The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Abrams' Ascent
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Stacey Abrams in 2016, on how POC power will electorally steamroll the GOP:

Look at Georgia by contrast today: In terms of active voters, it’s 57 percent white, 30 percent black, 2 percent Latino, and 2 percent Asian, which means you don’t need to spend as much time or money on the persuasion part of the equation. All you have to do is turn out black voters and brown voters. So unlike in North Carolina, where they spent $22.9 million trying to persuade white voters to vote for Obama, all you have to do is spend a quarter of that convincing black voters to vote. It’s a much easier lift to turn out people who agree with you than it is to convince people and then turn them out.

Georgia was going through a demographic shift in the 1990s that made us very solidly red. Previously, we’d been a Democratic state, but you had conservative Democrats, northern liberals who’d moved into Georgia, and African-American Democrats: We were all in same party but not with the same values. That started to fracture in the ’90s. It completely fell apart in 2002, and Democrats hit our nadir in 2010 with the tea party.

What’s different now is that the demographic migration in Georgia is massive and it’s unique; between 2000 and 2010, 1.5 million new people moved into Georgia, 1.2 million of whom were people of color. That is unprecedented in terms of Georgia’s population.

People like to locate where other people share their values, their history, their ethnicity.

The New Georgia Project’s entire focus is voter registration, voter education, and voter activation of people of color. We successfully registered 64,000 people in 2014 and another 123,000 applications will have been submitted in 2016. When we finish this year, we will have registered around 20 percent of that unregistered population we started with in 2014.

Your untapped population, the population we haven’t spent a great deal of time or effort on, is people of color. And the goal is spending time early, convincing them that their votes matter. If you want progressive policies, these are the folks you go to.

Georgia is the future of America. Economic changes, demographic changes happening around this country — not only with regard to race but in terms of age — all those things find a perfect crucible in Georgia. Georgia is a vision of what America is going to look like in 20 years. Our demographic changes are dramatic. We are now on the cusp of being a majority minority state for first time since Reconstruction.

Abrams is not a stupid woman. She has a sophisticated understanding of the electoral landscape–what it looked like in the past, what it looks like now, and what it is likely to look like in the future. Her inversion of the Sailer Strategy not only has the inherent advantage of winning the long game, her becoming the new face of the Democrat party also immediately backs Republicans into a corner they cannot extricate themselves from without a fundamental shift in their rhetorical paradigm.

Here we have someone who won the Democrat gubernatorial primary and nearly the governorship of one of the more reliably Republican states in the country by explicitly focusing on non-whites. How did she rise to such a position in the first place? By explicitly targeting the POC ascendancy.

More than any other currently active Democrat pol, Abrams is both the cerebral and spiritual embodiment of that ascendancy. In many ways she is the Democrat Donald Trump. To attack Trump is to attack forgotten America. To attack Abrams is to attack the POC champion, to attack the POC champion is to be a white supremacist, and to be a white supremacist terrifies Republicans into rank-breaking, back-stabbing, and surrender more than anything else. That last bit is why Democrats will win for the foreseeable future. They welcome their way to win. The Republicans relentlessly #Resist it.

By taking the party mantle in the state of the union response, Abrams will be casting a circle of protection on Democrats across the country. Republican attacks against Democrats will be more easily recast as attacks on POCs than ever before. There will increasingly be no need to explicitly make the connection, it will simply be understood to be the case.

The only way for the GOP to counter the pro-POC party will be to become the pro-white party, something unthinkable as currently constituted. A politician who not only owns but emphatically promotes focusing on POCs without regard to whites is jettisoned to the top of the Democrat party. In contrast, any Republican politician who is accused of possibly being guilty of maybe thinking about focusing on whites as whites is considered a cursed liability that must be expunged at all costs–even if those accusations are false. This dynamic makes a Democrat defeat virtually impossible.

This is not an unforced error on the part of the Democrat leadership. It’s an aggressive move by a party that senses it has the upperhand and is keen to exploit it. The Bernie Sanders’-style of ‘colorblind’ progressivism doesn’t stand a chance. To reiterate for the hundredth time, Kamala Harris will be the Democrat nominee.

Parenthetically, notice our representation in the above photo. See there, outside on the bench!

 
Hide 176 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. thought this was gonna be about elliott abrams. and how neocons like him just keep coming back no matter what.

    the ascent of a useless do nothing like stacey abrams makes sense, due to demographics. they’re the least impressive people on earth.

    but how these neocons keep coming back is seriously impressive. i’ve never seen anything like it in 40 years of watching politics. they’re hanging around in democrat administrations too, it’s not just a republican thing.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Neocons have managed to appeal to a lot of Americans by emphasizing American values such as freedom and democracy. It's certainly not surprising that these ideas have a lot of staying power among Americans.
    , @anonymous
    I, too, thought - hopefully - that this would concern that other Abrams.

    I early on welcomed AE to Unz Review. But he's since come across as a younger, harder working Derbyshire, a columnist who throws race chum on the water to generate a lot of froth from the readership that craves being reassured that they're better than blacks.

    There's a notable tendency in that camp to still buy into the Red v Blue, Trump needs to {whatever} by {whenever} to save his Presidency, etc., political puppet show. Shouldn't it be dawning on these HighQ guys that all the drama around elections, judicial confirmations, and other Washington stuff makes no difference, and is a convenient distraction for the Empire?

    Divided ==> Conquered
    , @athEIst
    Elliot Abrams is like a large floating turd that won't flush down no matter how many times you flush.
  2. I think this is a very interesting bit of analysis. And i would think that it would make sense. Save this, republican candidates are already considered as primarily appealing to white voters, primarily. Making that an exclusive pitch is probably going to alienate vast numbers of whites,

    who acknowledge that whiteness alone is not enough to carry the country forward in any sincere national ethos. I could be wrong, but I suspect it will undermine the very purpose of the appeal. It ignores what has been history — whites largely appealing to, governing and managing to white ethos and concerns.

    It may be a more honest approach, but it will be redundant nonetheless.

    • Replies: @M. Hartley
    "Redundant" is the least of our problems. We're talking about the ~50% of white people who wake up every day and recite their "I hate white people" mantra in the bathroom mirror. It's a bit more serious than "redundant" and by the way the percentage is much higher among younger people.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    There are ways the party could split the difference. Affirmative action for example is widely unpopular among whites. Even white liberals are mixed on it. Yet it's something the GOP never talks about.
  3. I just checked and it turns out that, like Kamala Harris, Stacey Abrams is yet another example of Black female dysgenics. Smart Black women like Harris and Abrams don’t have any children–which is a huge shame since it makes the next generation of Blacks less intelligent on average. Thus, to compensate for this, Democrats might need to import smart African and Caribbean Blacks.

    BTW, what really alienates me is the corporate whorism of the Republican Party. I strongly prefer a colorblind progressivism, but I would probably take a non-colorblind progressivism over corporate whorism.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
    I've remarked before about Kamala's childlessness. In this, she is like failed Euro leaders (and proponents of mass third world immigration) Edna May, Emmanuel Macron, and Angela Merkel - all childless. Rulers without children have no skin in the country's future. Electing them should be avoided.
    , @SMK
    Harris is a quadroon: half Mumbai Indian, 1/4 white, and 1/4 black with straight hair and very light brown skin with yellowish undertones. So why is she defined as "black"? But even octoroons are defined as "black" albeit they are almost 90% white and/or other races and only 1/8 negroid.
  4. @prime noticer
    thought this was gonna be about elliott abrams. and how neocons like him just keep coming back no matter what.

    the ascent of a useless do nothing like stacey abrams makes sense, due to demographics. they're the least impressive people on earth.

    but how these neocons keep coming back is seriously impressive. i've never seen anything like it in 40 years of watching politics. they're hanging around in democrat administrations too, it's not just a republican thing.

    Neocons have managed to appeal to a lot of Americans by emphasizing American values such as freedom and democracy. It’s certainly not surprising that these ideas have a lot of staying power among Americans.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    'Neocons have managed to appeal to a lot of Americans by emphasizing American values such as freedom and democracy...'

    ? Neocons emphasize serving Israel.
    , @Muh 6 Gorrillion!!!!!!!!

    Ziocon imposters, whose only fealty is to the criminal zio regime in zio-occupied Palestine, have managed to dupe a lot of Americans by emphasizing American values such as freedom and democracy, while selling America down the river. It’s certainly not surprising that anyone with half a brain and internet access can see these ziocons for the treacherous fifth column they are.

     

    FIFY.
  5. 30 percent black, 2 percent Latino, and 2 percent Asian

    That’s not “PoC” – it’s just black.

  6. It’d be nice if smart, realistic, black ladies like Stacey Abrams had life aims other than accumulating power through racial politics.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Muh 6 Gorrillion!!!!!!!!

    It’d be nice if smart, realistic, black ladies like Stacey Abrams had life aims other than accumulating power through racial politics.
     
    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Yeah, Jewboy, and what’d be even nicer is if racist, dissembling, Jew-terrorist scum like the loud-mouthed, gentile-hating, zio parasites who've been wreaking havoc from their Jew-squat in Jew-occupied Palestine for over a century now, weren't the fucking poster children for "accumulating power through racial politics".

  7. @Mr. XYZ
    Neocons have managed to appeal to a lot of Americans by emphasizing American values such as freedom and democracy. It's certainly not surprising that these ideas have a lot of staying power among Americans.

    ‘Neocons have managed to appeal to a lot of Americans by emphasizing American values such as freedom and democracy…’

    ? Neocons emphasize serving Israel.

  8. Georgia has the third highest percentage of Black people among U.S. states. Abrams’ strategy seems unlikely to win in many other U.S. states.

    • Replies: @iffen
    Georgia has the third highest percentage of Black people among U.S. states. Abrams’ strategy seems unlikely to win in many other U.S. states.


    You're forgetting about the 20-30% of white Americans that will vote for the "approved" POC candidate without any effort expended in their direction by the POC candidate.
    , @Jay Fink
    Interestingly that strategy doesn't work in the two states with a higher % of blacks than Georgia (Mississippi and Louisiana?). That means the types of whites you have plays a role. Georgia has plenty of yankee transplants and a higher % of white liberals in general living in the ATL area.

    The whites in Mississippi are nearly unified to vote Republican to the point where having the highest % of blacks doesn't make a difference.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Georgia, Texas, or Florida will be the next state it works in--but the other two of those states will be close behind the one that goes first. Those states become blue and the electoral college becomes unwinnable for the GOP, even if it holds on upperhand in the Midwest.
    , @Marty T
    Not only that, but she, you know, LOST. Brian Kemp is the governor of Georgia. Democrats pushing Stacey Abrams is fine with me. If anything it paints them into the corner as the antiwhite, antimale party.

    Kamala Harris may be nominated, but I don't think she'll win. Why not? Because many white women will not want a black woman to be president first. Also - Kamala may lose some black men...she's married to a Jewish guy.

    It should be very easy for the GOP to get all the leftist groups to go after each other. Doesn't mean they will, but they should.
    , @anon
    whites need to move out of minority states and into states they can hold the ground in they need to poison pill their new states eliminate all welfare prosecute crimes ruthlessly etc push the jews out along with their proxy mud army
  9. AE is right about Kamaltoe Harris. As for the GOP becoming the white party, it already is. It just isn’t presenting itself as such. Yet. The constant kowtowing to explicitly racist groups such as blacks, mexicans, squatemalans, etc. will end eventually. The current crop of GOP politicians think they have too much to lose by speaking the truth (just look what those craven, stupid bootlickers did to Steve King over a proven false report!). They will learn or be replaced. For now, they fear the media more than they fear their voters. That will change too.

    Nothing focuses the mind like hardship and it is coming to normal Americans at some point via the usual economic shenanigans, or imposed by the leftist coalition of turd-worlders. At that point, GOP cucks will. Be introduced to tar and feathers…if they are lucky.

    Their replacements will actually represent the interests of normal Americans against the leftist democrat hordes of not-Americans or will suffer worse fates. The pressure will be too great and it WILL find an outlet. It always does.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    On that 2nd-to-last sentence, that "... it WILL find an outlet.", I think this may mean another party will have to form. The politicians in the GOP, even those who understand in which direction they need to go, don't have the courage. They are almost all cowards.

    They can be replaced slowly or just beaten by a new movement of people who don't care about being called names anymore.
    , @Corvinus
    "Their replacements will actually represent the interests of normal Americans."

    How do you define "normal Americans"? What criteria is involved here?

    "AE is right about Kamaltoe Harris."

    About her, without a doubt, being the Democratic nominee for President? All he is doing is making a prediction. She MIGHT be the choice. Of course, AE was convinced that Kris Kobach would be the next governor of Kansas. Look how that forecast turned out.

    "Her inversion of the Sailer Strategy..."

    Actually, the Sailer Strategy borrows heavily from Nixon's "Southern Strategy". Lee Atwater explains:

    "You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."

    --Interview with Alexander P. Lamis (8 July 1981), as quoted in The Two-Party South (1984)‎ by Alexander P. Lamis


    The fact of the matter is that the GOP is already the white party. The problem with the majority of white Americans, however, is that they remain ideological about race and culture, and tend to look at pocketbook issues. It will take a heavy, perpetual dose of Alt Right race realism propaganda to convert white Americans to their side, considering how they have been duped by the Jewish controlled media. Sad how supposedly high IQ white Americans apparently have an inborn flaw in that they can be manipulated quite easily. Perhaps you are up to the challenge to help out. There is a dire need for children's books on this very topic. Is your talent creating the storyline or drawing the pictures? It would help that you are female, as you can put your motherly touch on the materials. Guys tend to be ham fisted and heavy handed on such matters.

    , @Peripatetic Commenter
    Look to the Democrats to introduce legislation outlawing secret ballots so they can browbeat whites not to vote in their ethnic interests!
    , @Hypnotoad666

    The only way for the GOP to counter the pro-POC party will be to become the pro-white party
     
    I think that is mostly true, but needs to be handled correctly and not taken too far.

    For example, the status quo is explicit anti-white discrimination, PC censorship, open borders, etc. But that means that a color-blind, meritocratic, patriotic, law and order, free-speech program is necessarily "pro-white."

    We wouldn't want to forfeit that persuasive advantage by adopting our own special interest program -- I don't think White people have any desire for special privileges even if they could get them anyway. The moral superiority of a pro-White (but colorblind) program should contrast well over time with their special pleading, especially as their message gets more explicitly anti-white with each election cycle.

    But you're absolutely right about the need to stop cucking over fake allegations that anything good for whites is "racist."
  10. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @prime noticer
    thought this was gonna be about elliott abrams. and how neocons like him just keep coming back no matter what.

    the ascent of a useless do nothing like stacey abrams makes sense, due to demographics. they're the least impressive people on earth.

    but how these neocons keep coming back is seriously impressive. i've never seen anything like it in 40 years of watching politics. they're hanging around in democrat administrations too, it's not just a republican thing.

    I, too, thought – hopefully – that this would concern that other Abrams.

    I early on welcomed AE to Unz Review. But he’s since come across as a younger, harder working Derbyshire, a columnist who throws race chum on the water to generate a lot of froth from the readership that craves being reassured that they’re better than blacks.

    There’s a notable tendency in that camp to still buy into the Red v Blue, Trump needs to {whatever} by {whenever} to save his Presidency, etc., political puppet show. Shouldn’t it be dawning on these HighQ guys that all the drama around elections, judicial confirmations, and other Washington stuff makes no difference, and is a convenient distraction for the Empire?

    Divided ==> Conquered

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    Why do you think some ersatz civic nationalism is viable? Isn't that "Empire?"

    Division doesn't equal Conquest. Lots of people are prospering under POC-nationalism. Stacey Abrams, for example.
    , @SunBakedSuburb
    Elliot Abrams is an agent of a power system that began in ancient Babylon and soon infiltrated the entire Near East and Classical Greece. The Babylonian System is tightly woven into the fabric of Western Civilization. At this point in history the two are inseparable. Abrams and his fellow neocons as we all know are from Trotskyite lineage. Their genes command them to ignite global chaos and carnage, Venezuela being their latest project. Stacey Abrams and her fellow unwitting cultural Marxist comrades, like the witting neocons, are agents of the Babylonian System.
    , @Kratoklastes

    Shouldn’t it be dawning on these HighQ guys that all the drama around elections, judicial confirmations, and other Washington stuff makes no difference, and is a convenient distraction for the Empire?
     
