logo
Experts Say Conservative Men Are Identifying As Moderates On Dating Apps

Experts Say Conservative Men Are Identifying As Moderates On Dating Apps

Buzz Feed10-07-2025
Hot Topic
🔥 Full coverage and conversation on Politics
Back in January, the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative public policy think tank, released a survey that determined 52% of single heterosexual women are less likely to date a Donald Trump supporter — with only 36% of single heterosexual men saying voting for Trump would be a dealbreaker.
And in the lead-up to Inauguration Day, Hily, a dating app with over 35 million worldwide users, released its own politics and dating study. After surveying 5,000 Gen Z and millennial Americans, Hily determined that 1 in 3 American women would decline a date over political differences. Similar to the AEI survey, Hily's study determined that only 1 in 10 American men would decline a date for the same reason.
These results could very well explain the suspicious trend of heterosexual men misrepresenting their political leanings on dating apps: Specifically, they put 'moderate' on their profiles or act vague about their politics to increase their chances of matching with women who deliberately put 'no conservatives' in their own profiles. These so-called 'moderates' connect with liberal women, only for them to discover that their matches voted for Donald Trump in the last election (a dealbreaker for many).
So why are people lying about their politics on dating apps in the first place? And how can daters spot the red flags behind these vague profiles before everyone's emotions take over? Here's what relationship experts have to say about this very 2025 dating problem.
How 'Moderate' Became A Red Flag
Ella,* a Los Angeles resident, said she's had nothing but frustration with 'moderates' on the apps. As she told HuffPost, Ella noticed that her 'large number of matches' with guys listed as 'moderate' on their Hinge dating profiles has grown significantly in recent months. But she now swipes left on all 'moderates': This is because more than once, after 'days and days of texting,' it turns out that these guys are 'really far-right, anti-feminist, etc,' she said.
Ella's theory is that conservative men might need to lie about their political views – or else they won't get any dates in a liberal city like LA.
Amanda*, creator of the ' Dating Is Dead ' Instagram account, recently ended a two-year relationship with a man who also listed 'moderate' on his profile.
'I think that he was conservative more than moderate,' she said. 'I feel like I was catfished in that sense.'
She said her now-ex-boyfriend began to show his true colors during the first 100 days of the second Trump administration: 'He was becoming more and more indoctrinated to the hard right.'
Now, Amanda is questioning whether her ex's far-right attitude was there all along and she was 'just so blinded by love' — or if 'he was hiding who he was.'
Since ending that relationship, Amanda said she is far more cautious around men who put 'moderate' in their dating profiles: 'I try and bring it up more gently than I did in the beginning,' she said, 'because there's a lot of dancing around who we voted for, so now I ask immediately.'
This approach may result in some abbreviated dates, but it could also mean dodging a major bullet before you've even finished drinks: 'I actually went on a date the other night that lasted seven minutes,' Amanda said. Her date, after admitting that he voted for Donald Trump, brushed off her concerns about the president's second administration, claiming that 'nothing in America is really going to change,' which was all Amanda needed to know about this guy's values.
Bolster Your Dating Boundaries
From the chipping away of reproductive freedom to the U.S. government's pronatalist campaign, women's rights are under attack in 2025. So discovering that the 'moderate' guy you've matched with might actually be looking for a tradwife can be unsettling, to say the least.
'For a lot of women — especially women of color, queer women, women with trauma histories — conservative beliefs don't just feel like a difference of opinion,' said Cheryl Groskopf, an LA-based anxiety, trauma and attachment therapist. 'They feel like a threat. And if you've ever been dismissed, gaslit or harmed by someone who hides behind 'traditional values,' then this kind of dishonesty can feel like a violation (because it is).'
'It's also just draining to constantly have to explain yourself,' continued Groskopf. 'Think of the energy it takes to spend the first 30 minutes of a first date defending your humanity.'
