A common comment that I see often when talking about how pollsters get things wrong so often is that “well they didn’t account for x or y”. Though still the things they present do not mean anything either. So, what is most important when seeking the voting patterns according to real data sets that are not a control variable for some sort of ideology or narrative? To start, there must be an understanding for any given individual policy, instead of typical communal knowledge on an entire platform or party. It turns out that there is 3 metrics that will reliably determine a person’s vote when presented ideas on a certain policy problem. The first of course is IQ which is the most determinant factor in voting patterns because of the abstract thinking ability. The second is marital status + children shared (not separate partners) because it binds you to the future of the state. The third is property ownership value (not price) because it ties you directly to the economic stability of the country. Also, it is good to mention that each of these metrics do not measure on the same scale. For instance, the IQ metric is determinant of thoughts on a wide variety of angles on a specific issue. Marital Status + Children is specifically pertaining to regional stability and local security. Property value is strictly an economic stability scale set out years in advance. To make everything clearer, I will tell you of the inverse for each one that is commonly used in a more contrived and misguided judgement.

The most under reported and unmeasured metric of voting patterns is IQ range. This is the problem of the Middle-Brain. The Middle Brain, as I am referring to, is those who occupy the space between 85 and 115 IQ in the USA. This is some 70%~ of the population and is mostly responsible for how the USA is governed in policy as they are the majority in say. In typical voting patterns exit poll data accounts for this information in a different way. News outlets and pollsters use “education levels” instead of measured intelligence because they have a narrative to push that attending university for 4 years makes people more intelligent and cognitively functional; or at least the universities filter out those who aren’t. This comes from a feminine idea of credentialism, the endless acquiring of more and more titles or accreditations to elevate your status. They directly correlate this with inherent intelligence. Of course this is not correct because what university actually filters for is memorizations skills, determination and willingness to adhere to polite social cohesion. Now what you may find in actuality is that anyone equal to or under the 85 IQ strata will reliably vote with the 115 IQ or higher strata. This is because coincidentally the inclination of a higher abstract thinking ability has the same effect as someone who has a lower abstract thinking ability. So how would you expand your voting block if this is understood? The current Republican party has been able to tackle it from the angle of pushing from the outside inwards. Which makes their voting base range from equal and up to 90 IQ and also equal to and above 107 IQ which encompasses about 60% of the population. This creates a small voting base for the Democrats of roughly 40% squeezed between the 90 to 107 IQ marks. This seems to be shrinking as well. Identifying the problem as either low IQ people voting for problem policies or some sort of “elite” influencing the policy is absolutely ridiculous. It is time and time again shown that the “Middle Brain” controls this kind of policy that people consistently complain about even when they themselves are part of the middle brain.

The next metric is also some what disregarded in the matrix of determining a voter’s disposition or focus. Which of course is marital status + children shared with that marital partner. This is how we can measure the instinct of voting towards a safer society. The marital status of a person is not enough to be a stable marker of voting patterns because many people now are doing it just for show or some misplaced notion of “love”. As well as with the new age version of marriage there is the concept of hypergamy and not being tethered to just one partner but multiple. So if a person is married multiple times and has children with multiple partners, they will have the same voting pattern as a person who is not married and has no children. Their mindset and view of the world is essentially the same; That everything changes and should change. This is a consequence of female sexual freedom and a technocratic state which allows the female instinct to run wild without control. This encourages the plague of single motherhood which actually heightens the structural damage of the security of a regional society. So in order to get a reliable voting metric you simply control for a marriage that is longer than 3 years with more than just one child together and you can predict their voting tendency. This is because the bond between the marriage partners is stronger and creates a sense of needing to protect that bond, it is amplified by the amount of children created together. This forces them to also think in a long term manner because of the attachment to their children. This also affects their children’s voting patterns and their probability of marriage or having children, increasing with an order of magnitude by each child had. The metric normally used for this is a version of education because of the notion once again that education changes how a society intermingles with each other. What they are speaking of is a prosperous and well financed K-12 School district and access to child care facilities. I am sure you hear that in city council meetings everywhere that they need more funding for the school district and easily affordable infant childcare to have a better regional living standard. My question to you is, how are those inner cities doing?

The last main metric is Property Value owned, not a price label, or a rental. This directly ties yourself to the economy not only of your region but to your country. House building is manifested by the prices of many markets coming together such as: Lumber, concrete, granite, steel, appliances and brick. This also requires crews who have the skills to put it all together and connect the utilities to the building itself. This only multiplies if you have more than one property dependent on the quality of each. Low quality does not mean low value, this can be a low priced lower valued property that is seen as a beginner home. A high quality housing unit at any price point depending on the value is how this is measured. The voting marker normally used in this way is income level. It is a sort of way to mark people towards specific jobs and lifestyles even when an income does not mean the same thing in different areas. The income of a city dweller does not equal the income of a rural life enjoyer or even a suburbs citizen. This once again is a misunderstanding of value in currency. General living costs and prices are vastly different among regions and city centers. The reason we would instead use property value over an income level is because property value is a better store of wealth than that of an income level or also what could be said as “job security”. It must also be controlled for ownership of this property instead of having a bank note attached to it, because this would still be considered rental and shows real value of the “item”. In the end, it is the only way to account for a economic scale of a voter’s proclivities.

A bonus matter that is connected in a way sort of as a misnomer is voter age. In most polling surveys the age groups are highly skewed by the fringes and the reasoning for the grouping is life working stages. It gives a really shallow reading of what age is in a voting manner. There is this notion used by sociologists that there is sort of 3 stages of a person, in which they either contribute or do not. But the old applications of these rules no longer matter in a post-boomer economy. Especially in the USA where younger people have the ability to be wealthier than their predecessors due to the internet in some form. This also skews their ability to view reality. So, this metric is completely unreliable because a work ethic is no longer built in the same manner or for the same reasons. It is purely materialistic as well, due to life being more and more about individualism rather than survivalist or in a familial sense. If you were to do polling by age correctly it would be age groups based on brain development and typical neurological decline. For instance, I will put groupings together in brackets. IE: (18-20) (21-25) (26-40) (41-65) (66+). This gives you 5 groups that would more accurately show a voter’s inclinations and focus due to their milestones in life and neurological progression. The biggest part of why they do not do typical polling age groups like this is because they do not want to show the inabilities of some voting groups. There is a very entrenched belief that direct democracy produces the best outcome. That representation is required across every group classification. Though this is actually reducing the democratic process in ways that force very identity or tribalistic politics.

There has always been a misdirection and shadowing of intentions behind how polls are constructed which is why most are highly inaccurate and can be skewed so easily. Famous pollsters like Nate Silver really only predict things like public conscious. It has nothing to do with raw data, even if he sells his persona as something like that. This is why we have things like primary orders and bell-weather counties and electoral predictors. It is really about what the court of public opinion is, not how people perceive policy. The USA has never been about rational policy or even being about building a stable structure for the republic to sit on. It has always been a battle of celebrity. Some day there will be a time when the USA’s politics will be policy based on structural arguments. But we may still be 100 or more years out. We must at least make it so that we still have something to pass on to those people in the future and not a pile of rubble.