    Yes, it absolutely should - to the extent they are capable of joined-up thinking, they do not apply that capability when the appropriate button is pushed.

    The fact that they are almost entirely focused on the wrong enemy is yet another vindication of the most important of the "Proverbs for Paranoids"[1] - viz.,


    If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.
     
    In an ideal world, everyone would read a few key "red pill" documents[2] in their teens - or at least before they bother investing emotional energy in political goings-on.

    If that was a standard part of the formative years of HighQ types, these soi-disant 'intellectuals' would be inoculated against both sides of the political (i.e., parasite) false-dichotomy.

    Rooting for (R) over (D) (or Trump over Clinton, or (R)-lackey judge over (D)-lackey judge) is like rooting for Lhassa fever over Ebola. That's not to say that one isn't worse than the other, but that's not a sound basis for actively supporting the 'lesser evil'.

    The fact that Lhassa only kills about 1% of the infected while Ebola kills ~50%, isn't the same thing as Lhassa being a social positive: the best solution is the extermination of both. And so it is with (R) "vs" (D) (the scare quotes are to indicate that the putative adversarial relationship is a shibboleth).

    Advocating for one side or the other of The Spectacle, is advocating for the system itself - with the only caveat being the desire that 'your' side be in charge as often as possible.

    The core premise of the "choose a side" view, is that the system can be reformed by the kinds of people attracted to political life: that requires a degree of gullibility usually only found in profoundly-retarded small children.

    Anybody who is genuinely interested in why the economic prospects of the bottom 99% are stagnating throughout the West, should look ignore the colour bar and look instead to the palaces that house the political class.

    Politics is not 'failing' to deliver social results: it's delivering the social results that it's designed to deliver. The Political Means (to use Oppenheimer's useful taxonomy, paraphrased here) is a machine for enriching politicians and their cronies, at the expense of the demos: understand that, and the myth of policy 'failures' is shown for what it is.

    So the only people who have a genuine vested interest in who is in charge, are those who profit directly - cronies and politicians. All other actors in the economy have low-information guesses about the extent to which 'their' side of politics will deliver actual net benefits relative to the 'other' side: those low-information guesses are very likely to be wrong, given the tendency of the political class to renege on their promises (and the uncertain interaction between the direct action of a policy and the rest of the economy).

    The actual intended beneficiaries of policy are sure as fuck not participating in online political discussions.

    Notes...

    [1] the "Proverbs for Paranoids" are scattered through Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow"; "the wrong questions" is on p251 of the 1973 paperback edition.

    [2] Red Pill Readings

    I've only included 'polemical' texts (i.e., math-free); the academic literature tends to be less accessible so I've left out journal articles.

    The academic literature on both sides of the debate concerning 'legitimate' coercion (Gaus, Nagels, Rawls, Lister, Buchanan etc) isn't hard to understand; the core stuff on preference expression (Arrow, Gibbard, Satterthwaite, Buchanan [again] and so on) is tough going unless you're comfortable with mathematics beyond high-school level.

    5-10 minute reads
    Ronert Higgs' Myth of "Failed" Policies
    Murray Rothbard's "Do You Hate the State?"
    Guy deBord's "Society of the Spectacle"
    Harry Frankfurter's "On Bullshit"
    Lysander Spooner's "No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority"
    Gustave de Molinari's "The Production of Security"

    Longer reads (still "math-free")
    Frédéric Bastiat's "That Which Is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen" and The Law
    Albert J Nock's "Our Enemy, The State"

    , @Audacious Epigone
    I'll step right into it and ask what tact to take that will make a difference. If it's to point at the 6 gorillion commenter, I'll duly note and then continue doing what I'm doing.
  11. “….Kamala Harris will be the Democrat nominee.”

    Re: USC, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5: Natural Born Citizen.

    Harris IS NOT a Natural Born Citizen. Then again the usurper Barry Soetoro did not meet the Natural Born Citizen requirement of TWO American parents at birth.

    Take the 2d Amendment for example…. “….shall not be infringed.” Totally ignored for decades as the same political scum who took an oath to defend the Constitution did otherwise. Simply lied and created laws which compromised their oath to the Constitution….AND the Constitution itself.

    The US Constitution is long dead. DEAD. Just as Barry Soetoro failed to meet constitutional requirements, yet was blessed and not vetted by House Speaker Pelosi, Harris’ failure to be a Natural Born Citizen, will be a non-starter. In fact, Harris herself called the Constitution “….just a book.” Pretty much in line with former President George W. Bush’s similar denigration of the United States Constitution.

    What is left of this once, great nation is in the proverbial “deep shit”. Prepare to defend yourself. Be prepared to kill and be killed. Organize as best as you can.

    The time for Patriots and Nationalists to defend against enemies “foreign and DOMESTIC” is drawing ever nearer.

    Make peace with your God. And….

    SAT CONG

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I can't argue with a 3%er. I used up my AGREE a minute ago, Dan.
    , @Peripatetic Commenter
    As Obama proved, that does not matter.

    Besides, the GoP is currently afraid of being called racist, so they won't litigate!
    , @follyofwar
    Oh, please! You claim that Kamala is not a natural born citizen, yet don't back up your reasoning regarding the status of her birth.

    And this Obama thing is long over. By my understanding, since he was born in Hawaii (proven by his long form Birth Cert), and since his mother was a US citizen, he IS a natural born citizen. The fact that his father was Kenyan is irrelevant.

    BTW, Obama's claim to natural born citizenship is much stronger than Ted Cruz's anyway. Cruz was born in CANADA, and was a duel citizen until he relinquished the Canadian one when he ran for potus. Cruz's mother was a US citizen while his father, at the time, was not. I didn't hear too many whites demanding that Cruz was not eligible.

    Please, where is it specifically stated that BOTH parents must be US citizens at the time of their child's birth in order for the child to qualify as Natural Born?

  12. Who’s this kid who keeps chiming it on how the GOP are “corporate whores”?? LoL. Listen son, of course they are, just as the Demtard Party is if not even more “corporate whores”. You must be young n dumb, eh? All politicians do what they donors want. Got it?

    • Replies: @iffen
    All politicians do what they donors want.

    Yes, but there are differences between Republicans who deny that they are corporate whores and Democrats who deny it.

  13. • Replies: @indocon
    Trumps reelection problems are even bigger than what this map suggests, I would make Arizona a light blue state for 2020 at this point, like it's sister orange county on the coast the desert state finally succumbed to the blue wave in 2018 and I think it will stay for the foreseeable future. Also Texas will be a swing state in 2020 consuming lot of resources, Florida will stray red I think. This means Trump has to win 2 out of 3 in MI/PA/WI, I just don't see that happening.
  14. @Stilicho
    AE is right about Kamaltoe Harris. As for the GOP becoming the white party, it already is. It just isn't presenting itself as such. Yet. The constant kowtowing to explicitly racist groups such as blacks, mexicans, squatemalans, etc. will end eventually. The current crop of GOP politicians think they have too much to lose by speaking the truth (just look what those craven, stupid bootlickers did to Steve King over a proven false report!). They will learn or be replaced. For now, they fear the media more than they fear their voters. That will change too.

    Nothing focuses the mind like hardship and it is coming to normal Americans at some point via the usual economic shenanigans, or imposed by the leftist coalition of turd-worlders. At that point, GOP cucks will. Be introduced to tar and feathers...if they are lucky.

    Their replacements will actually represent the interests of normal Americans against the leftist democrat hordes of not-Americans or will suffer worse fates. The pressure will be too great and it WILL find an outlet. It always does.

    On that 2nd-to-last sentence, that “… it WILL find an outlet.”, I think this may mean another party will have to form. The politicians in the GOP, even those who understand in which direction they need to go, don’t have the courage. They are almost all cowards.

    They can be replaced slowly or just beaten by a new movement of people who don’t care about being called names anymore.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @M. Hartley

    I think this may mean another party will have to form
     
    When in all of human history did a one-party state permit the emergence of another party to challenge it?
    Tell us another one!
  15. @DAN III
    "....Kamala Harris will be the Democrat nominee."

    Re: USC, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5: Natural Born Citizen.

    Harris IS NOT a Natural Born Citizen. Then again the usurper Barry Soetoro did not meet the Natural Born Citizen requirement of TWO American parents at birth.

    Take the 2d Amendment for example.... "....shall not be infringed." Totally ignored for decades as the same political scum who took an oath to defend the Constitution did otherwise. Simply lied and created laws which compromised their oath to the Constitution....AND the Constitution itself.

    The US Constitution is long dead. DEAD. Just as Barry Soetoro failed to meet constitutional requirements, yet was blessed and not vetted by House Speaker Pelosi, Harris' failure to be a Natural Born Citizen, will be a non-starter. In fact, Harris herself called the Constitution "....just a book." Pretty much in line with former President George W. Bush's similar denigration of the United States Constitution.

    What is left of this once, great nation is in the proverbial "deep shit". Prepare to defend yourself. Be prepared to kill and be killed. Organize as best as you can.

    The time for Patriots and Nationalists to defend against enemies "foreign and DOMESTIC" is drawing ever nearer.

    Make peace with your God. And....

    SAT CONG

    I can’t argue with a 3%er. I used up my AGREE a minute ago, Dan.

  16. Some six or seven weeks ago, on your old blog, I made the point that Stacy Abrams possesses more intersectionality than Kamala Harris and that the more authentic POC standard bearer was Ms. Abrams.

    Woman of color, particularly black women, can more readily identify with the Georgia giant than they can with the ersatz Harris. In addition to the physical symmetry with Abrams, the average negress has not had the benefit of a Willie Brown.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Indeed, but I doubt Abrams is so ambitious as to challenge Harris in 2020, splitting the POC vote, causing a riff in a partnership and possibly keeping them both out. Harris is a decade older than Abrams, and both understand the Democrat patronage system well.

    I suspect Harris is promising everything she can to Booker to keep him from running. If she's the only POC--Castro doesn't count, he's a non-entity nobody cares about--against a field of SWPLs in Sanders, Gillibrand, Klobuchar, Warren, O'Rourke, and Biden, she is obviously going to clean up.
  17. Our solution will be either separation or POCfindom. White liberals are not prone to being tribal, unless it is in defense of other white liberals. They don’t extend tribalism to conservatives of the same race.

    So we not only have to make the GOP explicit about white identity politics, we have to perform the near-impossibility of getting PeeOhCee GOP candidates to say “It’s OK to be white”.

    More off topic commentary on “the progressive stack”

    https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/01/29/nolte-fox-news-anchor-julie-banderas-melts-down-after-mild-criticism-trump/

    This is why even someone like Trump cannot “punch down”. The use of “bullying” and “harassment” is intended for a reason, as it is only extended to a male victim here by happenstance of being tweeted by a female along with a female victim.

    Our people need to find ways of bypassing the “harassment” charge, and finding “non-hateful” ways of presenting arguments. The trolling of ’16 prospered in part because of doubts as to whether or not the Alt-Right was ironic. Heilgate and Charlottesville demolished that doubt.

    There perhaps might be a generational shift underway towards a greater sense for manners. In that regard, Trump is truly the last bout of Boomer boorishness.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    I dream of the day a congressman introduces a resolution simply stating "it's okay to be white".
  18. You couldn’t be more right, Steve, although it is so very hard for wealthy Republican politicians, with their locked-in, gerrymandered jobs at $174 and their lobbyist friends, guaranteeing them and theirs a smooth ride in this brutal churn-job economy, to see why whites simply cannot afford to be see-no-color Bernie progressives, even when that is their historical voting pattern and their natural way of thinking. Talk to non-rich whites living in GA. If you are not in one of the few decent-paying fields, lack a spousal income, lack rent-covering child support and lack the blanket of welfare & child tax credit support given to single-breadwinner moms to hoist up their wages, you won’t have a roof over your head unless you can land a living-wage job. Yet, most workplaces are dominated by the race-centric philosophy that Abrams proudly spouts, saying straight up that people seek to live and work with their own racial group.

    That’s not racist when Blacks or Hispanics do it. That’s why it is good for a white woman to change her name to Shiniqua when seeking a job in many parts of Georgia.

    Whites can’t afford to wallow in colorblind naivety much longer unless they are in a secure profession or have a spouse, bringing in a safe second income from a .Gov job, although it will be very interesting to see how many of those comfortably smug, upper-middle-class, white signalers in dual-earner households stay on the race-and-reparations bandwagon as the economy slides downward due to massive consumer and government debt, and their nest eggs get threatened, in part, by citizens & noncitizens of color, marching in lock step with white supporters to demand even more pay from government for sex and reproduction. This will require upper-middle signalers to shell out, backing up their beliefs with real financial sacrifice for the downtrodden Black & Brown people.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    I've little doubt that in our lifetimes there will be confiscatory taxation on 401(k) retirement withdrawals. The rhetoric is predictable and other than a direct tax on wealth, it's the last honeypot for the ascendancy to pillage.
  19. Who are the other 9% of “active voters”, dead people of unknown race and creed? Seriously, that’s a big number. In response partially to EldnaYm above, but this post in general, already the states with the most blacks vote solidly GOP in elections for Feral office. Whites in Mississippi and Alabama have learned by now not to ever vote for D’s, since these are not their GrandDaddy’s D’s of 1955.

    The whole thing is racial in some of these deep South states already. However, you get to a tipping point, if the numbers get like Georgia, depending on how many fried chicken meals the D’s can offer and how much cheating they can get away with (since the GOP people are too cowardly to stop it). If you didn’t have so many white PROGRESSIVES, in certain precincts, you could win with 90% of the 57%, though demographics are not in our favor.

    This is why the 9% matter, along with the Hispanics, if they ever get organized. Georgia probably has a cool million Hispanics, counting the illegal aliens, but most of them won’t bother to vote (who’s stopping them, otherwise?), and, as Mr. Sailer always mentions, they are not big into civil affairs and that. Yet, they don’t particularly get along with the blacks, so who knows how they’ll lean in the long run. Yeah, I know, on Trump, all the Hispanic newcomers believe the gov’t-media line that his is the devil out to get them …

  20. @EldnaYm
    Georgia has the third highest percentage of Black people among U.S. states. Abrams' strategy seems unlikely to win in many other U.S. states.

    Georgia has the third highest percentage of Black people among U.S. states. Abrams’ strategy seems unlikely to win in many other U.S. states.

    You’re forgetting about the 20-30% of white Americans that will vote for the “approved” POC candidate without any effort expended in their direction by the POC candidate.

  21. @GSR
    Who's this kid who keeps chiming it on how the GOP are "corporate whores"?? LoL. Listen son, of course they are, just as the Demtard Party is if not even more "corporate whores". You must be young n dumb, eh? All politicians do what they donors want. Got it?

    All politicians do what they donors want.

    Yes, but there are differences between Republicans who deny that they are corporate whores and Democrats who deny it.

  22. @anonymous
    I, too, thought - hopefully - that this would concern that other Abrams.

    I early on welcomed AE to Unz Review. But he's since come across as a younger, harder working Derbyshire, a columnist who throws race chum on the water to generate a lot of froth from the readership that craves being reassured that they're better than blacks.

    There's a notable tendency in that camp to still buy into the Red v Blue, Trump needs to {whatever} by {whenever} to save his Presidency, etc., political puppet show. Shouldn't it be dawning on these HighQ guys that all the drama around elections, judicial confirmations, and other Washington stuff makes no difference, and is a convenient distraction for the Empire?

    Divided ==> Conquered

    Why do you think some ersatz civic nationalism is viable? Isn’t that “Empire?”

    Division doesn’t equal Conquest. Lots of people are prospering under POC-nationalism. Stacey Abrams, for example.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    Not sure what you're reading into my comment.

    I don't see "ersatz civic nationalism" as any longer viable under the shredded Constitution. The current governmental structure is irredeemable. Most of us will be happier after things unravel, and we're governed on a smaller scale.

    But I don't aspire to some fantasty nation in which everyone looks, worships, and smells just like me. The people who run this country would just as readily subjugate the identity groups they now exalt if it kept them in power. And they would thrive in Whitopia, too, by pitting people against each other on the basis of astrological sign or whatever they could get them riled up about.

