Apparently, the President will make an announcement on Saturday. What should it be? What shouldn’t it be?
At West Hunter, Greg Cochran unloads on the New York Times:
Posted on January 18, 2019 by gcochran9
There is a new article in the New York Times Magazine (Is Ancient DNA Research Revealing New Truths — or Falling Into Old Traps?) , in which some pinhead repeats complaints about David Reich crushing his enemies [archaeologists] , driving them before him, and hearing the lamentations of their women. He doesn’t give them much respect.
They don’t deserve respect. Sure, he has a far more powerful method. Sequencing DNA gives you billions of bits, orders of magnitude more than staring at potsherds. But it is fair to look at how archaeologists did with the tools they had: terrible, horrible, no good, very bad. They really, really wanted to create detailed stories of local social change, stories that didn’t sound like something by Robert E, Howard, full of thud and blunder. Not stories about barbarian conquest, population replacement, and mating with nonhuman races.
But that’s what happened….
Aryan Invasion theory: An Aryan invasion (!) , offensive to local feelings in India, sounds almost like colonialism, blah blah blah. But correct….
And so on, and so on. They had one job…
Does this mean that David Reich is without sin? No. He occasionally genuflects to the PC powers that be, sometimes smearing the innocent in the process. Is his success going to his head – might he tend to underrate peer review when he has Nick Patterson on his side? Maybe. Should he think very carefully about sample conservation, perhaps saving some for improved future methods? Sure.
But he’s contributing to knowledge, while the archaeologists were sliding backwards, less correct in 2018 than in 1930.
Read the whole thing there.
Around 1990-91 I started writing op-eds for newspapers as a hobby. The pay wasn’t much $75 to $150 per 750 word essay, but it was fun to get paid. But that brought up the question of whether I should use my real name or pick a pseudonym. Going with a realistic sounding pseudonym (e.g., Mark Twain rather than Publius) sounded most prudent. But I really wanted to cash checks for my writing, and I couldn’t figure out how to do that. So I didn’t.
Now, all these years later, I wish I had gone with a pseudonym.
What’s the best guide to keeping your confidentiality while getting paid?
From the Daily Caller:
‘DISRESPECTFUL’: GOOGLE EMPLOYEES MELT DOWN OVER THE WORD ‘FAMILY’
10:10 PM 01/16/2019, Peter Hasson | Reporter
A Google executive sparked a fierce backlash from employees by using the word “family” in a weekly, company-wide presentation, according to internal documents obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Many Google employees became angry that the term was used while discussing a product aimed at children, because it implied that families have children, the documents show. The backlash grew large enough that a Google vice president addressed the controversy and solicited feedback on how the company could become more inclusive.
One employee stormed out of the March 2017 presentation after a presenter “continued to show (awesome) Unicorn product features which continually use the word ‘family’ as a synonym for ‘household with children,’” he explained in an internal thread. That employee posted an extended rant, which was well-received by his colleagues, on why linking families to children is “offensive, inappropriate, homophobic, and wrong.”
This is a diminishing and disrespectful way to speak. If you mean “children”, say “children”; we have a perfectly good word for it. “Family friendly” used as a synonym for “kid friendly” means, to me, “you and yours don’t count as a family unless you have children”. …
“Using the word ‘family’ in this sense bothers me too,” wrote another employee, who felt excluded by the term because she was neither married nor a parent. …d
“My family consists of me and several other trans feminine folks, some of whom I’m dating. We’re all supportive of each other and eventually aspire to live together. Just because we aren’t a heterosexual couple with 2.5 kids, a white picket fence, and a dog doesn’t mean we’re not a family,” another employee added in agreement. …
By the way, English really ought to have more...
Oddly, the New York Times has published a second article summarizing the message of its long article on David Reich and other Ancient DNA scientists:
By The New York Times Magazine
Jan. 17, 2019
In only the past few years, as a new report in The New York Times Magazine describes, this burgeoning science of “paleogenomics” has begun to offer surprising revisions to the story of humanity. But at the same time, this research has generated significant controversy, including among some of the archaeologists, anthropologists and other academics who have collaborated with geneticists on this work.