Amanda knows this sentiment well. She recounted how the seven-minute-date guy disregarded her concerns about women's bodily autonomy by pointing out that she lives in a blue state like New York. 'I was like, but it's not about me,' she said. 'It's about the girl in Mississippi or Texas who was, God forbid, sexually assaulted at 13 or who needs a D&C. [Men] have the same rights across all 50 states, and I don't. It is not really up for discussion. A gun has more rights than I do.'
Bottom line? 'Women need these boundaries to protect their energy, their bodies and their sense of safety,' Groskopf said. 'They can absolutely name up-front what they need to feel safe.'
Why Are Men Misrepresenting Themselves On The Apps?
The numbers don't lie: If 52% of single women are less likely to date a Trump supporter, then it makes sense that some of those Trump supporters are attempting to game the system.
'It may be because they are trying to appeal to a broader range of women, and want to select answers that they perceive will get them past the initial screening,' observes Marisa T. Cohen, PhD, LMFT, a relationship expert with Hily. (Cohen also provided the data from Hily's pre-Inauguration Day survey.)
'They also may perceive that they are being inaccurately judged as a result of their political views, so they are trying to present themselves in a way that they think will allow them to match with more people,' she added.
But these political mismatches sometimes occur simply because some people 'may judge their own views inaccurately,' Cohen said. 'They may think they are progressive compared to other people they are associated with, but don't necessarily hold progressive views.'
Groskopf also points to a 'real-time cultural shift': Women are now asking questions like, 'Does this person feel emotionally safe to me?'
Amanda echoes that, reiterating her need to know a man's political beliefs before getting involved. 'I would not feel safe in a room with a bunch of conservative men at this point,' she told HuffPost.
While Groskopf doesn't believe all men are 'trying to maliciously deceive' their potential dates, she also observes that they're not all being honest and authentic, either.
'Many of them have just never had to think about how their political beliefs affect someone else's sense of emotional or physical safety,' Groskopf said. 'They weren't taught to connect their values to safety, or to see 'moderate' as vague instead of neutral. But what he's missing is that for a lot of women, that kind of vagueness is the red flag.'
Trust Yourself — And Your Values
If a person's political views are a dealbreaker for you, then it's imperative to tackle vague, 'moderate' profiles with a clear strategy: That starts with establishing your values, Cohen said. 'Additionally, going beyond surface-level questions to get to know a person and their worldview is important.'
That being said, Cohen advises skepticism if a potential date 'consistently fails to expand on their own views.' For the sake of your emotional safety, Groskopf recommends asking simple questions like:
'What does 'moderate' mean to you?'
'How do your values show up in your day-to-day?'
'Where do you land on things that matter to me — like therapy, mental health, women's rights?'
'The way he responds will tell you a lot,' Groskopf said. 'Does he get curious? Defensive? Does he minimize your question? Does he give a clear answer or just talk in circles and try to sound chill? If he can't meet that moment with honesty, clarity, or even basic self-awareness — that is the red flag.'
Groskopf also cautions against continued obscurity: 'If he says things like 'I'm pretty middle of the road' or 'I just don't like extremes' — but can't tell you what he does believe or values,' then that's a red flag too.
Watch out for defensiveness or mockery as well: 'If he gets weird or low-key annoyed when you ask a totally normal question about values — or makes fun of people who care about things like social issues or emotional growth — that's your sign,' Groskopf said. 'A guy who's actually grounded doesn't get defensive over basic emotional curiosity.'
Women deserve to know if someone they're dating voted against their interests from the get-go. If a guy you match with says 'moderate' on his profile, you are entitled to know his definition of the word before your emotions potentially take over.
'For you to tell me that you're a moderate, but it's OK to have unmarked police cars and people without badges sweeping people up in the streets? That's outrageous,' Amanda said of dubious 'moderate' men.
'Your non-negotiables are your non-negotiables,' Cohen said. 'If learning about a person's political leanings matters to you, ask!'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US-EU trade deal wards off further escalation but will raise costs for companies, consumers
US-EU trade deal wards off further escalation but will raise costs for companies, consumers

