How the SJW Mindset Propelled Trump to Victory

Look, there were a lot of reasons why Hilary Clinton lost, but I thought I’d focus on one pet theory of mine and run with it. You can go everywhere else and find myriad reasons, both true and hyperbolic as to the “how’s” and “whys” of the 2016 election. Nevertheless, here, you will only find one.

SJWs propelled Trump to glorious victory!

trmp216

“But Chad,” You may be asking. “How is that possible? Trump is literally the antithesis to the SJW hive mind.” Moreover, this is true. SJWs helped build a giant asshole fumed filled bubble and trapped many left-wingers, millennials, young women and fooled them in to thinking that there was just no way Trump could win! I mean, the polls literally said so!

The SJW mindset permeated deep in to the Hilary supporter and brought a host of problems to a political campaign. Namely, tertiary and duodenary bullshit “problematic issues” that needed to be addressed that, frankly, no sane person actually gives a shit about.

For instance, the false notion of a woman making 77 cents compared to a man making $1. The SJW mindset dictates that the Hilary campaign focuses and harp on that point. Women are being taken advantage of and being held under the heavy stifling yoke of the patriarchy! When Joe Sixpack, who has been largely underemployed or unemployed for an interminable amount of time, looks at this, he sees that he’s making zero cents to anyone’s money. This not only alienates him, it makes him angry, and when Donald Trump says he’s going to “fix it”, Mr. Sixpack is more than happy to support that.

dt4-e1442272498197

Instead of that, Hilary could’ve focused on the universal umbrella of something approaching a higher minimum wage. Everyone’s wage would go up, there would be better paying jobs that Joe Sixpack could possibly get a chance at. Ideally, women could possibly make more under the idea, seeing as they purportedly work the majority of the minimum wage jobs in the first place. Perhaps it wouldn’t quell the white-hot misogynistic anger that resides deep inside Mr. Sixpack (next to his nigh constant urge to rape), but it would go further to not out-and-out alienate him from a Hilary presidency.

The vast majority of Trump supporters, “old white people”, actually vote. Speaking Anecdotally, I heard so many first time voters call in to the local (right-wing) talk radio station on Nov. 9. Men in their mid-to-late 30’s feeling compelled to vote for the first time. It wasn’t outwardly said, but they’ve been under attack from SJWs for a good many years and found this election as an opportunity to “correct” a perceived “wrong” by putting anyone but Hilary in to the presidential office.

dt3-667x247

Repeatedly I would hear that it was more a refutation of her than an implicit support of him.

Oddly enough, the “old white people” voter contingent has largely been unchanged. The same numbers that voted for Trump in 2016 also voted for Romney in 2012. Hilary lost the youth vote because of the SJW mindset.

Outside of a “yokel” like Joe Sixpack, several white millennial men were left hanging by a Hilary campaign that actively coddled SJW feminists and dickless doods. Who actively told the white men that they’re refusal to support Hilary was because of their suddenly exposed misogyny, sexism and bigotry. “All politicians have faults, it’s time for a white woman to run things…you’ve had your turn for, like, centuries…YEILD!” Moreover, this somehow wasn’t going to alienate millions of male voters somehow?

dt5

As I’ve stated before, the SJW mindset doesn’t have any notions of the long game. They naively believe that things can be done in an instant and that everyone will fall in line because…well who’s totally AGAINST social justice, right?

They have no problem selfishly pushing for single-minded agendas that inevitably alienate more people than help in the long run. On top of this, even the mere suggestion of tapping the brakes is met with instant ire and accusations ending in “ist”. Makes you really  want to get behind a candidate that would seemingly support this, right?

This goes hand in hand in the election aftermath witnessing as the butt hurt and salt flows freely from SJWs that declare bigotry, misogyny and sexism were the main driving force of a Trump victory. There is no self-reflection, no need to check the volume on the rhetoric and hyperbole or tacit support of a shitty presidential candidate. Just the absolute need to alienate as many people that “aren’t like them” as possible. Which sadly still means white men.

There’s a litany of other reasons Hilary lost this election, but you cannot deny that SJWs and their mindset cost her dearly with a plethora of the sane voting bloc. You cannot even begin to approach the notion of unity when the bulk of your supporters are busying themselves “othering” people that dare have a different opinion than them. There’s no discussion or debate, they shout “You’re wrong AND a bigot AND a sexist!” and move on, leaving nothing but scorched earth behind them.

Buy Now Button

How the SJW Mindset Propelled Trump to Victory

Taking Your Review Ball And Going Home With The Games Press

What’s a games press to do when all of the sudden they’re not privy to early access to an upcoming video game to review? Especially from a publisher that has already started anti-games press things like “blackballing” certain outlets, and by “outlets” just Kotaku and not releasing early review copies of the most excellent DOOM earlier this year.

Bethesda Softworks, creators of such fine video games in the Elder Scrolls and Fallout series announced a couple of weeks ago  that they were essentially doing away with day and date reviews for their games. Citing the previously mentioned DOOM and its glorious reception from both gamer and games press alike, it has decided to forego sending out review copies of games of Skyrim: Special Edition and Dishonored 2 well in advance of their release.