    This is what prompted me to comment on AE's focus on race and naivete about politics.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Indeed. Division may end up being our deliverance.
  23. @Tyrion 2
    It'd be nice if smart, realistic, black ladies like Stacey Abrams had life aims other than accumulating power through racial politics.

    It’d be nice if smart, realistic, black ladies like Stacey Abrams had life aims other than accumulating power through racial politics.

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Yeah, Jewboy, and what’d be even nicer is if racist, dissembling, Jew-terrorist scum like the loud-mouthed, gentile-hating, zio parasites who’ve been wreaking havoc from their Jew-squat in Jew-occupied Palestine for over a century now, weren’t the fucking poster children for “accumulating power through racial politics”.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    If he's not an intentional troll, he may as well be. This approach will appeal to a percentage of the population smaller than that of the 2%.
  24. The Pewitt 2020 GOP presidential primary campaign says it is OKAY to be White.

    I hereby accuse both Kamala Harris and Stacey Abrams of being anti-White oafs of the worst sort.

    I also challenge both Kamala Harris and Stacey Abrams to a debate on immigration and American national identity.

    Trump is a weak baby boomer fop who played White people for chumps. Trump and Jared Kushner can both go to hell!

    You say you don’t much care for Trump or Jared Kushner or Kamala Harris or Stacey Abrams? If that is so, then begin supporting my campaign for president today!

    The United States is a European Christian nation.

    Mass legal immigration and illegal immigration are killing the United States of America.

    Tweet from 2015:

  25. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Anti-Gnostic
    Why do you think some ersatz civic nationalism is viable? Isn't that "Empire?"

    Division doesn't equal Conquest. Lots of people are prospering under POC-nationalism. Stacey Abrams, for example.

    Not sure what you’re reading into my comment.

    I don’t see “ersatz civic nationalism” as any longer viable under the shredded Constitution. The current governmental structure is irredeemable. Most of us will be happier after things unravel, and we’re governed on a smaller scale.

    But I don’t aspire to some fantasty nation in which everyone looks, worships, and smells just like me. The people who run this country would just as readily subjugate the identity groups they now exalt if it kept them in power. And they would thrive in Whitopia, too, by pitting people against each other on the basis of astrological sign or whatever they could get them riled up about.

    This is what prompted me to comment on AE’s focus on race and naivete about politics.

  26. @DAN III
    "....Kamala Harris will be the Democrat nominee."

    Re: USC, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5: Natural Born Citizen.

    Harris IS NOT a Natural Born Citizen. Then again the usurper Barry Soetoro did not meet the Natural Born Citizen requirement of TWO American parents at birth.

    Take the 2d Amendment for example.... "....shall not be infringed." Totally ignored for decades as the same political scum who took an oath to defend the Constitution did otherwise. Simply lied and created laws which compromised their oath to the Constitution....AND the Constitution itself.

    The US Constitution is long dead. DEAD. Just as Barry Soetoro failed to meet constitutional requirements, yet was blessed and not vetted by House Speaker Pelosi, Harris' failure to be a Natural Born Citizen, will be a non-starter. In fact, Harris herself called the Constitution "....just a book." Pretty much in line with former President George W. Bush's similar denigration of the United States Constitution.

    What is left of this once, great nation is in the proverbial "deep shit". Prepare to defend yourself. Be prepared to kill and be killed. Organize as best as you can.

    The time for Patriots and Nationalists to defend against enemies "foreign and DOMESTIC" is drawing ever nearer.

    Make peace with your God. And....

    SAT CONG

    As Obama proved, that does not matter.

    Besides, the GoP is currently afraid of being called racist, so they won’t litigate!

    • Replies: @DAN III
    What soetoro-obama proved was that the entire American system of law is corrupt. Pelosi never vetted him. He was not and is not a Natural Born Citizen.
  27. Lee Kuan Yew said:

    In a multi-ethnic state, people do not vote their economic interests, they vote their race and religion

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  28. The only way for the GOP to counter the pro-POC party will be to become the pro-white party, something unthinkable as currently constituted.

    The GoP will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to that platform. They still think they can get a decent percentage of the Hispanic vote.

    Perhaps it is not worth it.

    Perhaps we have to do everything we can to ensure Whites see what is going on and that the Democrats are truly, the Black Party.

    • Replies: @216

    The GoP will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to that platform. They still think they can get a decent percentage of the Hispanic vote.
     
    They could, but they need to move left economically. The donors don't want that. Immigration restriction as part of a left-populist-environmentalist angle is feasible, unlike the strange Boomer fearmongering about crime and turrorism. A revival of labor unions would also help, along with increasing taxes on the rich and cutting DOD spending.

    The leftist tilt of Hispanics/Asians is accelerated by ongoing immigration, and increased credentialism. While the GOP isn't likely to ever win a majority here, the only need win a bigger share and maintain the existing white share. The loss of white Millennials and Zeds to "woke" and debt is a bigger concern, that Conservatism Inc refuses to do anything about other than some occasional moral shaming.
    , @MikeCLT
    As Steve Sailer has suggested, the GOP doesn't need to explicitly be the White party, they just have to make sure that the Dems are perceived as the Black party. Especially by Hispanics and Asians. That could scramble the electorate.
  29. @Mr. XYZ
    Neocons have managed to appeal to a lot of Americans by emphasizing American values such as freedom and democracy. It's certainly not surprising that these ideas have a lot of staying power among Americans.

    Ziocon imposters, whose only fealty is to the criminal zio regime in zio-occupied Palestine, have managed to dupe a lot of Americans by emphasizing American values such as freedom and democracy, while selling America down the river. It’s certainly not surprising that anyone with half a brain and internet access can see these ziocons for the treacherous fifth column they are.

    FIFY.

  30. @Peripatetic Commenter

    The only way for the GOP to counter the pro-POC party will be to become the pro-white party, something unthinkable as currently constituted.
     
    The GoP will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to that platform. They still think they can get a decent percentage of the Hispanic vote.

    Perhaps it is not worth it.

    Perhaps we have to do everything we can to ensure Whites see what is going on and that the Democrats are truly, the Black Party.

    The GoP will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to that platform. They still think they can get a decent percentage of the Hispanic vote.

    They could, but they need to move left economically. The donors don’t want that. Immigration restriction as part of a left-populist-environmentalist angle is feasible, unlike the strange Boomer fearmongering about crime and turrorism. A revival of labor unions would also help, along with increasing taxes on the rich and cutting DOD spending.

    The leftist tilt of Hispanics/Asians is accelerated by ongoing immigration, and increased credentialism. While the GOP isn’t likely to ever win a majority here, the only need win a bigger share and maintain the existing white share. The loss of white Millennials and Zeds to “woke” and debt is a bigger concern, that Conservatism Inc refuses to do anything about other than some occasional moral shaming.

    • Replies: @Big Dick Bandit
    i created an account specifically to endorse this comment.

    it is spot on--on paper, i'm a textbook Rootless Cosmopolitan millennial; i live in Oakland, my wife+I attended really good (and progressive) schools our entire lives, and our social circles are definitely your typical SWPL folks....

    ...and yet, we're all sick as fuck of the Neoliberal Globalist project. period. the anger over wages, crowded schools, unaffordable healthcare, *insane* higher-ed debt TRUMPS EVERYTHING ELSE.

    in fact, people are shockingly receptive to the idea that because Immigration is a net drag on wages, a net pressure on school sizes, and just generally a giant cost center. arguing from a leftist economics perspective *works*, and in fact is the only way to overcome the hesitation on the part of this class to avoid anything that could be considered Racist crimethink. remember: Bernie Sanders himself decried open borders as a "Koch Brothers plot to keep down wages" not all too long ago.

    Tucker has the exact right idea. until Republicans (most especially BoomerCons) get over their idiotic fears of "!!SOCIALISM!!!!" and realize that their best case is made embracing modern economic reality, they're going to continue being losing losers.

  31. @Mr. XYZ
    I just checked and it turns out that, like Kamala Harris, Stacey Abrams is yet another example of Black female dysgenics. Smart Black women like Harris and Abrams don't have any children--which is a huge shame since it makes the next generation of Blacks less intelligent on average. Thus, to compensate for this, Democrats might need to import smart African and Caribbean Blacks.

    BTW, what really alienates me is the corporate whorism of the Republican Party. I strongly prefer a colorblind progressivism, but I would probably take a non-colorblind progressivism over corporate whorism.

    I’ve remarked before about Kamala’s childlessness. In this, she is like failed Euro leaders (and proponents of mass third world immigration) Edna May, Emmanuel Macron, and Angela Merkel – all childless. Rulers without children have no skin in the country’s future. Electing them should be avoided.

    • Agree: Joseph Doaks
    • Replies: @bro3886
    You're dead wrong here, she has a racial agenda. The other three are actively working to destroy their own nations and peoples and deny them a future, Harris is working to rob and destroy some of the same people for the future benefit of her own people. They're working for the same goals but she has a future orientation for her people the others don't.
  32. @Stilicho
    AE is right about Kamaltoe Harris. As for the GOP becoming the white party, it already is. It just isn't presenting itself as such. Yet. The constant kowtowing to explicitly racist groups such as blacks, mexicans, squatemalans, etc. will end eventually. The current crop of GOP politicians think they have too much to lose by speaking the truth (just look what those craven, stupid bootlickers did to Steve King over a proven false report!). They will learn or be replaced. For now, they fear the media more than they fear their voters. That will change too.

    Nothing focuses the mind like hardship and it is coming to normal Americans at some point via the usual economic shenanigans, or imposed by the leftist coalition of turd-worlders. At that point, GOP cucks will. Be introduced to tar and feathers...if they are lucky.

    Their replacements will actually represent the interests of normal Americans against the leftist democrat hordes of not-Americans or will suffer worse fates. The pressure will be too great and it WILL find an outlet. It always does.

    “Their replacements will actually represent the interests of normal Americans.”

    How do you define “normal Americans”? What criteria is involved here?

    “AE is right about Kamaltoe Harris.”

    About her, without a doubt, being the Democratic nominee for President? All he is doing is making a prediction. She MIGHT be the choice. Of course, AE was convinced that Kris Kobach would be the next governor of Kansas. Look how that forecast turned out.

    “Her inversion of the Sailer Strategy…”

    Actually, the Sailer Strategy borrows heavily from Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”. Lee Atwater explains:

    “You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger” — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”

    –Interview with Alexander P. Lamis (8 July 1981), as quoted in The Two-Party South (1984)‎ by Alexander P. Lamis

    The fact of the matter is that the GOP is already the white party. The problem with the majority of white Americans, however, is that they remain ideological about race and culture, and tend to look at pocketbook issues. It will take a heavy, perpetual dose of Alt Right race realism propaganda to convert white Americans to their side, considering how they have been duped by the Jewish controlled media. Sad how supposedly high IQ white Americans apparently have an inborn flaw in that they can be manipulated quite easily. Perhaps you are up to the challenge to help out. There is a dire need for children’s books on this very topic. Is your talent creating the storyline or drawing the pictures? It would help that you are female, as you can put your motherly touch on the materials. Guys tend to be ham fisted and heavy handed on such matters.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    " ... they remain ideological about race and culture, and tend to look at pocketbook issues."

    I think you meant non-ideological about "... race and culture ...".
    , @Audacious Epigone
    I never said I was convinced Kobach would win. I wanted him to, but please show where I confidently predicted he would.
  33. @DAN III
    "....Kamala Harris will be the Democrat nominee."

    Re: USC, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5: Natural Born Citizen.

    Harris IS NOT a Natural Born Citizen. Then again the usurper Barry Soetoro did not meet the Natural Born Citizen requirement of TWO American parents at birth.

    Take the 2d Amendment for example.... "....shall not be infringed." Totally ignored for decades as the same political scum who took an oath to defend the Constitution did otherwise. Simply lied and created laws which compromised their oath to the Constitution....AND the Constitution itself.

    The US Constitution is long dead. DEAD. Just as Barry Soetoro failed to meet constitutional requirements, yet was blessed and not vetted by House Speaker Pelosi, Harris' failure to be a Natural Born Citizen, will be a non-starter. In fact, Harris herself called the Constitution "....just a book." Pretty much in line with former President George W. Bush's similar denigration of the United States Constitution.

    What is left of this once, great nation is in the proverbial "deep shit". Prepare to defend yourself. Be prepared to kill and be killed. Organize as best as you can.

    The time for Patriots and Nationalists to defend against enemies "foreign and DOMESTIC" is drawing ever nearer.

    Make peace with your God. And....

    SAT CONG

    Oh, please! You claim that Kamala is not a natural born citizen, yet don’t back up your reasoning regarding the status of her birth.

    And this Obama thing is long over. By my understanding, since he was born in Hawaii (proven by his long form Birth Cert), and since his mother was a US citizen, he IS a natural born citizen. The fact that his father was Kenyan is irrelevant.

    BTW, Obama’s claim to natural born citizenship is much stronger than Ted Cruz’s anyway. Cruz was born in CANADA, and was a duel citizen until he relinquished the Canadian one when he ran for potus. Cruz’s mother was a US citizen while his father, at the time, was not. I didn’t hear too many whites demanding that Cruz was not eligible.

    Please, where is it specifically stated that BOTH parents must be US citizens at the time of their child’s birth in order for the child to qualify as Natural Born?

    • Replies: @follyofwar
    PS: Just referring to a clause in the Constitution is not proof. Supreme Court justices spend their entire careers trying to determine what the Constitution means. Even Trump gave up his challenge once Obama produced his long form birth cert.
    , @DAN III
    The Naturalization Act of 1790 defines "natural born" as the at-birth child of TWO American citizen parents.

    BTW....everything and anything to do with barry soetoro's past has been judicially sealed. In fact, his involvement and all information regarding his treasonous activity with Holder, in the Fast & Furious debacle, has been sealed by the Executive Privilege perk.

    Amazing how you want to dismiss the secretive activities of a seditious conspirator, barry soetoro, aka Barack Hussein obama. All such head-in-the-sand mentality only perpetuates more tyranny and corruption by those we call government, now and in the future.

    Cruz, Rubio, Harris were/are illegitimate candidates for POTUS as none of those three are natural born, just as soetoro-obama is not natural born. Yet, 99% of Amerikan fools did nothing to defend the nation and it's Constitution from the aforementioned, usurping scoundrels. Soetoro-obama being the greatest seditious and usurping scoundrel to ever occupy the Oval Office. Congress and the federal judiciary were/are complicit with the Constitutional crime by soetoro-obama and his multitude of co-conspirators.

    The United States Constitution is DEAD !
  34. @follyofwar
    Oh, please! You claim that Kamala is not a natural born citizen, yet don't back up your reasoning regarding the status of her birth.

    And this Obama thing is long over. By my understanding, since he was born in Hawaii (proven by his long form Birth Cert), and since his mother was a US citizen, he IS a natural born citizen. The fact that his father was Kenyan is irrelevant.

    BTW, Obama's claim to natural born citizenship is much stronger than Ted Cruz's anyway. Cruz was born in CANADA, and was a duel citizen until he relinquished the Canadian one when he ran for potus. Cruz's mother was a US citizen while his father, at the time, was not. I didn't hear too many whites demanding that Cruz was not eligible.

    Please, where is it specifically stated that BOTH parents must be US citizens at the time of their child's birth in order for the child to qualify as Natural Born?

    PS: Just referring to a clause in the Constitution is not proof. Supreme Court justices spend their entire careers trying to determine what the Constitution means. Even Trump gave up his challenge once Obama produced his long form birth cert.

    • Replies: @DAN III
    Why did it take three years for barry soetoro to produce his "birth" certificate ?

    It was proven by Sheriff Joe Arpio (sp ?) and his investigators that the finally produced "birth certificate" was a forgery; a fake. Information embedded in his "birth certificate" was electronically overlaid upon the document. The incorrect term used to describe the race of the alleged father in the fake birth certificate, was "African". "African"is not nor ever was, a legal, descriptive term used to describe the race of a child born in the United States in 1961. The term used in 1961 was "Negro" ! A blatant error on the part of the conspirator protecting soetoro-obama's POTUS legitimacy. Hell. Soetoro-obama's paternal grandmother stated he was born in Kenya ! Of course, her remarks had no substance, eh ?