The Hill

time14 minutes ago

  • The Hill

US-EU trade deal wards off further escalation but will raise costs for companies, consumers

FRANKFURT, Germany (AP) — President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have announced a sweeping trade deal that imposes 15% tariffs on most European goods, warding off Trump's threat of a 30% rate if no deal had been reached by Aug. 1. The tariffs, or import taxes, paid when Americans buy European products could raise prices for U.S. consumers and dent profits for European companies and their partners who bring goods into the country. Here are some things to know about the trade deal between the United States and the European Union: What's in the agreement? Trump and von der Leyen's announcement, made during Trump's visit to one of his golf courses in Scotland, leaves many details to be filled in. The headline figure is a 15% tariff rate on 'the vast majority' of European goods brought into the U.S., including cars, computer chips and pharmaceuticals. It's lower than the 20% Trump initially proposed, and lower than his threats of 50% and then 30%. Von der Leyen said the two sides agreed on zero tariffs on both sides for a range of 'strategic' goods: Aircraft and aircraft parts, certain chemicals, semiconductor equipment, certain agricultural products, and some natural resources and critical raw materials. Specifics were lacking. She said the two sides 'would keep working' to add more products to the list. Additionally, the EU side would purchase what Trump said was $750 billion (638 billion euros) worth of natural gas, oil and nuclear fuel to replace Russian energy supplies, and Europeans would invest an additional $600 billion (511 billion euros) in the U.S. What's not in the deal? Trump said the 50% U.S. tariff on imported steel would remain; von der Leyen said the two sides agreed to further negotiations to fight a global steel glut, reduce tariffs and establish import quotas — that is, set amounts that can be imported, often at a lower rate. Trump said pharmaceuticals were not included in the deal. Von der Leyen said the pharmaceuticals issue was 'on a separate sheet of paper' from Sunday's deal. Where the $600 billion for additional investment would come from was not specified. And von der Leyen said that when it came to farm products, the EU side made clear that 'there were tariffs that could not be lowered,' without specifying which products. What's the impact? The 15% rate removes Trump's threat of a 30% tariff. It's still much higher than the average tariff before Trump came into office of around 1%, and higher than Trump's minimum 10% baseline tariff. Higher tariffs, or import taxes, on European goods mean sellers in the U.S. would have to either increase prices for consumers — risking loss of market share — or swallow the added cost in terms of lower profits. The higher tariffs are expected to hurt export earnings for European firms and slow the economy. The 10% baseline applied while the deal was negotiated was already sufficiently high to make the European Union's executive commission cut its growth forecast for this year from 1.3% to 0.9%. Von der Leyen said the 15% rate was 'the best we could do' and credited the deal with maintaining access to the U.S. market and providing 'stability and predictability for companies on both sides.' What is some of the reaction to the deal? German Chancellor Friedrich Merz welcomed the deal which avoided 'an unnecessary escalation in transatlantic trade relations' and said that 'we were able to preserve our core interests,' while adding that 'I would have very much wished for further relief in transatlantic trade.' The Federation of German Industries was blunter. 'Even a 15% tariff rate will have immense negative effects on export-oriented German industry,' said Wolfgang Niedermark, a member of the federation's leadership. While the rate is lower than threatened, 'the big caveat to today's deal is that there is nothing on paper, yet,' said Carsten Brzeski, global chief of macro at ING bank. 'With this disclaimer in mind and at face value, today's agreement would clearly bring an end to the uncertainty of recent months. An escalation of the US-EU trade tensions would have been a severe risk for the global economy,' Brzeski said. 'This risk seems to have been avoided.' What about car companies? Asked if European carmakers could still sell cars at 15%, von der Leyen said the rate was much lower than the current 27.5%. That has been the rate under Trump's 25% tariff on cars from all countries, plus the preexisting U.S. car tariff of 2.5%. The impact is likely to be substantial on some companies, given that automaker Volkswagen said it suffered a 1.3 billion euro ($1.5 billion) hit to profit in the first half of the year from the higher tariffs. Mercedes-Benz dealers in the U.S. have said they are holding the line on 2025 model year prices 'until further notice.' The German automaker has a partial tariff shield because it makes 35% of the Mercedes-Benz vehicles sold in the U.S. in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, but the company said it expects prices to undergo 'significant increases' in coming years. What were the issues dividing the two sides? Before Trump returned to office, the U.S. and the EU maintained generally low tariff levels in what is the largest bilateral trading relationship in the world, with some 1.7 trillion euros ($2 trillion) in annual trade. Together the U.S. and the EU have 44% of the global economy. The U.S. rate averaged 1.47% for European goods, while the EU's averaged 1.35% for American products, according to the Bruegel think tank in Brussels. Trump has complained about the EU's 198 billion-euro trade surplus in goods, which shows Americans buy more from European businesses than the other way around, and has said the European market is not open enough for U.S.-made cars. However, American companies fill some of the trade gap by outselling the EU when it comes to services such as cloud computing, travel bookings, and legal and financial services. And some 30% of European imports are from American-owned companies, according to the European Central Bank.

Good riddance to UNESCO — a hate-America shouting gallery
Good riddance to UNESCO — a hate-America shouting gallery

New York Post

time44 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Good riddance to UNESCO — a hate-America shouting gallery