This kind of Vox-like explainer about a New York Times article appearing in the New York Times is pretty weird. Presumably, the NYT, having recently Watsoned for crimethinking geneticist James Watson now wants to Watson fellow crimethinker geneticist David Reich.
Here are some key takeaways.
The study of ancient DNA has upended many of our assumptions about prehistoric times.
For decades, it was commonly believed that ancient communities tended to stay in one place — and thus didn’t mix very much with their neighbors.
The idea of “pure” groups with identifiable “origins” has been largely reconsidered.
Many of the new findings say the same thing: that these groups mixed together in the process of great and previously unknown migrations.
For example, ancient DNA research seems to indicate that about 5,000 years ago, when Europe was populated with a mix of hunter-gatherer groups and early farmers, a group of outsiders suddenly arrived — nomadic herders from the Asian steppes — and within a relatively short time their own ancestry became prevalent. Sometimes these prehistoric migrations seemed to result in “admixture” between groups on an even footing. Other times, however, researchers describe population “replacement” or “turnover” — the near-wholesale shift from one predominant ancestry to another....
— ian bremmer (@ianbremmer) January 17, 2019
What exactly does being genetically Mexican mean? Being mestizo?
By the way, 23andMe reported that the ancestry of its self-identified non-Hispanic white American customers was less than 0.2% Amerindian on average.
I’m not a big gun-grabber, but the last time I vacationed in Mexico there were too many guys with fifth-grade educations standing around holding AK-47s for my peace of mind.
Similarly, former Mexican foreign minister Jorge Castaneda wrote a book touching on how Mexico could attract more paying American tourists and, especially, retirees: one of his suggestions was to install more traffic lights to make crossing the street in Mexico less terrifying. But his biggest suggestion was that Mexicans retire the use of the ethnic slur gringo.
As I’ve been pointing out for years, recent genomic breakthroughs have, on the whole, done more to validate old, politically incorrect scientific theories than the newer politically correct conventional wisdom about everything is Socially Constructed.
One obvious example is Ancient DNA research, as practiced by David Reich, Svante Paabo, and the like, where 19th Century ideas like, yes, the Aryans really did invade India, are often being upheld by scanning the DNA found in ancient skeletons that have been (more or less) grave-robbed.
Now the New York Times Magazine attempts to strike back against the new science with a massive chin-stroking article about how it’s All Very Complicated (which no doubt it is):
Geneticists have begun using old bones to make sweeping claims about the distant past. But their revisions to the human story are making some scholars of prehistory uneasy.
By Gideon Lewis-Kraus, Jan. 17, 2019
… In 1967, the molecular biologist Allan Wilson at the University of California, Berkeley, along with one of his students, Vincent Sarich,
I knew Vince, a great guy.
demonstrated that evolutionary relationships between species could be determined not only from fossils but also, via a quantitative analysis of blood proteins, from living specimens. Humans and apes, Wilson found, diverged only five million years ago — far more recently than previously believed.
Within the decade, researchers trained in the discipline of population genetics would get in on the historical act. Every contemporary genome is a mosaic of individual tiles passed along from thousands of ancestors; each of us thus contains not only our “own” ancestry but those of multitudes. With each new generation, random mutations, like misspellings, are introduced into a population; some of these will disappear over time, but others will increase in frequency until they are common enough to become...
Yet another data point for my theory that late onset M-to-F trans ex-men tend to be right-of-center: Jewish billionaire and retired Army Reserve colonel “Jennifer” N. Pritzker, who is a GOP donor despite several of his cousins, such as new Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker and former Obama cabinet member Penny Pritzker, being leading Democrats.
James Pritzker is a scion of the famous Chicago Jewish Democratic clan that more or less picked out Obama to be President, but he is so rightist by nature that he is a Republican, reached colonel in Army Reserve, and founded a military museum.