Not to toot my own horn, but I have been calling for this for a long time now. I even wrote about why the written review was a useless endeavor for games publishers.
rvw1
Of course, this doesn’t mean the utter and complete end of the games press, and I wholeheartedly disagree with Forbes’ Erik Kain that certain gamers shouldn’t be gloating about the games press being declared “dead”. Nevertheless, this does portend a growing trend of their needlessness in general. Perhaps a culling of the apes is in order.

More damning, in that all of the articles and podcast “hot takes” I found no real compelling reason from the games press as to why this was a bad thing. Instead a near universal din of this move being “anti-consumer”. How much this would make a reviewer’s life more unbearable by being forced to marathon a game review in order to beat competitors to be first.

Ideally, this only affects maybe 25 people. Moreover, that’s a games press the world over.

Last year when I quoted the ESA report on video game buying habits, “Written Product Reviews in Video Game Magazine and Websites” polled at an anemic 3% of influencing purchase power. It’s not even referenced this year, instead it seems to have been absorbed in to an all encompassing “Other” of about 22%, or maybe it’s finally fallen of to be statistically a 0%?

Aside from the hot takes, there seemed to be this assertion from many in the games press that this really didn’t matter, as there’s been a shift from “day and date ”to a more long view“ games criticism take on games. There is no need to feed the content monster when you can clog it up with such hard-hitting pieces of playing a ten-year-old PS2 game in 2016 and shaking your head at all the misogyny and general Japany-nonsense all up in it!

More to the point, it’s apparently another way for the games press to pooh-pooh the video game focused Youtubers who once again come out on top in all of this.
rv4
Anecdotally, I’ve always used reviews as a validation device. I buy most video games I want to buy day-and-date, and then I’ll go read the reviews from a few select sites. It’s usually not until the following week that actual discussion and breakdown of a game occurs anyways. So why is there such an apparent “pro-consumer” need for a day-and-date review? Aside from competing websites trying to be the first one and therefore getting the most clicks.

Barring that, most video game websites have a plethora of gamed related “content” surrounding almost every major release, so that regardless of an actual review on the site itself there’s a spike in interest for the game. The game gets some sort of coverage, and with the games press being another de facto wing of the marketing department these days, that’s about as good as you can ask for.

Video is king now. People are more interested in seeing the game in action, getting some form of “hot take” on the video game. Personally, I find this lacking, as most video games are hour’s long endeavors at best, and a quick hot take just cannot do most games justice. I mean how many times have your cemented an opinion on a video game in the first few hours. The only thing you can really comment on is how ubiquitous the tutorials are…at best.
rv2
I’ve always been of the mind that video game publishers are wasting precious resources trying to get video game websites to cover a game. It’s not that’s there’s literally too many  games to play, but the games press is getting smaller and leaner, and becoming more pointed in their coverage. In addition, the average games press member is a chubby white guy in his late 30’s…he’s tired. He cannot stay up all weekend trying to marathon a game for review. Hell, he cannot even bother to write a review in anything approaching a timely manner.

Youtubers, for lack of a better word are what the games press should be now: young. There’s this jaundiced, cynical, chubby staleness to the current games press that can no longer be ignored. There’s a lack of enthusiasm for video games, and it’s gotten palpable to publishers.

What sells games better? “Meh, here’s another one of these.” or “Hey, this just came out and it. Is. Awesome!”

To readers that listen to video game podcasts, how many times have you heard the hosts not even bother playing the games that are currently out, or they’ve only played a few hours to “get a feel” for a game of the year discussion to happen later or to deliver some sort of “hot take”?

More publishers need to follow Bethesda’s example and eschew the games press and just take it to the gamers. Have giveaways on social media for early copies. Get the word of mouth out on a game. That’s what really worked for DOOM, early adopters started playing the game, found it to be awesome and spread the word!
rv3
Of course, it’s not going to work in all cases, a new Elder Scrolls game or Dishonored 2 doesn’t need reviews. It’s going to sell a boatload of copies just on name and previous excellence alone.

Gamers are much more informed than they were in the past, and day-and-date reviews are a more recent development. There were literal decades as a gamer you didn’t know the quality of a game until you played it. If you were really itching for an opinion, you could wait for a magazine to say something….a month later. Typically, word of mouth, previous games in the franchise, or the publisher dictated purchasing a game.

This whole notion of the move away from review copies being “anti-consumer” is absurd. The games press has long proven itself more “anti-consumer” than anything a publisher could do. Taking the message directly to your fans, who actually want what you’re selling, is an infinitely better business move than shoveling your games at a disinterested chubby shaved ape that might not even play your game. In the post, Bethesda even acknowledges that if you are so desperate for a review, just wait for it, then make up your mind.

Nintendo has long proven the uselessness of a games press and many, many year’s later publisher like Bethesda are coming around to this idea. The games press is not your audience, the games press is dead.

Taking Your Review Ball And Going Home With The Games Press