    Regardless, the blatant fact-of-the matter is a natural born AMERICAN citizen must be the product of TWO American citizens at time of birth. Cruz, Rubio, soetoro-obama and now Harris joins the club of seditious usurpers to the United States Constitution and the citizens of this formerly great nation. All with the blessing of the federal judiciary and the ignorant morons of the electorate.
  35. @Stilicho
    AE is right about Kamaltoe Harris. As for the GOP becoming the white party, it already is. It just isn't presenting itself as such. Yet. The constant kowtowing to explicitly racist groups such as blacks, mexicans, squatemalans, etc. will end eventually. The current crop of GOP politicians think they have too much to lose by speaking the truth (just look what those craven, stupid bootlickers did to Steve King over a proven false report!). They will learn or be replaced. For now, they fear the media more than they fear their voters. That will change too.

    Nothing focuses the mind like hardship and it is coming to normal Americans at some point via the usual economic shenanigans, or imposed by the leftist coalition of turd-worlders. At that point, GOP cucks will. Be introduced to tar and feathers...if they are lucky.

    Their replacements will actually represent the interests of normal Americans against the leftist democrat hordes of not-Americans or will suffer worse fates. The pressure will be too great and it WILL find an outlet. It always does.

    Look to the Democrats to introduce legislation outlawing secret ballots so they can browbeat whites not to vote in their ethnic interests!

    • Replies: @M. Hartley
    Well of course the private ballot has to be abolished. Everyone Knows that if you permit wypipos any privacy they'll just be racist.
  36. I didn’t know that Stacey Abrams, after losing the Georgia governors race, would be awarded the prime spot of the D response to Trump’s SOTU address. To put it mildly, the woman is not very photogenic. I can see men of all colors turning that sow off once they get a look at her. I never watch that ridiculous speech anyway, though it might be of interest this year if the D’s turn their backs or if a melee breaks out. And I’m curious how Pelosi will react sitting behind Trump.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Pelosi can no longer make facial expressions so I think that's predictable enough!
  37. O/T

    About the Chicago “lynching attempt”

    While odds on are that this will prove a hoax, we should be prepared for the chance that it is either real or made to look real. We are not prepared for the hatestorm that would be unleashed by a trial.

    • Replies: @216
    There's just something odd to me about seeing so many high-level Dem politicians grab the narrative by the horns. Ordinarily their advisors would caution against this, unless there is more evidence that we aren't seeing. Springing the trap on the right, after it screamed "hoax", would severely damage our public standing.

    At the very least, Trump could counter-signal and collectively blame his own supporters. Like it or not, that's the price you pay when 90% of the media is on the other side. Having Coulter and Spencer criticizing him probably boosts his numbers in the center.
  38. @Peripatetic Commenter
    As Obama proved, that does not matter.

    Besides, the GoP is currently afraid of being called racist, so they won't litigate!

    What soetoro-obama proved was that the entire American system of law is corrupt. Pelosi never vetted him. He was not and is not a Natural Born Citizen.

    • Replies: @Peripatetic Commenter
    Well, that depends. If it is true that his father was Frank Marshall Davis ...

    However, the bigger issue is that he may have renounced his citizenship to college funding.
  39. @follyofwar
    Oh, please! You claim that Kamala is not a natural born citizen, yet don't back up your reasoning regarding the status of her birth.

    And this Obama thing is long over. By my understanding, since he was born in Hawaii (proven by his long form Birth Cert), and since his mother was a US citizen, he IS a natural born citizen. The fact that his father was Kenyan is irrelevant.

    BTW, Obama's claim to natural born citizenship is much stronger than Ted Cruz's anyway. Cruz was born in CANADA, and was a duel citizen until he relinquished the Canadian one when he ran for potus. Cruz's mother was a US citizen while his father, at the time, was not. I didn't hear too many whites demanding that Cruz was not eligible.

    Please, where is it specifically stated that BOTH parents must be US citizens at the time of their child's birth in order for the child to qualify as Natural Born?

    The Naturalization Act of 1790 defines “natural born” as the at-birth child of TWO American citizen parents.

    BTW….everything and anything to do with barry soetoro’s past has been judicially sealed. In fact, his involvement and all information regarding his treasonous activity with Holder, in the Fast & Furious debacle, has been sealed by the Executive Privilege perk.

    Amazing how you want to dismiss the secretive activities of a seditious conspirator, barry soetoro, aka Barack Hussein obama. All such head-in-the-sand mentality only perpetuates more tyranny and corruption by those we call government, now and in the future.

    Cruz, Rubio, Harris were/are illegitimate candidates for POTUS as none of those three are natural born, just as soetoro-obama is not natural born. Yet, 99% of Amerikan fools did nothing to defend the nation and it’s Constitution from the aforementioned, usurping scoundrels. Soetoro-obama being the greatest seditious and usurping scoundrel to ever occupy the Oval Office. Congress and the federal judiciary were/are complicit with the Constitutional crime by soetoro-obama and his multitude of co-conspirators.

    The United States Constitution is DEAD !

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The Naturalization Act of 1790 is not part of the Constitution. The qualifications for the presidency are listed in the Constitution. Congress cannot change those qualifications.
  40. @LondonBob
    https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1090369400518176769

    Trumps reelection problems are even bigger than what this map suggests, I would make Arizona a light blue state for 2020 at this point, like it’s sister orange county on the coast the desert state finally succumbed to the blue wave in 2018 and I think it will stay for the foreseeable future. Also Texas will be a swing state in 2020 consuming lot of resources, Florida will stray red I think. This means Trump has to win 2 out of 3 in MI/PA/WI, I just don’t see that happening.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    I'm guessing the coup d'état engineered by Bob Mueller and his allies will be successful. Trump will be out by the end of the year, and Mike Pence, who was probably compromised years ago by the CIA, will take up residency in the White House until Kamala Harris arrives in January 2021. The secret ceremony where Hillary will pass the crown of Blood Queen to Kamala will transpire on the winter solstice of 2020.
  41. @DAN III
    What soetoro-obama proved was that the entire American system of law is corrupt. Pelosi never vetted him. He was not and is not a Natural Born Citizen.

    Well, that depends. If it is true that his father was Frank Marshall Davis …

    However, the bigger issue is that he may have renounced his citizenship to college funding.

  42. @follyofwar
    PS: Just referring to a clause in the Constitution is not proof. Supreme Court justices spend their entire careers trying to determine what the Constitution means. Even Trump gave up his challenge once Obama produced his long form birth cert.

    Why did it take three years for barry soetoro to produce his “birth” certificate ?

    It was proven by Sheriff Joe Arpio (sp ?) and his investigators that the finally produced “birth certificate” was a forgery; a fake. Information embedded in his “birth certificate” was electronically overlaid upon the document. The incorrect term used to describe the race of the alleged father in the fake birth certificate, was “African”. “African”is not nor ever was, a legal, descriptive term used to describe the race of a child born in the United States in 1961. The term used in 1961 was “Negro” ! A blatant error on the part of the conspirator protecting soetoro-obama’s POTUS legitimacy. Hell. Soetoro-obama’s paternal grandmother stated he was born in Kenya ! Of course, her remarks had no substance, eh ?

    Regardless, the blatant fact-of-the matter is a natural born AMERICAN citizen must be the product of TWO American citizens at time of birth. Cruz, Rubio, soetoro-obama and now Harris joins the club of seditious usurpers to the United States Constitution and the citizens of this formerly great nation. All with the blessing of the federal judiciary and the ignorant morons of the electorate.

  43. Anonymous [AKA "Squaw"] says:
    @DAN III
    The Naturalization Act of 1790 defines "natural born" as the at-birth child of TWO American citizen parents.

    BTW....everything and anything to do with barry soetoro's past has been judicially sealed. In fact, his involvement and all information regarding his treasonous activity with Holder, in the Fast & Furious debacle, has been sealed by the Executive Privilege perk.

    Amazing how you want to dismiss the secretive activities of a seditious conspirator, barry soetoro, aka Barack Hussein obama. All such head-in-the-sand mentality only perpetuates more tyranny and corruption by those we call government, now and in the future.

    Cruz, Rubio, Harris were/are illegitimate candidates for POTUS as none of those three are natural born, just as soetoro-obama is not natural born. Yet, 99% of Amerikan fools did nothing to defend the nation and it's Constitution from the aforementioned, usurping scoundrels. Soetoro-obama being the greatest seditious and usurping scoundrel to ever occupy the Oval Office. Congress and the federal judiciary were/are complicit with the Constitutional crime by soetoro-obama and his multitude of co-conspirators.

    The United States Constitution is DEAD !

    The Naturalization Act of 1790 is not part of the Constitution. The qualifications for the presidency are listed in the Constitution. Congress cannot change those qualifications.

    • Replies: @c matt
    Congress cannot change the qualifications, but it can introduce legislation to define/clarify terms that are no specifically defined.
  44. ” […] We are now on the cusp of being a majority minority state for first time since Reconstruction.”

    LOL! What?!

    I suspect that if you looked up the word “innumeracy,” you’d find a pic of Stacey A.

    Dear God.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    I suspect that if you looked at a picture of Stacey Abrams you'd figure out why black men date white and Asian women.
  45. Isn’t it obvious that the “Abrams strategy” could backfire? I mean, if she demonizes whites to the point where guys like Schumer, Biden and Sanders feel left out, while also supporting BDS, I see nothing but chaos and self-destruction for Democrats. Now you might say, “but Abrams doesn’t openly support BDS.” Not yet she doesn’t. But she scares the Jews. The future of her wing of the party is BDS. BTW, BDS is the one far-left Dem position that I endorse wholeheartedly. Bring forth a Democrat who will do BDS and secure the borders and I just might vote for them.

    • Replies: @Peripatetic Commenter
    At least two out of three are members of the tribe, so they won't be left out!
  46. @Mr. XYZ
    I just checked and it turns out that, like Kamala Harris, Stacey Abrams is yet another example of Black female dysgenics. Smart Black women like Harris and Abrams don't have any children--which is a huge shame since it makes the next generation of Blacks less intelligent on average. Thus, to compensate for this, Democrats might need to import smart African and Caribbean Blacks.

    BTW, what really alienates me is the corporate whorism of the Republican Party. I strongly prefer a colorblind progressivism, but I would probably take a non-colorblind progressivism over corporate whorism.

    Harris is a quadroon: half Mumbai Indian, 1/4 white, and 1/4 black with straight hair and very light brown skin with yellowish undertones. So why is she defined as “black”? But even octoroons are defined as “black” albeit they are almost 90% white and/or other races and only 1/8 negroid.

    • Replies: @Mr Darcy
    Then technically, she's a Sambo.
  47. @SMK
    Harris is a quadroon: half Mumbai Indian, 1/4 white, and 1/4 black with straight hair and very light brown skin with yellowish undertones. So why is she defined as "black"? But even octoroons are defined as "black" albeit they are almost 90% white and/or other races and only 1/8 negroid.

    Then technically, she’s a Sambo.

    • LOL: jim jones
  48. @EldnaYm
    Georgia has the third highest percentage of Black people among U.S. states. Abrams' strategy seems unlikely to win in many other U.S. states.

    Interestingly that strategy doesn’t work in the two states with a higher % of blacks than Georgia (Mississippi and Louisiana?). That means the types of whites you have plays a role. Georgia has plenty of yankee transplants and a higher % of white liberals in general living in the ATL area.

    The whites in Mississippi are nearly unified to vote Republican to the point where having the highest % of blacks doesn’t make a difference.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  49. @anonymous
    I, too, thought - hopefully - that this would concern that other Abrams.

    I early on welcomed AE to Unz Review. But he's since come across as a younger, harder working Derbyshire, a columnist who throws race chum on the water to generate a lot of froth from the readership that craves being reassured that they're better than blacks.

    There's a notable tendency in that camp to still buy into the Red v Blue, Trump needs to {whatever} by {whenever} to save his Presidency, etc., political puppet show. Shouldn't it be dawning on these HighQ guys that all the drama around elections, judicial confirmations, and other Washington stuff makes no difference, and is a convenient distraction for the Empire?

    Divided ==> Conquered

    Elliot Abrams is an agent of a power system that began in ancient Babylon and soon infiltrated the entire Near East and Classical Greece. The Babylonian System is tightly woven into the fabric of Western Civilization. At this point in history the two are inseparable. Abrams and his fellow neocons as we all know are from Trotskyite lineage. Their genes command them to ignite global chaos and carnage, Venezuela being their latest project. Stacey Abrams and her fellow unwitting cultural Marxist comrades, like the witting neocons, are agents of the Babylonian System.

  50. @Corvinus
    "Their replacements will actually represent the interests of normal Americans."

    How do you define "normal Americans"? What criteria is involved here?

    "AE is right about Kamaltoe Harris."

    About her, without a doubt, being the Democratic nominee for President? All he is doing is making a prediction. She MIGHT be the choice. Of course, AE was convinced that Kris Kobach would be the next governor of Kansas. Look how that forecast turned out.

    "Her inversion of the Sailer Strategy..."

    Actually, the Sailer Strategy borrows heavily from Nixon's "Southern Strategy". Lee Atwater explains:

    "You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."

    --Interview with Alexander P. Lamis (8 July 1981), as quoted in The Two-Party South (1984)‎ by Alexander P. Lamis


    The fact of the matter is that the GOP is already the white party. The problem with the majority of white Americans, however, is that they remain ideological about race and culture, and tend to look at pocketbook issues. It will take a heavy, perpetual dose of Alt Right race realism propaganda to convert white Americans to their side, considering how they have been duped by the Jewish controlled media. Sad how supposedly high IQ white Americans apparently have an inborn flaw in that they can be manipulated quite easily. Perhaps you are up to the challenge to help out. There is a dire need for children's books on this very topic. Is your talent creating the storyline or drawing the pictures? It would help that you are female, as you can put your motherly touch on the materials. Guys tend to be ham fisted and heavy handed on such matters.

    ” … they remain ideological about race and culture, and tend to look at pocketbook issues.”

    I think you meant non-ideological about “… race and culture …”.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I think you meant non-ideological about “… race and culture …”."

    No. I got it right the first time. It is worth repeating--The problem with the majority of white Americans, however, is that they remain ideological about race and culture, and tend to look at pocketbook issues.
  51. @Mr Darcy
    " [...] We are now on the cusp of being a majority minority state for first time since Reconstruction."

    LOL! What?!

    I suspect that if you looked up the word "innumeracy," you'd find a pic of Stacey A.

    Dear God.

    I suspect that if you looked at a picture of Stacey Abrams you’d figure out why black men date white and Asian women.

  52. @indocon
    Trumps reelection problems are even bigger than what this map suggests, I would make Arizona a light blue state for 2020 at this point, like it's sister orange county on the coast the desert state finally succumbed to the blue wave in 2018 and I think it will stay for the foreseeable future. Also Texas will be a swing state in 2020 consuming lot of resources, Florida will stray red I think. This means Trump has to win 2 out of 3 in MI/PA/WI, I just don't see that happening.

    I’m guessing the coup d’état engineered by Bob Mueller and his allies will be successful. Trump will be out by the end of the year, and Mike Pence, who was probably compromised years ago by the CIA, will take up residency in the White House until Kamala Harris arrives in January 2021. The secret ceremony where Hillary will pass the crown of Blood Queen to Kamala will transpire on the winter solstice of 2020.

  53. @Bragadocious
    Isn't it obvious that the "Abrams strategy" could backfire? I mean, if she demonizes whites to the point where guys like Schumer, Biden and Sanders feel left out, while also supporting BDS, I see nothing but chaos and self-destruction for Democrats. Now you might say, "but Abrams doesn't openly support BDS." Not yet she doesn't. But she scares the Jews. The future of her wing of the party is BDS. BTW, BDS is the one far-left Dem position that I endorse wholeheartedly. Bring forth a Democrat who will do BDS and secure the borders and I just might vote for them.

    At least two out of three are members of the tribe, so they won’t be left out!

  54. @216
    O/T

    About the Chicago "lynching attempt"

    While odds on are that this will prove a hoax, we should be prepared for the chance that it is either real or made to look real. We are not prepared for the hatestorm that would be unleashed by a trial.

