Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.4K

Tell us why you think women belong in political office or not.

Tell us why you think women belong in political office or not.

(post is archived)

[–] • 28 pts

No. Women by and large shouldn't have jobs. Its way more important for women to have and raise kids. Further, women have a massive in-group bias towards their own sex. They will disproportionately implement laws that favour women over men. Finally, women will trade security for freedom everytime. They have absolutely no place in politics. They shouldn't even be allowed to vote, tbh.

[–] • 3 pts

Really only those who would fight to take the government back over if it went bad should be voting. And that's basically never women, but not strictly not.

[–] • 10 pts

It's not strictly impossible that a woman would be a good potential fit.

The issue is more just letting anyone vote. There should be reasonable restrictions. Like must be a gun owner. Must be over 30. Must have kids. Must not be a net burden on the tax system (this includes taking a government job).

[–] • 4 pts

Why should parents be the only citizens allowed to vote? You'd lose plenty of damn good people by arbitrarily assuming folks without kids have no viable solutions or don't care about others. Likewise, why would they have to be over 30? There are incredibly talented intelligent young adults--potentially already engaged in civic duties or military service--that deserve to vote before three-eighths of their life is gone. As for the net burden idea, I just don't see how it could be assessed without an authoritarian nanny state keeping tabs on everything everybody does all the time, in which case, it would necessitate a bloated staff of busybodies running the country like a soulless HOA. Just all bad things.

[–] • 2 pts

Childless at 30? That spells bad news. Think cat ladies, incels etc. Someone smart, an ultra dedicated scientist etc, ultra rare, they can figure out how to have a kid.

[–] • 2 pts

Yep, and my two late 30s nieces fit the bill.

[–] • 1 pt

I wouldn't want any government that wouldn't allow Da Vinci, William Blake, Isaac Newton, or Jesus to have a say in how their country/state/province was run simply because they didn't have kids. Just saying.

[–] • 1 pt

I know plenty of good men who are incels thanks to feminism gaining ground every year. And I know plenty of bad men who have children because they got on with the corrupted system. This is what happens in a country where even managing to get a job goes through the political system.

[–] • 0 pt

that deserve to vote before three-eighths of their life is gone

Voting has nothing to do with deserving to vote. Voting is not a right.

[–] • 0 pt

Parents are the only ones with skin in the game for the future of the country.

[–] • 0 pt

Parents are not the only ones with "skin in the game" because parents are not the only people in a family unit.

[–] • 3 pts

I think a system of having multiple votes based upon personal investment into the nation would make the most sense with an open bias toward white men.

You get 1 vote for being a white male over age 24 with no felonies, another for owning a home, another for serving in the military honorably, another for owning a business which has more than 10 people employed(contractors, temps, and interns don't count) you get an additional vote for each 0 you add to your number of employees up to 2 additional votes. You get a vote for being married with children (only if you are both citizens), certain military honors may confer an additional vote. Being a first responder medical worker or teacher should confer 1 additional vote but only in state elections. And 2 additional votes for owning and operating a farm/ranch.

[–] • 1 pt (edited )

I think a system of having multiple votes based upon personal investment into the nation would make the most sense with an open bias toward white men.

Wouldn't take more than two election iterations before those voted in manipulated the country / taxes to dump exorbitant amounts back on themselves to revote themselves in forever.

You get 1 vote for being a white male over age 24 with no felonies, another for owning a home, another for serving in the military honorably

I don't think there is a good way to quantify how much people should get for what. Certainly when you do something like give more votes to those who own companies, especially extra counts per employee, you'll just have the biggest company owners deciding elections. It'll be a 2 election cycle fascist country.

Also fraud will be ridiculously rampant as it'll be too hard to keep track of everyone's qualifiers.

[–] • 0 pt

A few more details then, a system of voter ID by which you are free to have your ID updated once every four years and that ID would have the number and reason for your vote totals, likely with a number of symbols denoting which types of votes, and a matching set of stamps for ballots that poll judges would use to weight the ballots to the individual's total votes. the first symbol would be a black circle, relating to being a white male over 24, 3 additional symbols being possible for the categories of financial contribution, service, and social investment, those symbols having different shapes based on number of votes earned from given categories.