Now Pritzker is an ex-man calling himself “Jennifer.”
From the Washington Post:
Opinion: Why should I support a political party that is marginalizing me out of existence? https://t.co/D0aZkZ2Ru6
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) January 14, 2019
Maybe being one of these late onset ex-men is a symptom of actual Toxic Masculinity in which you are so arrogant that you think you can bully everybody else into letting you get away with even this? For a certain kind of extreme masculinity personality, what could be more gratifying than bullying people into humiliating themselves by submitting to your will that they call you a woman?
On Twitter, billybobmcmanus asserts:
the pritzkers sponsored an english translation of the Zohar. Kabbalah is arguably the inspiration for a lot of gender bending. Not suggesting colonel Jen is a kabbalist but that she may have soaked in the same waters so to speak
Late onset M-to-F transgenderism seems to hit high IQ nerds hard: computer geeks, baseball sabermetricians, libertarian economists, defense analysts, sci-fi fans, etc.
Kabbalah, with its numerology obsession, seems to me like an early manifestation of Nerdism. But about all I know about it is from watching Darren Aronofsky’s fun movie Pi about a Jewish math genius whose breakthrough is wanted by Wall Street, the Deep State, and an ultra-Orthodox...
A few months ago Ron Unz, suggested I write an article about Bill Browder and the Magnitsky Act. I said I would think about it, but that I was not the most qualified person for the job. I have never investigated this affair deeply myself, so unless I was to spend a few days if not weeks researching it, it would essentially just be a repetition/rephrasing of what other people have already written on the matter. Why have I never deeply delved into an affair so central to Russian-American relations? Because at a fundamental level it just doesn’t interest me that much.
So here’s the thing. Based on the material I have read over the years, I am pretty certain that Browder is a crook, has a strong vindictive streak, and has played a central role in constructing anti-Russian sanctions and feeding the Russiagate conspiracy theory. OTOH, I am also pretty sure that the people on the other side are no angels either. As the guest writer “kovane” convincingly argued, in what remains one of the best intros to the subject despite having been written in 2011, the two police investigators – Karpov and Kuznetsov – are almost certainly corrupt themselves (even though they were innocent of the tax rebate that lay at the root of Browder’s allegations). And frankly, I think having the Russian elites “squeezed” by the West is a good thing for Russia, regardless of individual guilt or innocence. American bans on Russian chinovniki having property in Florida is a pretty minor human rights violation in the grand scheme of things, and is obviously not something I feel compelled to campaign against. This is actually even more true today than it had been before 2014, when at least the prospect of adequate Russian-Western relations did not yet seem entirely otherworldly. The sum of these considerations means that I can’t make myself care about this issue to the extent of writing a longread about it, and/or personally involving myself...
Seems the South Korean Military 2018 Whitebook has changed in three interesting ways:
1: Deleted references to North Korea as an enemy
2 Deleted references to "Japan shares our values of liberal democracy and market economy"
3: Priority to tech cooperation with China > Japan https://t.co/t5wsCXZGWV
— Spandrell (@thespandrell) January 18, 2019
Deep history in action?
Vietnam: Rebelling against China since before Christ – turns commie (if with a marked nationalist brand, as Linh Dinh will tell you); hates China anyway, and building defense ties with the US.
Korea: Near always a loyal vassal to China – gets bifurcated thanks largely to China, becomes ferociously anti-commie (ask, for that matter, the Vietnamese – South Korean troops were more motivated, effective, and brutal than American ones during the Vietnam War), hosts 25,000 American troops on its territory, but has long maintained warm ties with China and is now apparently prepared to sidle up closer.
Food for thought*.
Anyhow, this would be a major coup for the Sinosphere.
South Korea is the world’s third most technologically complex economy, and while its future doesn’t seem that prospective (last year its TFR fell below 1.0 children per woman, and twice smaller North Korea probably had more births for the first time ever), tech transfer in the meantime could be a major boon for China.