President Donald Trump is pulling America out of UNESCO for the third time. Maybe this time it'll be for good. Once lauded for its work in preserving important cultural sites, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organizations became a platform for miseducation by every tinpot tyrant trying to score points by defaming America and its allies. It also adopted a full-on woke agenda, backing divisive DEI and social-justice causes that, as a Team Trump aide explained, conflicted with American values. Advertisement 'Continued involvement in UNESCO is not in the national interest of the United States,' the State Department declared. The agency's focus on the UN's 'Sustainable Development Goals,' for example, follows the Paris Climate Accords program of deindustrializing the developed world, while paying the Third World to help it catch up. It admitted the 'State of Palestine' as a full member, though the United States does not recognize such a state, believing the Palestinian issue should be decided by Israel and Palestinian Arabs, not the striped-pants brigade from third-party nations. Advertisement UNESCO has also politicized Jewish holy sites, calling Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem a 'mosque,' which it never was. And it's been China's running dog, promoting Beijing's domination of Tibetan and Uyghur culture — arguably genocidal — as perfectly fine. UNESCO's odious record goes back decades. Washington first withdrew from the group in 1984, under Ronald Reagan, when it sought to have US media companies submit to the control of a 'New World Information Order.' Advertisement Trump's withdrawal from UNESCO follows his exit from the UN's equally vile Human Rights Council, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio's sanctioning of its 'special rapporteur' on Palestinian issues, Francesca Albanese, who was obsessed with falsely depicting Israel as a perpetrator of genocide. Those moves were well deserved. Call it a Turtle Bay trifecta.

CIA director teases more files on alleged Russiagate links to Hillary: ‘Finally coming to light'
CIA director teases more files on alleged Russiagate links to Hillary: ‘Finally coming to light'

New York Post

timean hour ago

  • New York Post

CIA director teases more files on alleged Russiagate links to Hillary: ‘Finally coming to light'

CIA Director John Ratcliffe on Sunday teased plans to publicly disclose additional files that allegedly help tie Hillary Clinton to the false claims of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Ratcliffe specifically hinted at 'underlying intelligence' referenced in the annex of the Durham report, which scrutinized probes into the Clinton vs. President Trump match-up and is currently undergoing a declassification process. 'What hasn't come out yet and what's going to come out is the underlying intelligence,' Ratcliffe told Fox News' Maria Bartiromo on 'Sunday Morning Futures,' referring to Russiagate. 4 CIA Director John Ratcliffe claims that the 'good guys' are in charge now. AP 'And what that intelligence shows, Maria, is that part of this was a Hillary Clinton plan, but part of it was an FBI plan to be an accelerant to that fake Steele dossier, to those fake Russia collusion claims by pouring oil on the fire, by amplifying the lie and bearing the truth of what Hillary Clinton was up to.' During the 2016 election cycle, an opposition-research file against then-candidate Trump and compiled by ex-MI6 spy Christopher Steele was circulated within the intelligence community. 4 Hillary Clinton's campaign helped pay for the development of the Steele dossier. The Washington Free Beacon, Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee ultimately ended up paying for the research Steele conducted into Trump during the 2016 cycle. The largely debunked Steele dossier was reviewed by investigators in the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane probe into Russia's meddling in the 2016 election. Former Special Counsel John Durham, who was appointed by the first Trump administration, investigated the FBI probe and criticized the bureau's handling of the inquiry in a report released in 2023. The unclassified portion of his report is public. 'In the summer of 2016, U.S. intelligence intercepted Russian intelligence talking about a Hillary Clinton plan, a Hillary Clinton plan to falsely accuse Donald Trump of Russia collusion, to vilify him and smear him with what would become known infamously as the — as the Steele dossier,' Ratcliffe recapped. The CIA boss said he combed through predecessor John Brennan's handwritten notes on the matter to discover the 'underlying intelligence behind it that revealed exactly what happened. 'All of this evidence that's been hidden and buried from the American people is finally coming to light,' Ratcliffe said. Some key figures from the Obama administration, which was in power at the time, have denied that the Steele dossier was the impetus for the FBI's Russia investigation into whether the Kremlin was communicating with Trump's 2016 campaign. 'There is no doubt in my mind that the people that we just talked about conspired. They conspired against President Trump. They conspired against the American people,' Ratcliffe said. 4 Former CIA Director John Brennan was a key figure in promulgating the Russiagate narrative. AP He noted that both he and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard have made referrals to the Justice Department pertaining to their findings. 'I don't think statute of limitations are going to impact [it] because, on the conspiracy, the statute of limitation doesn't start to run until the last act in furtherance of that conspiracy,' he said. 'The people behind this are still furthering the conspiracy. 'They're refusing to admit or acknowledge what they did … was wrong.' Gabbard revisited Russiagate earlier this month with a series of public disclosures on previously classified information, such as a 2020 House Intelligence Committee report which determined there wasn't enough evidence to conclude Russia favored Trump in 2016. 4 Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has been revisiting the Russiagate controversy and declassifying key intelligence documents. Anna Wilding/ She also released material indicating that top intelligence bosses had evidence that Russia did not hack 2016 voting systems in a way that allowed them to change the election outcome. US Attorney General Pam Bondi announced a 'strike force' last week at the Justice Department to parse through the referrals made from Gabbard and Ratcliffe on Russiagate.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store