    There’s just something odd to me about seeing so many high-level Dem politicians grab the narrative by the horns. Ordinarily their advisors would caution against this, unless there is more evidence that we aren’t seeing. Springing the trap on the right, after it screamed “hoax”, would severely damage our public standing.

    At the very least, Trump could counter-signal and collectively blame his own supporters. Like it or not, that’s the price you pay when 90% of the media is on the other side. Having Coulter and Spencer criticizing him probably boosts his numbers in the center.

    • Replies: @bro3886
    It simply doesn't matter anymore, the vast number of non-white colonizers who vote in solid anti-white racial blocs have eliminated the need for Democrats to fear the sensible, white, "Silent Majority." The ADL knows, and all these Dem candidates know this is a hoax, it doesn't matter. In fact it's better, since vomiting hate on whites over an obviously fake incident is a stronger virtue signal, it indicates that your contempt for dehumanized whites is over their existence not their actions. Making your victims kowtow for patently false accusations is also a good way to humiliate them and demonstrate their powerlessness. So, no, downstream from mass-migration anti-white is a winner.
  55. just wanted to add that i don’t see stacey abrams as all that smart. she understands the situation on the ground, and wants to take advantage. but that’s about it. her life history reveals her to be just another POC who makes bad life decisions but gets bailed out from them. she never did or said anything smart in her 45 years, as far as i can tell. and did a lot of stuff that was dumb.

    think AE might be getting tricked here by that african verbal fluency thing. she talks well. but she acts like a generic POC.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    She, like most broads on the left side of politics, is a vapid loudmouth with calloused knees. The extent of her intellect pertains to her ability to regurgitate the narrative as spoon fed to her by her handlers.

    As white women become the next great enemy of who we really are, as indicated by the emerging war on Beckys, the Democratic machine will shift to backing these shameless, soulless, ghoulish mongrels as they provide better visuals to the mouthbreathing NPC masses and are much dumber and thus easier to manipulate by the (((men))) behind the curtain.

    , @Audacious Epigone
    She writes well, too, assuming the responses in the Cut article where her own. I'm not claiming she's a genius, just that the caricatures of her as the sassy black woman at the DMV might be cathartic but they're not doing us any favors. Ocasio-Cortez, in contrast, could conceivably have a double-digit IQ.
  56. We need a pro-Palestinian Right.

    • Replies: @indocon
    Absolutely, one of the easiest layups available for #MAGA if they have the brains to grasp it. Nauseating to see that one of only consequential actions taken by Trump was to move embassy in Israel.
    , @Mr. XYZ
    You mean like Bush Sr.?
    , @Marty T
    We don't because unless you're obsessed with hating jews, you understand that Israel has a right and duty to defend itself.
  57. @EliteCommInc.
    I think this is a very interesting bit of analysis. And i would think that it would make sense. Save this, republican candidates are already considered as primarily appealing to white voters, primarily. Making that an exclusive pitch is probably going to alienate vast numbers of whites,

    who acknowledge that whiteness alone is not enough to carry the country forward in any sincere national ethos. I could be wrong, but I suspect it will undermine the very purpose of the appeal. It ignores what has been history -- whites largely appealing to, governing and managing to white ethos and concerns.

    It may be a more honest approach, but it will be redundant nonetheless.

    “Redundant” is the least of our problems. We’re talking about the ~50% of white people who wake up every day and recite their “I hate white people” mantra in the bathroom mirror. It’s a bit more serious than “redundant” and by the way the percentage is much higher among younger people.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    I don't think you know what i mean by redundant. Whites are in power and despite election results, they govern largely by a white inclined polity, inspite of the rhetoric.. The last president in office was purported be black, but his governance was almost exclusively what whites wanted, including a foreign policy and domestic policy he campaigned against.

    Change democrats could believe in turned out to be that a purported black could be just as obtuse about actual change as his white counter-parts.

    What is going to rescue the republican party is democratic polity. One can rope that into some kind of white thing, but the past ten years have revealed just what the democrats are about. And it is not governance with the interests of the US first.

    The current president for all his angst about the purported black guys weakness is doing exactly what the black president did.

  58. @Peripatetic Commenter
    Look to the Democrats to introduce legislation outlawing secret ballots so they can browbeat whites not to vote in their ethnic interests!

    Well of course the private ballot has to be abolished. Everyone Knows that if you permit wypipos any privacy they’ll just be racist.

  59. @Achmed E. Newman
    On that 2nd-to-last sentence, that "... it WILL find an outlet.", I think this may mean another party will have to form. The politicians in the GOP, even those who understand in which direction they need to go, don't have the courage. They are almost all cowards.

    They can be replaced slowly or just beaten by a new movement of people who don't care about being called names anymore.

    I think this may mean another party will have to form

    When in all of human history did a one-party state permit the emergence of another party to challenge it?
    Tell us another one!

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    It will likely be known as the AWMWG party.

    I'll let you figure out what it stands for.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    All of human history?

    1800's United States, for starters.

    It may not be easy. When Ross Perot was giving it a go in the early 1990's, what stopped him was Deep State shenanigans along with, of course, a press that was aligned with The Party. The Deep State part is the more difficult to deal with, as lots of Americans are getting aware of the Lyin' Press' sack-hanging from the US Government, by this point.

    As for the Deep State, all one guy needs is an insider who's got the dirt on everyone, like a Snowden. Even the most powerful have something they want to keep hidden. We are dealing with an elite class of psychopaths.
  60. @prime noticer
    just wanted to add that i don't see stacey abrams as all that smart. she understands the situation on the ground, and wants to take advantage. but that's about it. her life history reveals her to be just another POC who makes bad life decisions but gets bailed out from them. she never did or said anything smart in her 45 years, as far as i can tell. and did a lot of stuff that was dumb.

    think AE might be getting tricked here by that african verbal fluency thing. she talks well. but she acts like a generic POC.

    She, like most broads on the left side of politics, is a vapid loudmouth with calloused knees. The extent of her intellect pertains to her ability to regurgitate the narrative as spoon fed to her by her handlers.

    As white women become the next great enemy of who we really are, as indicated by the emerging war on Beckys, the Democratic machine will shift to backing these shameless, soulless, ghoulish mongrels as they provide better visuals to the mouthbreathing NPC masses and are much dumber and thus easier to manipulate by the (((men))) behind the curtain.

  61. @SunBakedSuburb
    " ... they remain ideological about race and culture, and tend to look at pocketbook issues."

    I think you meant non-ideological about "... race and culture ...".

    “I think you meant non-ideological about “… race and culture …”.”

    No. I got it right the first time. It is worth repeating–The problem with the majority of white Americans, however, is that they remain ideological about race and culture, and tend to look at pocketbook issues.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    Everybody looks at pocketbook issues. And in case you haven't noticed, whites aren't allowed to speak about race -- except on contrarian sites like Unz. I guess the fear is we pale faces will gather together and decide to form the Fourth Reich.
  62. @anonymous
    I, too, thought - hopefully - that this would concern that other Abrams.

    I early on welcomed AE to Unz Review. But he's since come across as a younger, harder working Derbyshire, a columnist who throws race chum on the water to generate a lot of froth from the readership that craves being reassured that they're better than blacks.

    There's a notable tendency in that camp to still buy into the Red v Blue, Trump needs to {whatever} by {whenever} to save his Presidency, etc., political puppet show. Shouldn't it be dawning on these HighQ guys that all the drama around elections, judicial confirmations, and other Washington stuff makes no difference, and is a convenient distraction for the Empire?

    Divided ==> Conquered

    Shouldn’t it be dawning on these HighQ guys that all the drama around elections, judicial confirmations, and other Washington stuff makes no difference, and is a convenient distraction for the Empire?

    Yes, it absolutely should – to the extent they are capable of joined-up thinking, they do not apply that capability when the appropriate button is pushed.

    The fact that they are almost entirely focused on the wrong enemy is yet another vindication of the most important of the “Proverbs for Paranoids“[1] – viz.,

    If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers.

    In an ideal world, everyone would read a few key “red pill” documents[2] in their teens – or at least before they bother investing emotional energy in political goings-on.

    If that was a standard part of the formative years of HighQ types, these soi-disant ‘intellectuals’ would be inoculated against both sides of the political (i.e., parasite) false-dichotomy.

    Rooting for (R) over (D) (or Trump over Clinton, or (R)-lackey judge over (D)-lackey judge) is like rooting for Lhassa fever over Ebola. That’s not to say that one isn’t worse than the other, but that’s not a sound basis for actively supporting the ‘lesser evil’.

    The fact that Lhassa only kills about 1% of the infected while Ebola kills ~50%, isn’t the same thing as Lhassa being a social positive: the best solution is the extermination of both. And so it is with (R) “vs” (D) (the scare quotes are to indicate that the putative adversarial relationship is a shibboleth).

    Advocating for one side or the other of The Spectacle, is advocating for the system itself – with the only caveat being the desire that ‘your’ side be in charge as often as possible.

    The core premise of the “choose a side” view, is that the system can be reformed by the kinds of people attracted to political life: that requires a degree of gullibility usually only found in profoundly-retarded small children.

    Anybody who is genuinely interested in why the economic prospects of the bottom 99% are stagnating throughout the West, should look ignore the colour bar and look instead to the palaces that house the political class.

    Politics is not ‘failing’ to deliver social results: it’s delivering the social results that it’s designed to deliver. The Political Means (to use Oppenheimer’s useful taxonomy, paraphrased here) is a machine for enriching politicians and their cronies, at the expense of the demos: understand that, and the myth of policy ‘failures’ is shown for what it is.

    So the only people who have a genuine vested interest in who is in charge, are those who profit directly – cronies and politicians. All other actors in the economy have low-information guesses about the extent to which ‘their’ side of politics will deliver actual net benefits relative to the ‘other’ side: those low-information guesses are very likely to be wrong, given the tendency of the political class to renege on their promises (and the uncertain interaction between the direct action of a policy and the rest of the economy).

    The actual intended beneficiaries of policy are sure as fuck not participating in online political discussions.

    Notes…

    [1] the “Proverbs for Paranoids” are scattered through Pynchon’s “Gravity’s Rainbow“; “the wrong questions” is on p251 of the 1973 paperback edition.

    [2] Red Pill Readings

    I’ve only included ‘polemical’ texts (i.e., math-free); the academic literature tends to be less accessible so I’ve left out journal articles.

    The academic literature on both sides of the debate concerning ‘legitimate’ coercion (Gaus, Nagels, Rawls, Lister, Buchanan etc) isn’t hard to understand; the core stuff on preference expression (Arrow, Gibbard, Satterthwaite, Buchanan [again] and so on) is tough going unless you’re comfortable with mathematics beyond high-school level.

    5-10 minute reads
    Ronert Higgs’ Myth of “Failed” Policies
    Murray Rothbard’s “Do You Hate the State?
    Guy deBord’s “Society of the Spectacle
    Harry Frankfurter’s “On Bullshit
    Lysander Spooner’s “No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority
    Gustave de Molinari’s “The Production of Security

    Longer reads (still “math-free”)
    Frédéric Bastiat’s “That Which Is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen and The Law
    Albert J Nock’s “Our Enemy, The State

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    That's one libertarian list. I'm sympathetic, despite my best efforts.
  63. @M. Hartley

    I think this may mean another party will have to form
     
    When in all of human history did a one-party state permit the emergence of another party to challenge it?
    Tell us another one!

    It will likely be known as the AWMWG party.

    I’ll let you figure out what it stands for.

  64. @M. Hartley
    "Redundant" is the least of our problems. We're talking about the ~50% of white people who wake up every day and recite their "I hate white people" mantra in the bathroom mirror. It's a bit more serious than "redundant" and by the way the percentage is much higher among younger people.

    I don’t think you know what i mean by redundant. Whites are in power and despite election results, they govern largely by a white inclined polity, inspite of the rhetoric.. The last president in office was purported be black, but his governance was almost exclusively what whites wanted, including a foreign policy and domestic policy he campaigned against.

    Change democrats could believe in turned out to be that a purported black could be just as obtuse about actual change as his white counter-parts.

    What is going to rescue the republican party is democratic polity. One can rope that into some kind of white thing, but the past ten years have revealed just what the democrats are about. And it is not governance with the interests of the US first.

    The current president for all his angst about the purported black guys weakness is doing exactly what the black president did.

  65. @M. Hartley

    I think this may mean another party will have to form
     
    When in all of human history did a one-party state permit the emergence of another party to challenge it?
    Tell us another one!

    All of human history?

    1800’s United States, for starters.

    It may not be easy. When Ross Perot was giving it a go in the early 1990’s, what stopped him was Deep State shenanigans along with, of course, a press that was aligned with The Party. The Deep State part is the more difficult to deal with, as lots of Americans are getting aware of the Lyin’ Press’ sack-hanging from the US Government, by this point.

    As for the Deep State, all one guy needs is an insider who’s got the dirt on everyone, like a Snowden. Even the most powerful have something they want to keep hidden. We are dealing with an elite class of psychopaths.

    • Replies: @M. Hartley
    The USA was a one-party state in the 1800s?
  66. @EliteCommInc.
    I think this is a very interesting bit of analysis. And i would think that it would make sense. Save this, republican candidates are already considered as primarily appealing to white voters, primarily. Making that an exclusive pitch is probably going to alienate vast numbers of whites,

    who acknowledge that whiteness alone is not enough to carry the country forward in any sincere national ethos. I could be wrong, but I suspect it will undermine the very purpose of the appeal. It ignores what has been history -- whites largely appealing to, governing and managing to white ethos and concerns.

    It may be a more honest approach, but it will be redundant nonetheless.

    There are ways the party could split the difference. Affirmative action for example is widely unpopular among whites. Even white liberals are mixed on it. Yet it’s something the GOP never talks about.

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    Excuse the delay -- I missed this comment

    Uhhhh, no. In fact as white women and asians comprise 70% or more of the AA action beneficiaries, and have since the late seventies, I think, It is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

    One of the many mistakes in yanking on the color card repeatedly without paying to the data about the same is that a polity is established that eventually doesn't make any sense.


    Republican should have been the first to embrace civil liberties and ride Lincoln's coat tails for eternity. But out color analysis has been shoddy and opportunistic to gain advantage instead of fostering healthy policies to advantage, After more than 200 years of identity politics , rooted in rather shallow and benign traits, especially color. I have to be honest, it sounds like whining now that the opposition has fostered a relationship with blacks to gain advantage from the same tactics engaged by whites period.

    Now we are caught trying to leverage IQ, morality etc as justification and benefit. AA is so rooted in white ethos, that white women think it was created exclusively for them. I doubt there is any advantage there muchless an opportunity for a split.


    Continued behavior of democrats is to our advantage -- that and issues that the country cares about. A country looking for national healthcare is not going to upend AA, especially since whites, yellows and lighter browns are the big winners.

  67. @EldnaYm
    Georgia has the third highest percentage of Black people among U.S. states. Abrams' strategy seems unlikely to win in many other U.S. states.

    Georgia, Texas, or Florida will be the next state it works in–but the other two of those states will be close behind the one that goes first. Those states become blue and the electoral college becomes unwinnable for the GOP, even if it holds on upperhand in the Midwest.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @indocon
    Disagree slightly, Florida will stay red albeit very very narrowly, Cubans will vote heavily for Republicans to protect their interest plus continuing influx of retirees from Northeast will keep the state red.
    , @Mr McKenna
    Florida is already blue. Forever more, unfortunately.

    And there goes what's left of the country.
    , @iffen
    Then they use the nuclear option in the Senate and pack the Supreme Court and it's time to turn out the lights.
    , @EldnahYm
    What is the first state the strategy worked in?
  68. @Priss Factor
    We need a pro-Palestinian Right.

    Absolutely, one of the easiest layups available for #MAGA if they have the brains to grasp it. Nauseating to see that one of only consequential actions taken by Trump was to move embassy in Israel.

    • Replies: @iffen
    Sop to the most loyal part of his base; no downside.
  69. @anonymous
    I, too, thought - hopefully - that this would concern that other Abrams.

    I early on welcomed AE to Unz Review. But he's since come across as a younger, harder working Derbyshire, a columnist who throws race chum on the water to generate a lot of froth from the readership that craves being reassured that they're better than blacks.