You can't buy votes and there are upward limits on all categories, in a civilization with millions of people a few rare men having the voting power of ten men wont be enough to keep some good old boys club intact.

The goal is to make sure the people contributing what a nation needs and the men who are what a modern country needs to maintain itself are best represented. Each category is based on a high level of vitality to the nation. we need food more than anything, of course genuine farmers receive the most for keeping a nation alive every day, we need a national defense, of course those who conduct it honorably receive an extra vote, we need teachers and emergency services, mostly their proximity to the results of government makes them imminently well equipped to be a check against bad laws and policies produced by representatives. Producing jobs and generating wealth and opportunity in our nation for people in our nation is vital and as a voting block job creators should be heeded. lastly parents, those producing the next generation have need to speak on behalf of those children and the future they will inherit.

Essentially niggers, foreigners, and wine aunts don't get a vote under my system, but women are free to earn votes by becoming mothers, getting married, buying homes or even starting a home business, and my system recognizes the ideal man serves his community, provides opportunity, reproduces and has faithfully contributed to the national defense, this system is clearly making a statement about what a person should aspire to be

[–] • 0 pt

White Male land owners should all get one vote and only them.

[–] • 2 pts

Not impossible, but costly to the female and not wise.

[–] • 1 pt

I would be happy with fair and secure elections. What we have is election theatre.

[–] • 1 pt

Even a raw democracy with genuine unrigged unmanipulated elections would give this country better results than what we've currently got.

[–] • 1 pt

I like these rules. They're good rules.

[–] • 6 pts

I think politics, jobs, doctors - you name it - it is preferable to have a man in charge. For example, my advice to young men and young women in college is to find the man teaching a class - 80% of women professors are to be avoided (if not more); and 20% of men professors are to be avoided (or less). The 20% or less of men to be avoided are the personality-disordered types.

[–] • 6 pts

We have enough politicians of every gender, we have quite enough. We need less politicians.

[–] • 3 pts

Probably the best comment so far.

[–] • 5 pts

I would personally want a well groomed business man, and never a woman. We lead with emotions.

However, I don't think there should be any more political anything anymore. We need to do away with all of it. The whole system is corrupt and it needs to come crashing down on their effin heads.

[–] • 4 pts

I constantly call out women in politics. If women are in politics it means everything is systemically fucked. In the long term, there is only a road to hell with women in politics. In the short term, sadly, it's a necessary (appears anyways) evil as men have been castrated. This combined with the Jew rigging of our elections and knee bending required to enter the area makes the field extremely limited for anyone who doesn't actually want to suck a Jew's dick.

Alternatives are welcome but at the end of the day you also have to deal with the cards in hand. A fact the Jew/shills here constantly use to attack and undermine both candidates and commentators alike.

[–] • 4 pts

I would take Candie Owens over a Joe Biden every time .

Gotta pick the battles.

[–] • 4 pts

Women do not belong in the workforce or in politics.

[–] • 3 pts

A bit hard to complain about women in politics when all the men are guzzling jew cock. Kari lake appears to have more balls than most republican men. I could agree that women in general shouldn't be in politics but neither should most of the men that are.

[–] • 3 pts

Absolutely not.

I'm surprised all the time people here crying up women leaders, Kari Lake, Tulsi Gabbard, the Boebert woman...

[–] • 3 pts

Hey, we agree on something! Woot!

[–] • 1 pt

But Paul is dead.

Feel me?

[–] • 1 pt

But Paul is dead.

Nah, I run into him all the time at the grocery store. I even did some carpentry work at his house.

[–] • 3 pts

ANYONE who believes in women voting and holding office is a fucking idiot that does not understand history or The Jew. The Us was founded on ONLY white men who own property voting for very good reasons.

Load more (24 replies)