being lit, nor does it stop it and make it unlit.

There have been several times, in the U.S., when nukes almost went off and no one was involved. One time there was a war simulation going on at NORAD and blah blah, but then the tape played another day, which shows inbound missiles and radar signatures (just like in the movie Wargames) and they acted on it and got minutes from launching ballistic missiles.

Another time pilots on a bomber started a bombing run after receiving bad data. As in the movie "Dr. Strangelove".

Why does any of that nonsense matter? It doesn't matter what retard (and they all have been in the last 100 years) is sitting in the Oval Office, they have whatever power other people give them, and that's it. Exactly like women now.

The Soviet Union had problems as well. Arkhipov didn't vote to use nuclear torpedos against the U.S. navy (which was dropping depth charges in international waters) during the Cuban Missile Crisis as the Captain thought war had started, and because they had a three man rule, his vote neutered the Captain and political officer to order a "special weapons" launch.

Petrov in the 80s ignored satellite warnings saying there were inbound ICBMs from the U.S. coming in and also averted a MAD scenario.

Leaders don't matter. They take nice pictures and the media praises or yells at them.

Look at Trump vs. Obama. The media treats them totally differently, including the usual 100 day grace period where the media has traditionally only been favorable or neutral about presidents.

Kids don't know this, but in the "old" days, as in, the last president, the newly elected always had a 100 day grace period before the media started their shit after an election. It was a courtesy. They were hammering on Trump day -90. Now Trump hasn't actually done much but tweet nonsense, and the first one to do that shit, but the media has been doing their shit from the beginning and didn't even give him a chance.

If a woman gets elected, and there will be one, because other than this Trump upset last election "they" are desperate for a Taco to be in "power", the media will sing praises from -90 to + 3000 days, because you can't criticize a bitch. She will do nothing, they will invent massive leadership skills to her, despite her doing nothing, and even though the president in the U.S. don't actually do anything all day long, she'll be massively popular. I can only assume she won't be sticking a cigar in any intern's holes, although that would be awesome. They will paint the quota hire as the bestest president ever, and even if she kills people it'll be "decisive" leadership.

So relax. It'll just be another bitch quota hired and given praise despite doing nothing.

Presidents don't do anything.

lonewolfsigmamgtow · 2019-10-08T08:05:40+00:00

And they will elect someone like KAMALA HARRIS or pocahontas, not someone like TULSI GABBARD (i mean lesser of all evils).

Lfvbf · 2019-10-08T11:28:49+00:00

I'm brazillian. A couple of years ago everyone celebrated our first female presdient Dilma Roussef.

During her mandate, she managed to spend the country's budget of a year in less than 8 months, her party created one of the biggest corruption scandals of all time, she started talking about storing Wind and drove us into a economical crisis that still affect us to this day.

Then she got re elected. And increased her own salary

christianknight · 2019-10-08T12:36:34+00:00

The US is already on its last legs. The slow burn will become a fast burn. Similar to what that bitch in New Zealand is doing.

irishluckk · 2019-10-08T14:26:17+00:00

Men will have to rebuild society, good times create weak men.

honda_vfr · 2019-10-08T05:26:59+00:00

With that in mind we dodged a serious bullet with Hillary failing in 2016.

You know she is running again, right? https://meaww.com/hillary-clinton-become-president-in-2020-waiting-democrats-sacrifice-biden-steve-bannon-says

hork23 · 2019-10-08T09:54:14+00:00

Feminism already won.

bobgray1 · 2019-10-08T10:56:50+00:00

It's just a matter of time. It will happen. And when it does, it means your country has formally gone to pot

AlbertCohol · 2019-10-08T11:40:20+00:00

When feminism gets ultimate power, there will be no excuses. Everyone will see the failure.

Let it burn.

Professsor_Q · 2019-10-08T13:32:23+00:00

I can't wait to see the fights that break out online if a woman wins

strainer123 · 2019-10-08T14:56:24+00:00

Feminism already won in the west, we're just circling the drain right now, in the last throes of our civilization, soon Communist China or Islam will dominate us completely, and then feminism will be dead, but then it might flourish again and kill these civilizations as well.

strangerthing7 · 2019-10-08T18:18:41+00:00

Look outside son, feminism already won. President or not president, most western countries are being invaded by migrants and turned to welfare states, brought to you by weak politicians - mostly lefties, who were voted in by most women - feminist or not.

LightningEdge756 · 2019-10-09T00:04:17+00:00

Hear me out, it might be a good thing.

Once everything falls apart under the rule of feminism, who will they blame? Can't be patriarchy, cause they won't be in charge. The world will see only feminism can be blamed.

OddPhilosopher1 · 2019-10-08T14:55:54+00:00

Candace Owens is the exception.

Iperovic · 2019-10-08T22:09:35+00:00

I wouldn't say so, there's people like Ann Coulter and Candace Owens who represent well, but I'd support them based on their stances and not the fact that they're women...I don't think they are unicorns to hypergamy or relationships but there are women out there who speak up.

edgysecularist · 2019-10-09T07:52:58+00:00

I will never let that happen thank god whore hillary lost

IlllIIllIlII · 2019-10-09T14:03:21+00:00

Yeah but that means we’re gonna get the first male lady haha

deepcut6 · 2019-10-08T16:03:48+00:00

>Not voting for Candace Owens when the time comes

Never going to make this country great again fam.

Taeqwondeles · 2019-10-08T05:07:06+00:00

well, most likely elizabeth warren is the next president, trump has fucked up big time and biden is out.

Title	If a Female gets elected President of the USA, Feminism wins
Author	MoneyOverHoes3
Upvotes	104
Comments	83
Date	October 8, 2019 5:04 AM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MGTOW
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/devgds/if_a_female_gets_elected_president_of_the_usa/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MGTOW/if-a-female-gets-elected-president-of-the-usa.395681 https://theredarchive.com/post/395681

Comments