    There's a notable tendency in that camp to still buy into the Red v Blue, Trump needs to {whatever} by {whenever} to save his Presidency, etc., political puppet show. Shouldn't it be dawning on these HighQ guys that all the drama around elections, judicial confirmations, and other Washington stuff makes no difference, and is a convenient distraction for the Empire?

    Divided ==> Conquered

    I’ll step right into it and ask what tact to take that will make a difference. If it’s to point at the 6 gorillion commenter, I’ll duly note and then continue doing what I’m doing.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    Thanks for acknowledging my comment, but I don’t know what else to say beyond my reply to Anti-Gnostic. Kratoklastes, a good writer and valuable contributor, provided more authoritative sources for my perspective.
  70. @Audacious Epigone
    Georgia, Texas, or Florida will be the next state it works in--but the other two of those states will be close behind the one that goes first. Those states become blue and the electoral college becomes unwinnable for the GOP, even if it holds on upperhand in the Midwest.

    Disagree slightly, Florida will stay red albeit very very narrowly, Cubans will vote heavily for Republicans to protect their interest plus continuing influx of retirees from Northeast will keep the state red.

    • Replies: @Jay Fink
    Giving felons the right to vote isn't going to help Florida stay red. I was rather shocked at how easily that passed. From what I understand fundamentalist Christians were solidly behind it. That shows they were not smart enough to understand the political ramifications.
  71. @Liberty Mike
    Some six or seven weeks ago, on your old blog, I made the point that Stacy Abrams possesses more intersectionality than Kamala Harris and that the more authentic POC standard bearer was Ms. Abrams.

    Woman of color, particularly black women, can more readily identify with the Georgia giant than they can with the ersatz Harris. In addition to the physical symmetry with Abrams, the average negress has not had the benefit of a Willie Brown.

    Indeed, but I doubt Abrams is so ambitious as to challenge Harris in 2020, splitting the POC vote, causing a riff in a partnership and possibly keeping them both out. Harris is a decade older than Abrams, and both understand the Democrat patronage system well.

    I suspect Harris is promising everything she can to Booker to keep him from running. If she’s the only POC–Castro doesn’t count, he’s a non-entity nobody cares about–against a field of SWPLs in Sanders, Gillibrand, Klobuchar, Warren, O’Rourke, and Biden, she is obviously going to clean up.

  72. @216
    Our solution will be either separation or POCfindom. White liberals are not prone to being tribal, unless it is in defense of other white liberals. They don't extend tribalism to conservatives of the same race.

    So we not only have to make the GOP explicit about white identity politics, we have to perform the near-impossibility of getting PeeOhCee GOP candidates to say "It's OK to be white".

    ---

    More off topic commentary on "the progressive stack"

    https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/01/29/nolte-fox-news-anchor-julie-banderas-melts-down-after-mild-criticism-trump/

    https://twitter.com/JulieBanderas/status/1089870535738253312

    This is why even someone like Trump cannot "punch down". The use of "bullying" and "harassment" is intended for a reason, as it is only extended to a male victim here by happenstance of being tweeted by a female along with a female victim.

    Our people need to find ways of bypassing the "harassment" charge, and finding "non-hateful" ways of presenting arguments. The trolling of '16 prospered in part because of doubts as to whether or not the Alt-Right was ironic. Heilgate and Charlottesville demolished that doubt.

    There perhaps might be a generational shift underway towards a greater sense for manners. In that regard, Trump is truly the last bout of Boomer boorishness.

    I dream of the day a congressman introduces a resolution simply stating “it’s okay to be white”.

  73. @Endgame Napoleon
    You couldn’t be more right, Steve, although it is so very hard for wealthy Republican politicians, with their locked-in, gerrymandered jobs at $174 and their lobbyist friends, guaranteeing them and theirs a smooth ride in this brutal churn-job economy, to see why whites simply cannot afford to be see-no-color Bernie progressives, even when that is their historical voting pattern and their natural way of thinking. Talk to non-rich whites living in GA. If you are not in one of the few decent-paying fields, lack a spousal income, lack rent-covering child support and lack the blanket of welfare & child tax credit support given to single-breadwinner moms to hoist up their wages, you won’t have a roof over your head unless you can land a living-wage job. Yet, most workplaces are dominated by the race-centric philosophy that Abrams proudly spouts, saying straight up that people seek to live and work with their own racial group.

    That’s not racist when Blacks or Hispanics do it. That’s why it is good for a white woman to change her name to Shiniqua when seeking a job in many parts of Georgia.

    Whites can’t afford to wallow in colorblind naivety much longer unless they are in a secure profession or have a spouse, bringing in a safe second income from a .Gov job, although it will be very interesting to see how many of those comfortably smug, upper-middle-class, white signalers in dual-earner households stay on the race-and-reparations bandwagon as the economy slides downward due to massive consumer and government debt, and their nest eggs get threatened, in part, by citizens & noncitizens of color, marching in lock step with white supporters to demand even more pay from government for sex and reproduction. This will require upper-middle signalers to shell out, backing up their beliefs with real financial sacrifice for the downtrodden Black & Brown people.

    I’ve little doubt that in our lifetimes there will be confiscatory taxation on 401(k) retirement withdrawals. The rhetoric is predictable and other than a direct tax on wealth, it’s the last honeypot for the ascendancy to pillage.

  74. @The Anti-Gnostic
    Why do you think some ersatz civic nationalism is viable? Isn't that "Empire?"

    Division doesn't equal Conquest. Lots of people are prospering under POC-nationalism. Stacey Abrams, for example.

    Indeed. Division may end up being our deliverance.

  75. @Muh 6 Gorrillion!!!!!!!!

    It’d be nice if smart, realistic, black ladies like Stacey Abrams had life aims other than accumulating power through racial politics.
     
    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Yeah, Jewboy, and what’d be even nicer is if racist, dissembling, Jew-terrorist scum like the loud-mouthed, gentile-hating, zio parasites who've been wreaking havoc from their Jew-squat in Jew-occupied Palestine for over a century now, weren't the fucking poster children for "accumulating power through racial politics".

    If he’s not an intentional troll, he may as well be. This approach will appeal to a percentage of the population smaller than that of the 2%.

  76. @Corvinus
    "Their replacements will actually represent the interests of normal Americans."

    How do you define "normal Americans"? What criteria is involved here?

    "AE is right about Kamaltoe Harris."

    About her, without a doubt, being the Democratic nominee for President? All he is doing is making a prediction. She MIGHT be the choice. Of course, AE was convinced that Kris Kobach would be the next governor of Kansas. Look how that forecast turned out.

    "Her inversion of the Sailer Strategy..."

    Actually, the Sailer Strategy borrows heavily from Nixon's "Southern Strategy". Lee Atwater explains:

    "You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."

    --Interview with Alexander P. Lamis (8 July 1981), as quoted in The Two-Party South (1984)‎ by Alexander P. Lamis


    The fact of the matter is that the GOP is already the white party. The problem with the majority of white Americans, however, is that they remain ideological about race and culture, and tend to look at pocketbook issues. It will take a heavy, perpetual dose of Alt Right race realism propaganda to convert white Americans to their side, considering how they have been duped by the Jewish controlled media. Sad how supposedly high IQ white Americans apparently have an inborn flaw in that they can be manipulated quite easily. Perhaps you are up to the challenge to help out. There is a dire need for children's books on this very topic. Is your talent creating the storyline or drawing the pictures? It would help that you are female, as you can put your motherly touch on the materials. Guys tend to be ham fisted and heavy handed on such matters.

    I never said I was convinced Kobach would win. I wanted him to, but please show where I confidently predicted he would.

  77. @follyofwar
    I didn't know that Stacey Abrams, after losing the Georgia governors race, would be awarded the prime spot of the D response to Trump's SOTU address. To put it mildly, the woman is not very photogenic. I can see men of all colors turning that sow off once they get a look at her. I never watch that ridiculous speech anyway, though it might be of interest this year if the D's turn their backs or if a melee breaks out. And I'm curious how Pelosi will react sitting behind Trump.

    Pelosi can no longer make facial expressions so I think that’s predictable enough!

  78. More and more of the #LyingMSM are in the bag for Karmasutra Harris, it seems:

    https://hotair.com/archives/2019/01/30/wapo-columnist-kamala-harris-love-life-bounds/

    What are they going to do if Hillary decides she wants one more merry-go-round ride?

    • Replies: @Peripatetic Commenter
    However, this suggests that they think she is vulnerable here as well.
  79. Anonymous [AKA "Muthaucker"] says:

    You forgot that Blacks and Hispanics hate each other….

    • Replies: @Peripatetic Commenter
    Yeah, but they will leave the partying until they have dealt with whitey!
  80. @prime noticer
    just wanted to add that i don't see stacey abrams as all that smart. she understands the situation on the ground, and wants to take advantage. but that's about it. her life history reveals her to be just another POC who makes bad life decisions but gets bailed out from them. she never did or said anything smart in her 45 years, as far as i can tell. and did a lot of stuff that was dumb.

    think AE might be getting tricked here by that african verbal fluency thing. she talks well. but she acts like a generic POC.

    She writes well, too, assuming the responses in the Cut article where her own. I’m not claiming she’s a genius, just that the caricatures of her as the sassy black woman at the DMV might be cathartic but they’re not doing us any favors. Ocasio-Cortez, in contrast, could conceivably have a double-digit IQ.

  81. @indocon
    Disagree slightly, Florida will stay red albeit very very narrowly, Cubans will vote heavily for Republicans to protect their interest plus continuing influx of retirees from Northeast will keep the state red.

    Giving felons the right to vote isn’t going to help Florida stay red. I was rather shocked at how easily that passed. From what I understand fundamentalist Christians were solidly behind it. That shows they were not smart enough to understand the political ramifications.

    • Replies: @iffen
    It's a non-issue; career criminals don't vote.
  82. @Anonymous
    You forgot that Blacks and Hispanics hate each other....

    Yeah, but they will leave the partying until they have dealt with whitey!

  83. @Kratoklastes

    Shouldn’t it be dawning on these HighQ guys that all the drama around elections, judicial confirmations, and other Washington stuff makes no difference, and is a convenient distraction for the Empire?
     
    Yes, it absolutely should - to the extent they are capable of joined-up thinking, they do not apply that capability when the appropriate button is pushed.

    The fact that they are almost entirely focused on the wrong enemy is yet another vindication of the most important of the "Proverbs for Paranoids"[1] - viz.,


    If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.
     
    In an ideal world, everyone would read a few key "red pill" documents[2] in their teens - or at least before they bother investing emotional energy in political goings-on.

    If that was a standard part of the formative years of HighQ types, these soi-disant 'intellectuals' would be inoculated against both sides of the political (i.e., parasite) false-dichotomy.

    Rooting for (R) over (D) (or Trump over Clinton, or (R)-lackey judge over (D)-lackey judge) is like rooting for Lhassa fever over Ebola. That's not to say that one isn't worse than the other, but that's not a sound basis for actively supporting the 'lesser evil'.

    The fact that Lhassa only kills about 1% of the infected while Ebola kills ~50%, isn't the same thing as Lhassa being a social positive: the best solution is the extermination of both. And so it is with (R) "vs" (D) (the scare quotes are to indicate that the putative adversarial relationship is a shibboleth).

    Advocating for one side or the other of The Spectacle, is advocating for the system itself - with the only caveat being the desire that 'your' side be in charge as often as possible.

    The core premise of the "choose a side" view, is that the system can be reformed by the kinds of people attracted to political life: that requires a degree of gullibility usually only found in profoundly-retarded small children.

    Anybody who is genuinely interested in why the economic prospects of the bottom 99% are stagnating throughout the West, should look ignore the colour bar and look instead to the palaces that house the political class.

    Politics is not 'failing' to deliver social results: it's delivering the social results that it's designed to deliver. The Political Means (to use Oppenheimer's useful taxonomy, paraphrased here) is a machine for enriching politicians and their cronies, at the expense of the demos: understand that, and the myth of policy 'failures' is shown for what it is.

    So the only people who have a genuine vested interest in who is in charge, are those who profit directly - cronies and politicians. All other actors in the economy have low-information guesses about the extent to which 'their' side of politics will deliver actual net benefits relative to the 'other' side: those low-information guesses are very likely to be wrong, given the tendency of the political class to renege on their promises (and the uncertain interaction between the direct action of a policy and the rest of the economy).

    The actual intended beneficiaries of policy are sure as fuck not participating in online political discussions.

    Notes...

    [1] the "Proverbs for Paranoids" are scattered through Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow"; "the wrong questions" is on p251 of the 1973 paperback edition.

    [2] Red Pill Readings

    I've only included 'polemical' texts (i.e., math-free); the academic literature tends to be less accessible so I've left out journal articles.

    The academic literature on both sides of the debate concerning 'legitimate' coercion (Gaus, Nagels, Rawls, Lister, Buchanan etc) isn't hard to understand; the core stuff on preference expression (Arrow, Gibbard, Satterthwaite, Buchanan [again] and so on) is tough going unless you're comfortable with mathematics beyond high-school level.

    5-10 minute reads
    Ronert Higgs' Myth of "Failed" Policies
    Murray Rothbard's "Do You Hate the State?"
    Guy deBord's "Society of the Spectacle"
    Harry Frankfurter's "On Bullshit"
    Lysander Spooner's "No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority"
    Gustave de Molinari's "The Production of Security"

    Longer reads (still "math-free")
    Frédéric Bastiat's "That Which Is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen" and The Law
    Albert J Nock's "Our Enemy, The State"

    That’s one libertarian list. I’m sympathetic, despite my best efforts.

  84. Contd: The Chicago Lynching

    This now makes two people that could potentially be held liable here if they are caught lying.

    It’s reasonable to think that this was black-on-black, and “MAGA” was substituted for something else.

    The left’s rage here should not be underestimated, and a victory for us means a total destruction of the case and conviction of both accusers. If the attack was genuine, but done by vengeful blacks we will still pay a penalty.

    https://twitter.com/Fox_Summit/status/1090744972591222785

    The left is moving towards accelerationism.

    The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion (to which few members of other civilizations were converted) but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

    Samuel P. Huntington

    • Replies: @densa
    A small aside, we shouldn't accept the oxymoron of 'majority minority'. It describes a coalition of all other races against one: White. It is more accurate, and describes the future more clearly, to use 'white minority' country instead. To contemplate no longer being tolerant of minorities but being a minority, one held in open hostility, should sober up a few borderline SJWs.
  85. @Audacious Epigone
    I'll step right into it and ask what tact to take that will make a difference. If it's to point at the 6 gorillion commenter, I'll duly note and then continue doing what I'm doing.

    Thanks for acknowledging my comment, but I don’t know what else to say beyond my reply to Anti-Gnostic. Kratoklastes, a good writer and valuable contributor, provided more authoritative sources for my perspective.

  86. A whole stream of targeted harassment against an elected official in the replies

    Use the report button with alacrity

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Rand could become the champion we need. I'm serious about this.
  87. @Corvinus
    "I think you meant non-ideological about “… race and culture …”."

    No. I got it right the first time. It is worth repeating--The problem with the majority of white Americans, however, is that they remain ideological about race and culture, and tend to look at pocketbook issues.

    Everybody looks at pocketbook issues. And in case you haven’t noticed, whites aren’t allowed to speak about race — except on contrarian sites like Unz. I guess the fear is we pale faces will gather together and decide to form the Fourth Reich.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Everybody looks at pocketbook issues."

    Especially white Americans, and for a number of them, this issue is priority number one.

    "And in case you haven’t noticed, whites aren’t allowed to speak about race"

    Of course people are "allowed" to speak about race! What a ridiculous assertion you are making. Americans of different races are constantly talking about it, whether it be in the media, at work, at school, etc.

    "I guess the fear is we pale faces will gather together and decide to form the Fourth Reich."

    Highly doubtful.
  88. This near-junvenile behavior disgusts me, but not surprising from a woman that blasphemed one of her own prophets.

    When you are at the top of the progressive stack, you can literally make jokes insulting the mentally ill.

    We were told how much the Third World was oppressed by colonialism, but when we gave them independence they invaded our lands.

    Deport Omar.