One additional important point is that South Korea also has good relations with Russia. These should be aggressively developed, as it is perhaps the only quality country that is quite Russophile. Better relations with South Korea will help undercut Western sanctions, while avoiding too lopsided a reliance on China for that function – while not coming at the expense of relations with China, since it has good (and improving) relations with Korea too. In contrast, Japan is too hostile to Russia, while Vietnam and India don’t really have anything...
Couple of good (native) takes on Serbia from the other thread.
What Proud Trans-Danubian Swine says meshes with what other Serbs have told me:
Vucic is free of any patriotic ideals and sees the people as low iq, low worth bydlo. He did spend 3 decades in the field, learnt his people, and it’s a good call.
Rise to power: West has a tactic to use compromised “patriots” to execute un-patriotic stuff, stuff pro-West “liberals” cannot pull off. I honestly don’t understand why, but Germans and French support English and Americans in installing a US foothold in the Europe’s belly, i.e. Kosovo. Vucic’s job is to make it happen, that’s why they brought him in 7 years ago. A perennial loser, a scarecrow, he was simply brought in and given power. Funny anecdote, on the day Vucic side first took power by winning presidential elections, some Brussel clerk couldn’t wait so late to congratulate, so they simply sent the telegram at the end of the work day at 5pm – 3 hours before the polls closed, on a super close race!
Establishing power: Vucic quickly gathered money by selling govt jobs like in ancient Rome (you want to govern town X – ok, that costs $$$). Then he used that money to literally buy off the key journalists, editors, professors and also make some show sackings. Every other small fry fell in place, it was beautiful. They fell in for fear of job loss or because: “Here’s our Lee Kwan Yew, silencing the terrible, fruitless cacophony that is “democracy” and now we’ll get to work. He’s young, smart and energetic, we’ll make strides now!”
His pillars of power:
– Alex Soros et all
MEDIA: His stranglehold on print and electronic media is by far the best we have ever seen, simply breathtaking how lightly yet firmly he holds the reins. The print is reduced to porn and shocking murders. Old stuff is regurgitated on slow days. All six national TV channels are his. He outright bought, through intermediaries,...
I am by no means a Serbia expert, and have to rely on other, more informed people – e.g., a couple of Serbian nationalist acquaintances – to tell me what is really going on there.
Anyhow, here’s the critical part which they are all agreed upon.
Despite his “reputation” in the West, Vucic is not a Serbian nationalist. He is actually hated amongst many Serbian nationalists, because they believe that he plays to them while planning to sell out on Kosovo. For instance, back in September, he relieved Chief of the General Staff Bratislav Dikovic, who is a veteran of the 1999 war against NATO and represents the hardcore pro-Russian wing in the military. Cleaning out or cowing patriotic officers would necessarily need to happen before any moves to stop resisting the final secession of Kosovo.
At the very least, Vucic is held to have no strong political convictions of his own, who can be expected to take the path of least resistance. That path, given Serbia’s position, is quite obvious. It leads to Brussels.
In this sense, he would appear similar to Milosevic, who was not the rabid, foaming at the mouth Kebab Remover of Western fantasy, but a typical sovok apparatchik forced along into nationalist projects, but whose half-hearted commitment to them ensured their failure – and eventually, his own political demise at the hands of nationalist insurgents. With said Bulldozer Revolution getting promptly hijacked by liberals.
In this sense, the Russian state – which from Serbian Sputnik up to Putin himself have slavishly backed Vucic, one suspects largely on account of his quasi-Russophile rhetoric and because he triggers Western journalists into writing op-eds on how he is an evil Putler puppet and Serbian SWPL-LGBT into demonstrating on the streets – may have set itself up for a rude awakening.
Having just received the Order of Alexander Nevsky from Putin – the first foreign head of state to be so honored – now...
Epstein’s book about race differences in sport published in the West vs. a Russian translation of Dutton & Lynn’s book about race differences in sport published in Russia. :LOL:
Further to my last post on the matter, I spent this evening collating all the most interesting maps I have on Russia, which I just published on my website: https://akarlin.com/projects/ruriks-seed/
(Why not here? Because I want it to be a page that I can keep editing indefinitely – adding to, and occasionally, deleting. For instance, since I posted my first post, I discovered that this was a fake map).
