Not that stereotypes should be considered truth, even though stereotypes aren’t created out of thin air, but that only applies to those stereotypes that we prefer not apply. Apparently, the awful stereotype of black men doesn’t prevent a black woman from burning them for their failure to do as she would expect.

White female voters in Georgia showed little interest in helping black women fulfill their dream of electing Stacey Abrams as governor, which would have made her the first African American woman to head a state in the nation’s history.

As everyone, except white women, knows, they’re awful. After all, isn’t politics all about helping a black woman fulfill her dreams, rather than, say, electing a person to office because that’s the person they choose to vote for?

Among black women, 97 percent supported Abrams, who is the first black woman to win a major party’s nomination for governor.

And that’s great, as every black woman who voted, like every white woman, got to vote for the candidate of their choice.

Although white suburban women were praised for helping to flip the U.S. House from Republican to Democratic control, liberal political pundits and activists criticized them for backing Kemp over the female Democratic candidate.

Not liberal political pundits, who would never challenge the choice of a voter because that’s the nature of the right to vote, the right to vote for whichever candidate a person prefers, even if their genitalia suggest to those who place identity above all else that they voted all wrong. But what about black men?

But another group of voters also raised eyebrows for how they voted in the race, in which Abrams fell about 17,000 votes short of forcing a runoff with Kemp.

Black men voted for Kemp at a higher rate than black women, according to exit polling, a data point that drew gasps and rebuke on social media and news commentary.

On the one hand, Kemp was a particularly awful candidate on questions of race. On the other, neither race nor gender is the only issues in an election, the sole driving force for every voter of color or gender.

Sexism was probably not a major factor in black men supporting Abrams at a lower rate, [senior fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice Ted] Johnson said.

So if the failure of black men to vote for the black woman wasn’t the obvious reason, sexism, why then did it happen?

Black men who voted for Kemp were not so much rejecting Abrams as embracing the conservative messages of rugged individualism and free-market economics.

Whether that’s the reason any individual voted Kemp instead of Abrams is unknown, but does reveal a point that tends to be utterly inconceivable to the woke, who have absolute expectations that people will vote their skin color or genitalia.

There are other issues. There are substantive issues that neither race nor gender necessarily encompass. People, whether white women or black men, will occasionally vote for a person because they agree with the candidate on substantive issues, or disagree with the other candidate, as the case may be.

“I think it boils down to — the conservative mantra of self-determination and economic empowerment resonates with men, period, but especially with a certain cohort of black men,” Johnson said. “Like the brothers that are hustling CD to the brothers that open barbershops, that entrepreneurial spirit is alive in the black community.”

He said those voters believe that the GOP talking point of “getting government out of the way and letting people determine their own economic path. That sounds good to black men, and it’s a mantra they can support rather than having the government say we’re gonna help you to be a man.”

Not just a man, but a good man, at least from the perspective of some women. Notably, Johnson calls it the “conservative mantra of self-determination,” because no one but a conservative could possibly prefer not having his life constrained by an excessive regulatory state or told how men are to behave by the wokiest of women.

But while the fact that more black men than women voted for Kemp may make them fiscal conservatives, it doesn’t make them “racial conservatives.”

“To be a racial conservative means you’re okay with Jim Crow,” he added. “There’s only one party that you can support and be progressive on race, and that’s the Democratic Party.”

But if so, then is Johnson saying that black men in Georgia care more about their fiscal health than Jim Crow? How is that possible, given the obsession with racism that progressives insist is the overarching pervasive issue?

“Every election becomes almost a single-issue election for black voters: Are you for or against civil rights?” Johnson said, adding that all the other social and economic issues “get muted by racial issues.”

Apparently not, despite Johnson’s certainty, and the disappointment of black women, as there would have been no disparity between the choice of black voters regardless of gender if that were the case. Or, is it possible that black voters, like white voters, like any other voter, make their choices based on substantive issues other than race and gender, and that they are as aware of, and concerned about, substantive issues that aren’t resolved solely by skin color or genitalia?

There is an expectation, almost a matter of reliance, that all voters of a particular bloc or demographic are obligated to vote the way stereotypes demand of them. But people are funny, in that each of us believes ourselves to be an independent individual, entitled to vote the way we prefer without regard to the skin color or genitalia of a candidate.

Even black men are allowed to vote any damn way they please, even if it turns out not to be the way that black women demand of them. They’re not doing it wrong, and just because progressive pundits can’t fathom how any black man could possibly vote any way other than as they expect, black men are allowed to make their own choice. Each and every one of them.