    • Replies: @Marty T
    Its gonna be kind of fun watching the Democrat party struggle to deal with its anti-semitic rising stars.
  89. @Stilicho
    AE is right about Kamaltoe Harris. As for the GOP becoming the white party, it already is. It just isn't presenting itself as such. Yet. The constant kowtowing to explicitly racist groups such as blacks, mexicans, squatemalans, etc. will end eventually. The current crop of GOP politicians think they have too much to lose by speaking the truth (just look what those craven, stupid bootlickers did to Steve King over a proven false report!). They will learn or be replaced. For now, they fear the media more than they fear their voters. That will change too.

    Nothing focuses the mind like hardship and it is coming to normal Americans at some point via the usual economic shenanigans, or imposed by the leftist coalition of turd-worlders. At that point, GOP cucks will. Be introduced to tar and feathers...if they are lucky.

    Their replacements will actually represent the interests of normal Americans against the leftist democrat hordes of not-Americans or will suffer worse fates. The pressure will be too great and it WILL find an outlet. It always does.

    The only way for the GOP to counter the pro-POC party will be to become the pro-white party

    I think that is mostly true, but needs to be handled correctly and not taken too far.

    For example, the status quo is explicit anti-white discrimination, PC censorship, open borders, etc. But that means that a color-blind, meritocratic, patriotic, law and order, free-speech program is necessarily “pro-white.”

    We wouldn’t want to forfeit that persuasive advantage by adopting our own special interest program — I don’t think White people have any desire for special privileges even if they could get them anyway. The moral superiority of a pro-White (but colorblind) program should contrast well over time with their special pleading, especially as their message gets more explicitly anti-white with each election cycle.

    But you’re absolutely right about the need to stop cucking over fake allegations that anything good for whites is “racist.”

    • Agree: M. Hartley
  90. Re: Why I only say that straight white gentile males are the only acceptable people to criticize directly on Big Social.

    We’ve got Jewish female vs Jewish male, but presumed “Nazis” that are “harassing”.

    He was owned because the stack didn’t come to his defense, but an attack by a gentile would have triggered a tribal response.

    The stack won’t defend its swgm “allies”. That is its weakness, exploit it.

  91. @216
    A whole stream of targeted harassment against an elected official in the replies

    https://twitter.com/AP/status/1090761005947334658

    Use the report button with alacrity

    Rand could become the champion we need. I’m serious about this.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Is Rand in favor of less immigration to the U.S.?
    , @Charles Pewitt
    Rand Paul pushes mass legal immigration and he hasn't made much of a fuss about illegal immigration.

    Rand Paul and his father, Ron, were two of the most radical presidential candidates of the last few decades.

    Ron Paul is a post-1848 Pennsylvania Kraut who is a doctor.

    Ron and Rand Paul have called for the destruction of the power of the privately-controlled Federal Reserve Bank. That is BALLSY politics that Scotch-Irish warrior Andrew Jackson would be proud of.

    I admire and respect Ron and Rand Paul, but both of them push mass legal immigration and are weak on illegal immigration.

    Trump gets along with Rand Paul because they are both half German, and because Rand Paul is a doctor, not a career politician.

    I asked Rand Paul about immigration policy and Islamic terrorism in 2015.

    Relevant portion of video starts at 16:10:

    https://youtu.be/feBWmMxFQNM
  92. @Priss Factor
    We need a pro-Palestinian Right.

    You mean like Bush Sr.?

  93. @Audacious Epigone
    Rand could become the champion we need. I'm serious about this.

    Is Rand in favor of less immigration to the U.S.?

    • Replies: @M. Hartley
    Less as in a hundred or two hundred less? This is the guy who said we must revoke any and all criminal penalties which result in disparate impact.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    He's waffly to be generous, but he's sharp, has shown he can calibrate, and doesn't appear to care about elite opinion.
  94. @Mr. XYZ
    Is Rand in favor of less immigration to the U.S.?

    Less as in a hundred or two hundred less? This is the guy who said we must revoke any and all criminal penalties which result in disparate impact.

  95. @Achmed E. Newman
    All of human history?

    1800's United States, for starters.

    It may not be easy. When Ross Perot was giving it a go in the early 1990's, what stopped him was Deep State shenanigans along with, of course, a press that was aligned with The Party. The Deep State part is the more difficult to deal with, as lots of Americans are getting aware of the Lyin' Press' sack-hanging from the US Government, by this point.

    As for the Deep State, all one guy needs is an insider who's got the dirt on everyone, like a Snowden. Even the most powerful have something they want to keep hidden. We are dealing with an elite class of psychopaths.

    The USA was a one-party state in the 1800s?

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    It was for a few years after the War of 1812 when the Federalists collapsed. Also the Republicans were very dominant 1860-1896.
  96. @EldnaYm
    Georgia has the third highest percentage of Black people among U.S. states. Abrams' strategy seems unlikely to win in many other U.S. states.

    Not only that, but she, you know, LOST. Brian Kemp is the governor of Georgia. Democrats pushing Stacey Abrams is fine with me. If anything it paints them into the corner as the antiwhite, antimale party.

    Kamala Harris may be nominated, but I don’t think she’ll win. Why not? Because many white women will not want a black woman to be president first. Also – Kamala may lose some black men…she’s married to a Jewish guy.

    It should be very easy for the GOP to get all the leftist groups to go after each other. Doesn’t mean they will, but they should.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna

    Because many white women will not want a black woman to be president first.
     
    99% of white women don't think that way. They'd be elated to see a black woman president.

    The trouble with Kamala is that she's not very smart, and also that she's made of plastic.

    However, these are not really barriers to high office in Current Year USA.
    , @dvorak

    Democrats pushing Stacey Abrams is fine with me. If anything it paints them into the corner as the antiwhite, antimale party.
     
    The Dems don't need white men. They need white women and POC, and a Harris-Abrams ticket could be competitive in Florida, Ohio, PA, MI and WI. Even Iowa would be in play because of naïve white women who live in a fifty-years-ago whitopia.

    The Ohio black vote: Little (and not so little) old black ladies turned out massively to reelect Obama. h/t iSteve

  97. @Audacious Epigone
    Georgia, Texas, or Florida will be the next state it works in--but the other two of those states will be close behind the one that goes first. Those states become blue and the electoral college becomes unwinnable for the GOP, even if it holds on upperhand in the Midwest.

    Florida is already blue. Forever more, unfortunately.

    And there goes what’s left of the country.

  98. @Marty T
    Not only that, but she, you know, LOST. Brian Kemp is the governor of Georgia. Democrats pushing Stacey Abrams is fine with me. If anything it paints them into the corner as the antiwhite, antimale party.

    Kamala Harris may be nominated, but I don't think she'll win. Why not? Because many white women will not want a black woman to be president first. Also - Kamala may lose some black men...she's married to a Jewish guy.

    It should be very easy for the GOP to get all the leftist groups to go after each other. Doesn't mean they will, but they should.

    Because many white women will not want a black woman to be president first.

    99% of white women don’t think that way. They’d be elated to see a black woman president.

    The trouble with Kamala is that she’s not very smart, and also that she’s made of plastic.

    However, these are not really barriers to high office in Current Year USA.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Indeed, they're features rather than bugs.
  99. The Democratic Party is serious about power, the GOP is serious about money. If they can lose respectably on the national level, but keep control in a number of states, public service via the GOP is still an essential stop on the way to a career as a highly paid lobbyist. Trump’s sin is not winning, it is not being a gentleman.

    Further, anyone who doesn’t think Harris has good odds of winning the Presidency is fooling themselves. Trump had a chance to solidify his coalition by making waves on behalf of the blue collar whites in the Mid-West who voted for him. Instead, he embraced McConnell and Ryan.

    • Agree: densa
  100. @Marty T
    Not only that, but she, you know, LOST. Brian Kemp is the governor of Georgia. Democrats pushing Stacey Abrams is fine with me. If anything it paints them into the corner as the antiwhite, antimale party.

    Kamala Harris may be nominated, but I don't think she'll win. Why not? Because many white women will not want a black woman to be president first. Also - Kamala may lose some black men...she's married to a Jewish guy.

    It should be very easy for the GOP to get all the leftist groups to go after each other. Doesn't mean they will, but they should.

    Democrats pushing Stacey Abrams is fine with me. If anything it paints them into the corner as the antiwhite, antimale party.

    The Dems don’t need white men. They need white women and POC, and a Harris-Abrams ticket could be competitive in Florida, Ohio, PA, MI and WI. Even Iowa would be in play because of naïve white women who live in a fifty-years-ago whitopia.

    The Ohio black vote: Little (and not so little) old black ladies turned out massively to reelect Obama. h/t iSteve

    • Replies: @Marty T
    Two black women? No way the dems are stupid enough to do that.
    , @Hibernian
    "Even Iowa would be in play because of naïve white women who live in a fifty-years-ago whitopia."

    I grew up in Iowa. It's a cross between neighboring states Wisconsin (blue) and Missouri (red.) The current Republican woman Senator is a character out of a country and western song.
  101. Biden has very high favourables with black, the question is how well they take to Harris. Jews definitely want Harris though, she is Israel uber aloes.

  102. @Peripatetic Commenter
    More and more of the #LyingMSM are in the bag for Karmasutra Harris, it seems:

    https://hotair.com/archives/2019/01/30/wapo-columnist-kamala-harris-love-life-bounds/

    What are they going to do if Hillary decides she wants one more merry-go-round ride?

    However, this suggests that they think she is vulnerable here as well.

  103. @Priss Factor
    We need a pro-Palestinian Right.

    We don’t because unless you’re obsessed with hating jews, you understand that Israel has a right and duty to defend itself.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    So why doesn't it?
    , @c matt
    Exactly -Israel has a right/duty to defend itself. We owe them nothing.
    , @Priss Factor
    Israel has a right and duty to defend itself.

    Israel isn't only defending itself. It is occupying West Bank and denying Palestinians the last hope for nationhood. Also, it is aiding terrorists throughout places like Syria and pressuring US foreign policy to subvert Iran. The way Israelis treat Palestinians in West Bank is very much how Jewish elites treat white people in US and EU: As Occupied People who exist to be censured, censored, deplatformed, fired, blacklisted, and even bullied by Antifa thugs.

    I can support Israel's defense of nationhood or nationalism. But NO to Zionist Occupation and Imperialism.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnCsWzAczIo
  104. @Marty T
    We don't because unless you're obsessed with hating jews, you understand that Israel has a right and duty to defend itself.

    So why doesn’t it?

  105. @SunBakedSuburb
    Everybody looks at pocketbook issues. And in case you haven't noticed, whites aren't allowed to speak about race -- except on contrarian sites like Unz. I guess the fear is we pale faces will gather together and decide to form the Fourth Reich.

    “Everybody looks at pocketbook issues.”

    Especially white Americans, and for a number of them, this issue is priority number one.

    “And in case you haven’t noticed, whites aren’t allowed to speak about race”

    Of course people are “allowed” to speak about race! What a ridiculous assertion you are making. Americans of different races are constantly talking about it, whether it be in the media, at work, at school, etc.

    “I guess the fear is we pale faces will gather together and decide to form the Fourth Reich.”

    Highly doubtful.

    • Replies: @Peripatetic Commenter

    Of course people are “allowed” to speak about race! What a ridiculous assertion you are making. Americans of different races are constantly talking about it, whether it be in the media, at work, at school, etc.
     
    This is how Corvinus lies, by speaking half-truths.

    Of course everyone speaks about race.

    However, whites are not allowed to speak the truth about race, especially about blacks, the way that other races are allows to speak their "truths" about whites.

    Get a Chinese person drunk sometime and ask them for the "truth".
    , @c matt

    Of course people are “allowed” to speak about race!
     
    reminds me of that old USSR joke:

    American: In America we have freedom of speech because we can say "the US sucks!"

    Russian: In Russia we too have freedom of speech because we can also say "the US sucks!"
    , @Hibernian
    "Americans of different races are constantly talking about it, whether it be in the media, at work, at school, etc."

    Not white employees where I work. Twenty five years ago some of us (mostly about the age I am now but including some younger people) talked about it constantly. Times have changed.
  106. @Corvinus
    "Everybody looks at pocketbook issues."

    Especially white Americans, and for a number of them, this issue is priority number one.

    "And in case you haven’t noticed, whites aren’t allowed to speak about race"

    Of course people are "allowed" to speak about race! What a ridiculous assertion you are making. Americans of different races are constantly talking about it, whether it be in the media, at work, at school, etc.

    "I guess the fear is we pale faces will gather together and decide to form the Fourth Reich."

    Highly doubtful.

    Of course people are “allowed” to speak about race! What a ridiculous assertion you are making. Americans of different races are constantly talking about it, whether it be in the media, at work, at school, etc.

    This is how Corvinus lies, by speaking half-truths.

    Of course everyone speaks about race.

    However, whites are not allowed to speak the truth about race, especially about blacks, the way that other races are allows to speak their “truths” about whites.

    Get a Chinese person drunk sometime and ask them for the “truth”.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "This is how Corvinus lies, by speaking half-truths."

    Mixed metaphor.

    "However, whites are not allowed to speak the truth about race, especially about blacks, the way that other races are allows to speak their “truths” about whites."

    You really haven't been paying close attention. Of course whites speak about the other races in the same manner other races do about whites. It just happens to be THEIR version of truth, which may not necessarily be accurate or realistic.

    "Get a Chinese person drunk sometime and ask them for the “truth”."

    Speaking from personal experience? So, Charlie Chan, what did he exactly say?
  107. @Audacious Epigone
    Rand could become the champion we need. I'm serious about this.

    Rand Paul pushes mass legal immigration and he hasn’t made much of a fuss about illegal immigration.

    Rand Paul and his father, Ron, were two of the most radical presidential candidates of the last few decades.

    Ron Paul is a post-1848 Pennsylvania Kraut who is a doctor.

    Ron and Rand Paul have called for the destruction of the power of the privately-controlled Federal Reserve Bank. That is BALLSY politics that Scotch-Irish warrior Andrew Jackson would be proud of.

    I admire and respect Ron and Rand Paul, but both of them push mass legal immigration and are weak on illegal immigration.

    Trump gets along with Rand Paul because they are both half German, and because Rand Paul is a doctor, not a career politician.

    I asked Rand Paul about immigration policy and Islamic terrorism in 2015.

    Relevant portion of video starts at 16:10:

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  108. @Anonymous
    The Naturalization Act of 1790 is not part of the Constitution. The qualifications for the presidency are listed in the Constitution. Congress cannot change those qualifications.

    Congress cannot change the qualifications, but it can introduce legislation to define/clarify terms that are no specifically defined.

  109. @Marty T
    We don't because unless you're obsessed with hating jews, you understand that Israel has a right and duty to defend itself.

    Exactly -Israel has a right/duty to defend itself. We owe them nothing.

  110. @Corvinus
    "Everybody looks at pocketbook issues."

    Especially white Americans, and for a number of them, this issue is priority number one.

    "And in case you haven’t noticed, whites aren’t allowed to speak about race"

    Of course people are "allowed" to speak about race! What a ridiculous assertion you are making. Americans of different races are constantly talking about it, whether it be in the media, at work, at school, etc.

    "I guess the fear is we pale faces will gather together and decide to form the Fourth Reich."

    Highly doubtful.

    Of course people are “allowed” to speak about race!

    reminds me of that old USSR joke:

    American: In America we have freedom of speech because we can say “the US sucks!”

    Russian: In Russia we too have freedom of speech because we can also say “the US sucks!”

    • Replies: @EH
    Much like modern marriage:
    Wives are free to do whatever they want, husbands to do whatever their wives want - that's what equality means.
  111. Priss Factor [AKA "Asagirian"] says:
    @Marty T
    We don't because unless you're obsessed with hating jews, you understand that Israel has a right and duty to defend itself.

    Israel has a right and duty to defend itself.

    Israel isn’t only defending itself. It is occupying West Bank and denying Palestinians the last hope for nationhood. Also, it is aiding terrorists throughout places like Syria and pressuring US foreign policy to subvert Iran. The way Israelis treat Palestinians in West Bank is very much how Jewish elites treat white people in US and EU: As Occupied People who exist to be censured, censored, deplatformed, fired, blacklisted, and even bullied by Antifa thugs.

    I can support Israel’s defense of nationhood or nationalism. But NO to Zionist Occupation and Imperialism.