If you have any good (high quality * novel/unusual) Russia maps, then feel free to post them here.
In my original post, I said I’d forego commentary, allowing my readers to look at the data through fresh eyes. But in this post, I will go ahead and spell out some basic observations. Just quick notes, nothing serious.
Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary (1890-1907) on illegitimate births:
Illegitimate births / 100 births in Russia in 1892:
Couple of observations:
Also, here is the number of illegitimate births in Europe for 1894. Nothing new to my readers; same pattern as what I wrote about here.
The main popular article on this topic that I am familiar with is Patrick Chovanec’s The Nine Nations of China (written in the spirit of Garreau’s and Woodard’s work on North America).
Commenter AquariusAnon provides an update with a focus on China’s major cities and their ideological outlooks. His series of comments are reprinted below.
1. Beijing is indeed Siloviki vatnik Sinotriumph. Actually it has strong historical cultural influences from Mongolia and Siberia, and there’s a little bit of a Buryatia vibe among a huge population of the locals, especially older men.
Russophilia in Beijing is manifest in the 6 flights a day between Beijing and Moscow, and have been at least 4 daily since 2010. Also, last time I was in Beijing, I noticed quite a few restaurants have Russian menus.
But Beijing still has a relevant, nontrivial liberal population: Arts and entertainment in China is largely centered on Beijing. Even if they have to work within the limits of Chinese censorship, they are highly liberal. Overall, vatnik-influenced Sinotriumph siloviki is still dominant.
Based on my experiences with Western expats in China, they find Beijing to be much more authentically Chinese and down to earth than Shanghai. There is some outright hostility towards foreigners in Beijing, but this is probably the Tier 1 city of China where its the easiest to befriend a local. So culturally, its quite similar to Russia.
Car culture and traffic jams are huge in Beijing. The architecture and city planning is very, in fact, extremely, Soviet. I recall my first impression of the outskirts of Moscow was how similar it looked to the same areas of Beijing.
2. Spot on about Shanghai. Russian influence ends at borscht among the Shanghainese. They’re also a small minority of Chinese tourists in Russia. Aeroflot flights to Shanghai are almost 100% connections, unlike those to Beijing.
Anglophilia is actually drastically declining among Shanghainese,...
Despite all the media promotion, there is no organic interest in O’Rourke. Search volume in the US since the beginning of December, after the dust of the mid-terms had settled, for the top four candidates and O’Rourke:
Search index scores–basically average interest over the period–are as follows:
Biden — 20
Warren — 18
Harris — 17
Sanders — 14
O’Rourke — 1
The Democrat party is not going to nominate the Macron-Trudeau hybrid in 2020. I could not figure out how serious people–and serious money, as he was until very recently at the top of the PredictIt 2020 Dem market–were identifying him as the frontrunner. The only two white men with a chance at the nomination are Biden and Sanders, both on account of their long party histories. The days of white male Democrats rising to the top of the party are over. There are those like the aforementioned Biden and Sanders who will be grandfathered in, but the door to national-level leadership is shut for new entrants.
Even though Obama was a US senator who gave the 2004 DNC keynote address, it wasn’t until The Audacity of Hope was released in October of 2006, insinuating an impending presidential run, that he attracted all the attention that he did. Here is search volume for the first nine months of 2006, comparable to the first nine months of 2018 with regards to the respective presidential election cycles:
I distinctly remember making a lighthearted joke about Obama to a few black guys while playing basketball in a section 8 apartment complex gym near the place I worked at in the summer of 2006 and no one knew who I was talking about. Parenthetically, the complex is in a suburban area that was fairly nice then and is still livable today, though it is predictably declining as the demographics of the area shift. And yes, there was (still is, probably) a rec center–a pretty crappy one, with nothing but a basketball court of any use, but an indoor...
What a missed opportunity. He’s been called every -ist and -ism in the book during his entire congressional career yet he keeps getting reelected even when other Iowan Republicans lose, so why play by their rules? Now that he has gone full pathetic pusillanimity, he very well may not be reelected in 2020–if he even runs at all. I understand it’s easy for me to play chickenhawk while hiding behind a pseudonym, but once a man is out there, he may as well be out there without reservation.
You’re King. The NYT blood libel piece is out. The House of Reprehensibles is preparing to vote on a resolution resolutely condemning your hateful hate. You call a press conference. Lying through your teeth, you inform every Fake News outlet that you’re going to repudiate the unfortunate things you’ve said, issue a full apology, and ask for forgiveness and the chance to do whatever you can to help heal the hurt you’ve caused. All the 24-hour news stations are here, eagerly awaiting your prostrated mea culpa press conference they will all be airing live. You walk up to the podium, and… what do you say?
John Derbyshire is fond of saying that if there is hope for civilization, it is to be found in the comments. The new Gillette ad–excuse me, the new short film–is a great testament to the perspicacity of the Derb’s observation. A sampling:
There are several comments along the same lines. I talked to my brother earlier today and he similarly swears the thumbs down figure was significantly higher yesterday than it is as of this posting. Whatever desperate manipulations have taken place behind the scenes, even now the ratio of dislikes-to-likes is more than 2-to-1 in favor of dislikes:
Not bad, though had I been earlier to the party I’d have written, “I loved this video but my wife’s boyfriend thinks it’s gay.”
Globohomo wants to feed the sons of moms who look like this one to Moloch. Mothers who understand and vocalize as much are worthy of praise.
Haven Monahan is eager to elbow his way back into the limelight!
It really is sick, a window into the Xanaxed minds of the yentas who think Brett Kavanaugh should be impeached. Almost nothing shown in the video actually occurs in the real world, save for truly unfortunate white kids whose mothers send them to majority-black public schools. The video, of course, shows a bunch of white kids bullying another white kid. Parenthetically, Stefan Molyneux has a good half-hour dissection of the ‘film’ here.
The one portrayal approaching an accurate depiction of daily suburban life is of a couple of boys, aged about eight, wrestling in the grass. Eventually, the soy-fed mangina cast as the father of one of them intervenes to say, “That’s not how we treat each other, okay?”
Fuck these misandrists to hell. My son asks if we can wrestle every single day, multiple times per day, without fail. It’s the exact same story when I see my nephews. As anyone who has spent two minutes around boys knows, they crave this sort of roughhousing like an infant...
The following graphs show two-way partisan affiliation among whites and total fertility rates among whites by state. The state-level results correlate at an impressive .73. States where whites still have a few babies here and there are red ones:
The future belongs to those who show up, so if you’re looking for comfort where some can be found, this is not nothing.
If the invasion put to a halt and the invaders expelled, the long-term electoral viability of the Republican party would once again become an open question. On the current trajectory, the GOP is a dead party walking.
Scrounging around the bottom of the bottle for another white pill, final birth data for 2017 shows that once again the sensational pronouncement by the Census all the way back in 2011 alleging that non-Hispanic white births no longer constituted a majority of all births in the US was incorrect then just as it continues to be incorrect now, albeit only just:
Parenthetically, the assertion can be quibbled with by pointing out that the data is exclusively for mothers, so if the progeny of both mixed-race male non-white/female white parents and male white/female non-white parents are counted as non-white, the POC percentage could be above 50%. In a flight-from-white zeitgeist, this is fair enough from a cultural perspective. Biologically-speaking, it’s less defensible.
It can also be contested on the relatively expansive definition of non-Hispanic white, which includes “off whites” among some portion of Chileans, Jews, Armenians, etc.
Still, the mendacious media’s effort at demoralization must not go unnoticed. When Fake News was celebrating the premature death of white America several years ago, it was not subsequent to taking these things into consideration. It was a headline they hungered for and uncritically gobbled up.
A few other interesting insights gleaned from the CDC’s report:
– Hispanics of Cuban extraction now comprise just 22.4% of all...
In the current year, saying “not who we are” is who we are.
The cliche isn’t just raining down from above, it’s miasmically rising up from below. Search volume in the US since 2004:
That’s quite the secular bull market. How about other Anglophone countries?
First, the still largely Anglo Anglophone ones. Great Britain:
Volume isn’t high enough to register in New Zealand.
Let’s take a look at a few of the largest non-Anglo Anglophone countries. Nigeria:
American exceptionalism wins again!
A recurring theme here is that Jews in America are either going to have throw in with the Heritage American whites they’ve long despised–if Heritage America will have them–or face the brown invasion in isolation. Despite Jews’ best efforts, the POC ascendancy increasingly not only denies them claim to victim status, it views them as especially privileged whites. It’s not an unreasonable assessment, either. Whatever white privilege is, Jewish privilege is it cubed.
Due to high outmarriage rates and fertility below replacement, the 2% is on its way to becoming the 1% is on its way to becoming the 0.X%. The Islamic invasion is obviously bad for Jews, but the Hispanic deluge is bad for them, too. I’ve come across with a fair share of anecdotal evidence (((they))) may be waking up to the reality they face, but now we’ll present some quantitative confirmation of it. The following graph shows president Trump’s approval rating among white gentiles and Jews by age range. “Mixed feelings”, comprising less than 5% of all responses, are excluded:
Based Jews aren’t the rarity they used to be. Ruth Bader Ginsburg can rest in Gehenna knowing she is being replaced with this:
The modest differences among whites are remarkable. The age gap was much more pronounced during Dubya’s presidency than it is today. Among married whites, the younger the couple the stronger their support for Trump. He gets higher levels of support from married Zs and millennials than he does from married Xers and boomers.
Frustrating though his lack of progress has been, Trump is changing the face of the Republican electorate. As I’m fond of pointing out, he is a transitional figure rather than a transformative one. The cucks and neocons are self-important chiefs who find themselves with fewer and fewer indians with each passing day.
The Imperial Capital is the only ‘state’ in the country that has, since 1970, lost non-whites and gained whites, in both absolute numbers and in percentage-terms. Funny how the political power center driving the Great Replacement has itself not only remained impervious to that replacement, it has–alone among the states–actually reversed the trend.
The following graph and table show the percentage of total population growth between 1970 and 2018, by state, that is attributable to non-whites (or to those who are not non-Hispanic white, more precisely). Data is from the US Census:
Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming have experienced a lot of white population growth over the last half-century. Mormon fertility makes a difference. Or at least it used to.
For the record, if Trump gets a cuck primary challenger like John Kasich or Ben Sasse, the weasel(s) won’t win a single state with the quasi-exception of the DC caucus, a result that will be even worse for Conservatism, Inc than if it didn’t win a single delegate at all. There can never be enough national reminders of how little electoral purchase Conservatism, Inc has left. Kek intervened more in the primaries than he did in the general election. While Trump may not deserve the level of shitlord support he received in 2016, nothing would rekindle it like a cuck primary challenge would.
If Trump caves on the wall, @AnnCoulter should run in the Republican primaries. Not being flippant in the least–completely serious
— Audacious Epigone (@AudaciousEpigon) January 9, 2019
As good as it would be to see Kasich get humiliated again, it would be even better to see Ann Coulter run. To filch from Pat Buchanan, she has been right from the beginning. Nobody has more credibility as a good-faith critic than she does. Her challenge would serve as a referendum on Trump’s deviation from the dance that put him the White House. Parenthetically, this is why she’d be even better than Tucker Carlson. Trump spurned Coulter on Twitter after having followed her for years before winning the presidency. He didn’t follow Carlson then but he does now.
She expressed great admiration for how the late Phyllis Schafly never rested on her laurels. As enormous as Coulter’s contributions have been, she could outdo herself yet.