    • Replies: @Marty T
    Israel offered a two state solution in the 90s but the Palestinian leadership nixed it.
  112. Aren’t Repugs and Demons all the same? The same love for the blood of blacks and browns and yellows and reds. No reasons needed. They will always find one for their blood soaked adventures in a bi(sexual) partisanship orgy.
    We have people like Cortez, Gabbard and Khanna (and a few others) making nice sounding noises. However, when the reins of power is in their grips how long will it take them to agree when Israel pushes them over and says ok folks, we are the real drivers here

  113. @Audacious Epigone
    Georgia, Texas, or Florida will be the next state it works in--but the other two of those states will be close behind the one that goes first. Those states become blue and the electoral college becomes unwinnable for the GOP, even if it holds on upperhand in the Midwest.

    Then they use the nuclear option in the Senate and pack the Supreme Court and it’s time to turn out the lights.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  114. @indocon
    Absolutely, one of the easiest layups available for #MAGA if they have the brains to grasp it. Nauseating to see that one of only consequential actions taken by Trump was to move embassy in Israel.

    Sop to the most loyal part of his base; no downside.

  115. @Jay Fink
    Giving felons the right to vote isn't going to help Florida stay red. I was rather shocked at how easily that passed. From what I understand fundamentalist Christians were solidly behind it. That shows they were not smart enough to understand the political ramifications.

    It’s a non-issue; career criminals don’t vote.

  116. @Peripatetic Commenter

    Of course people are “allowed” to speak about race! What a ridiculous assertion you are making. Americans of different races are constantly talking about it, whether it be in the media, at work, at school, etc.
     
    This is how Corvinus lies, by speaking half-truths.

    Of course everyone speaks about race.

    However, whites are not allowed to speak the truth about race, especially about blacks, the way that other races are allows to speak their "truths" about whites.

    Get a Chinese person drunk sometime and ask them for the "truth".

    “This is how Corvinus lies, by speaking half-truths.”

    Mixed metaphor.

    “However, whites are not allowed to speak the truth about race, especially about blacks, the way that other races are allows to speak their “truths” about whites.”

    You really haven’t been paying close attention. Of course whites speak about the other races in the same manner other races do about whites. It just happens to be THEIR version of truth, which may not necessarily be accurate or realistic.

    “Get a Chinese person drunk sometime and ask them for the “truth”.”

    Speaking from personal experience? So, Charlie Chan, what did he exactly say?

    • Replies: @216

    Speaking from personal experience? So, Charlie Chan, what did he exactly say?

     

    Must you be so insensitive?

    We can have a discussion here without resorting to use of ethnic slurs.
  117. @Corvinus
    "This is how Corvinus lies, by speaking half-truths."

    Mixed metaphor.

    "However, whites are not allowed to speak the truth about race, especially about blacks, the way that other races are allows to speak their “truths” about whites."

    You really haven't been paying close attention. Of course whites speak about the other races in the same manner other races do about whites. It just happens to be THEIR version of truth, which may not necessarily be accurate or realistic.

    "Get a Chinese person drunk sometime and ask them for the “truth”."

    Speaking from personal experience? So, Charlie Chan, what did he exactly say?

    Speaking from personal experience? So, Charlie Chan, what did he exactly say?

    Must you be so insensitive?

    We can have a discussion here without resorting to use of ethnic slurs.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "We can have a discussion here without resorting to use of ethnic slurs."

    Trigger much, SJW police lady? I am simply following the established decorum here. Besides, do not "ethnic slurs" have some truth to them? For example:

    Beaner / Beaney--(U.S.) people of Mexican descent or, more specifically, mestizos of Central American descent. The term originates from the use of frijoles pintos and other beans in Mexican food.

    Bog Irish / Bogtrotter / Bog-trotter--(UK, Ireland, U.S.) a person of common or low-class Irish ancestry.

    Frog, Froggy, Frogeater--(Canada, UK and U.S.) a French person, person of French descent, or a French Canadian.[123] Before the 19th century, referred to the Dutch (as they were stereotyped as being marsh-dwellers). When France became Britain's main enemy, replacing the Dutch, the epithet was transferred to them, because of the French penchant for eating frogs' legs (see comparable French term Rosbif.

    If anything, my reference to Charlie Chan should be considered an honor. I watched him regularly as a young lad.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Chan

    And for Pete's Sake, I didn't say "Chinaman!" Why must things of our past that we cherish have to be razed to the ground?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EJebBY-Yk0
    , @MikeatMikedotMike
    Put the bugman Corvinus on your ignore list. He is pure troll.
    , @Hibernian
    Hoisted by his own petard.
  118. @216

    Speaking from personal experience? So, Charlie Chan, what did he exactly say?

     

    Must you be so insensitive?

    We can have a discussion here without resorting to use of ethnic slurs.

    “We can have a discussion here without resorting to use of ethnic slurs.”

    Trigger much, SJW police lady? I am simply following the established decorum here. Besides, do not “ethnic slurs” have some truth to them? For example:

    Beaner / Beaney–(U.S.) people of Mexican descent or, more specifically, mestizos of Central American descent. The term originates from the use of frijoles pintos and other beans in Mexican food.

    Bog Irish / Bogtrotter / Bog-trotter–(UK, Ireland, U.S.) a person of common or low-class Irish ancestry.

    Frog, Froggy, Frogeater–(Canada, UK and U.S.) a French person, person of French descent, or a French Canadian.[123] Before the 19th century, referred to the Dutch (as they were stereotyped as being marsh-dwellers). When France became Britain’s main enemy, replacing the Dutch, the epithet was transferred to them, because of the French penchant for eating frogs’ legs (see comparable French term Rosbif.

    If anything, my reference to Charlie Chan should be considered an honor. I watched him regularly as a young lad.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Chan

    And for Pete’s Sake, I didn’t say “Chinaman!” Why must things of our past that we cherish have to be razed to the ground?

  119. @Audacious Epigone
    There are ways the party could split the difference. Affirmative action for example is widely unpopular among whites. Even white liberals are mixed on it. Yet it's something the GOP never talks about.

    Excuse the delay — I missed this comment

    Uhhhh, no. In fact as white women and asians comprise 70% or more of the AA action beneficiaries, and have since the late seventies, I think, It is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

    One of the many mistakes in yanking on the color card repeatedly without paying to the data about the same is that a polity is established that eventually doesn’t make any sense.

    Republican should have been the first to embrace civil liberties and ride Lincoln’s coat tails for eternity. But out color analysis has been shoddy and opportunistic to gain advantage instead of fostering healthy policies to advantage, After more than 200 years of identity politics , rooted in rather shallow and benign traits, especially color. I have to be honest, it sounds like whining now that the opposition has fostered a relationship with blacks to gain advantage from the same tactics engaged by whites period.

    Now we are caught trying to leverage IQ, morality etc as justification and benefit. AA is so rooted in white ethos, that white women think it was created exclusively for them. I doubt there is any advantage there muchless an opportunity for a split.

    Continued behavior of democrats is to our advantage — that and issues that the country cares about. A country looking for national healthcare is not going to upend AA, especially since whites, yellows and lighter browns are the big winners.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Polling data shows affirmative action is not popular. I'm skeptical of the assertion that most people vote their pocketbooks, incidentally--a lot of people vote aspirationally, especially ideologically so. If they tell you they are X on an issue, they're going tend to vote for the person who says he's X on the issue, too.

    And how has affirmative action benefited Asians and whites in higher education?
  120. @216

    The GoP will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to that platform. They still think they can get a decent percentage of the Hispanic vote.
     
    They could, but they need to move left economically. The donors don't want that. Immigration restriction as part of a left-populist-environmentalist angle is feasible, unlike the strange Boomer fearmongering about crime and turrorism. A revival of labor unions would also help, along with increasing taxes on the rich and cutting DOD spending.

    The leftist tilt of Hispanics/Asians is accelerated by ongoing immigration, and increased credentialism. While the GOP isn't likely to ever win a majority here, the only need win a bigger share and maintain the existing white share. The loss of white Millennials and Zeds to "woke" and debt is a bigger concern, that Conservatism Inc refuses to do anything about other than some occasional moral shaming.

    i created an account specifically to endorse this comment.

    it is spot on–on paper, i’m a textbook Rootless Cosmopolitan millennial; i live in Oakland, my wife+I attended really good (and progressive) schools our entire lives, and our social circles are definitely your typical SWPL folks….

    …and yet, we’re all sick as fuck of the Neoliberal Globalist project. period. the anger over wages, crowded schools, unaffordable healthcare, *insane* higher-ed debt TRUMPS EVERYTHING ELSE.

    in fact, people are shockingly receptive to the idea that because Immigration is a net drag on wages, a net pressure on school sizes, and just generally a giant cost center. arguing from a leftist economics perspective *works*, and in fact is the only way to overcome the hesitation on the part of this class to avoid anything that could be considered Racist crimethink. remember: Bernie Sanders himself decried open borders as a “Koch Brothers plot to keep down wages” not all too long ago.

    Tucker has the exact right idea. until Republicans (most especially BoomerCons) get over their idiotic fears of “!!SOCIALISM!!!!” and realize that their best case is made embracing modern economic reality, they’re going to continue being losing losers.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    Uhhhhhh . . .

    Modern economics has nothing to do with socialism. In fact, socialism has been around longer that the word modern (1585, in the meaning defined at sense 1a).


    There's theory and then there's application. Aside fro small states that don't really practice the theory . . . socialism in the US is probably untennable.

    , @Charles Pewitt
    Bernie Sanders was correct when he said that open borders was a Koch brothers proposal.

    Vermont Bronx Bernie Sanders also defended nation-state sovereignty in the video.

    Video from 2015:

    https://youtu.be/vf-k6qOfXz0

    Tweet from 2014:

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/505069174163775488
  121. @Big Dick Bandit
    i created an account specifically to endorse this comment.

    it is spot on--on paper, i'm a textbook Rootless Cosmopolitan millennial; i live in Oakland, my wife+I attended really good (and progressive) schools our entire lives, and our social circles are definitely your typical SWPL folks....

    ...and yet, we're all sick as fuck of the Neoliberal Globalist project. period. the anger over wages, crowded schools, unaffordable healthcare, *insane* higher-ed debt TRUMPS EVERYTHING ELSE.

    in fact, people are shockingly receptive to the idea that because Immigration is a net drag on wages, a net pressure on school sizes, and just generally a giant cost center. arguing from a leftist economics perspective *works*, and in fact is the only way to overcome the hesitation on the part of this class to avoid anything that could be considered Racist crimethink. remember: Bernie Sanders himself decried open borders as a "Koch Brothers plot to keep down wages" not all too long ago.

    Tucker has the exact right idea. until Republicans (most especially BoomerCons) get over their idiotic fears of "!!SOCIALISM!!!!" and realize that their best case is made embracing modern economic reality, they're going to continue being losing losers.

    Uhhhhhh . . .

    Modern economics has nothing to do with socialism. In fact, socialism has been around longer that the word modern (1585, in the meaning defined at sense 1a).

    There’s theory and then there’s application. Aside fro small states that don’t really practice the theory . . . socialism in the US is probably untennable.

    • Replies: @Big Dick Bandit
    call it "Democratic Socialism" or whatever you'd like--socialist programs (free education, national healthcare, etc etc) absent Government Ownership of private firms.

    places like Australia, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Taiwan, or Japan all to some extent or another have programs in place that can reasonably be defined as "socialist", and a skilled Right Winger could even avoid the dreaded "S" word (Tucker does this) so long as they're advocating for policies that favor the many instead of the oligarchs.

    by "modern economics" i mean "the reality that the current US economy is overwhelmingly slanted to favor a tiny handful of oligarchs at the expense of everybody else, most especially middle class families"

  122. @EliteCommInc.
    Uhhhhhh . . .

    Modern economics has nothing to do with socialism. In fact, socialism has been around longer that the word modern (1585, in the meaning defined at sense 1a).


    There's theory and then there's application. Aside fro small states that don't really practice the theory . . . socialism in the US is probably untennable.

    call it “Democratic Socialism” or whatever you’d like–socialist programs (free education, national healthcare, etc etc) absent Government Ownership of private firms.

    places like Australia, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Taiwan, or Japan all to some extent or another have programs in place that can reasonably be defined as “socialist”, and a skilled Right Winger could even avoid the dreaded “S” word (Tucker does this) so long as they’re advocating for policies that favor the many instead of the oligarchs.

    by “modern economics” i mean “the reality that the current US economy is overwhelmingly slanted to favor a tiny handful of oligarchs at the expense of everybody else, most especially middle class families”

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    I know exactly what you mean. And as I noted, your list of referenced countries , not a one comes close in size or population of the US.


    I am not the least bit afraid of the word. What it suggests as to polity is another matter. The socialist system actually has some effective and helpful mechanisms for smaller states and states whose populations are deeply oriented towards cooperative systems and links, and each of the states you reference unlike the US has more than seven hundred years of developing who they are and how that functions as a society. That simply is not the US in any manner. The imagined system you study in poli-sci, philosophy, and economics classes is great for theoretical frame working. But as each of the states you mention and those dysfunctional systems you avoid demonstrate, it's a very tough system to set in place and harder to maintain, the idea that a nation as young as the US founded not as n ation state but initially as a conglomeration of states will suddenly see your imagined light and it is imagined -- socialism even in states in which by all appearances operates with some sanity, requires very intense controls that no US citizen would embrace upon experience and shouldn't.


    And I find it curious that you have lived in the US and I presume raised here, educated here and cannot distinguish between noting a flaw in the system worthy of correction, say the marriage between our elected officials and business does not require socialist fixes. You don't think oligarchs exist in socialist systems -- you don't need to remake the wheel or make a new fangled system to when there are mechanisms to repair faults in the one in front of you.

    It's like the little who truck wheel falls off and thinks he must get a new truck. Unfortunately, my generation and the generation before have utterly failed to exemplify repair over replacement.

    hint: Socialism is not a fix for greed, and circumventing the system. Our socialist program to assist with retired citizens is bankrupt. That's not the fault of capitalism, that's just lousy management and careless accounting . . . the last thing our poor managers need is a system that requires more managerial integrity.
  123. @Big Dick Bandit
    i created an account specifically to endorse this comment.

    it is spot on--on paper, i'm a textbook Rootless Cosmopolitan millennial; i live in Oakland, my wife+I attended really good (and progressive) schools our entire lives, and our social circles are definitely your typical SWPL folks....

    ...and yet, we're all sick as fuck of the Neoliberal Globalist project. period. the anger over wages, crowded schools, unaffordable healthcare, *insane* higher-ed debt TRUMPS EVERYTHING ELSE.

    in fact, people are shockingly receptive to the idea that because Immigration is a net drag on wages, a net pressure on school sizes, and just generally a giant cost center. arguing from a leftist economics perspective *works*, and in fact is the only way to overcome the hesitation on the part of this class to avoid anything that could be considered Racist crimethink. remember: Bernie Sanders himself decried open borders as a "Koch Brothers plot to keep down wages" not all too long ago.

    Tucker has the exact right idea. until Republicans (most especially BoomerCons) get over their idiotic fears of "!!SOCIALISM!!!!" and realize that their best case is made embracing modern economic reality, they're going to continue being losing losers.

    Bernie Sanders was correct when he said that open borders was a Koch brothers proposal.

    Vermont Bronx Bernie Sanders also defended nation-state sovereignty in the video.

    Video from 2015:

    Tweet from 2014:

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    He was chastised by Klein for it in the course of the interview, but he didn't break immediately. He broke five minutes after the cameras stopped rolling, though, and he's been mum on open borders ever since.
    , @Hibernian
    He's from Brooklyn.
  124. Bernie from the Bronx Sanders says open borders is a Koch brothers proposal to lower wages for American workers, but Bronx Bernie voted for the Rubio/Obama Mass Legal Immigration Surge — Illegal Alien Amnesty bill(S 744) of June of 2013.

    Bernie Sanders voted to double or triple legal immigration and he voted to give amnesty to upwards of 30 million illegal alien invaders.

    Bernie Sanders is a bullshit artist from the Bronx and he knows it.

    Tweets from 2015:

  125. “Georgia was going through a demographic shift in the 1990s that made us very solidly red. Previously, we’d been a Democratic state, but you had conservative Democrats, northern liberals who’d moved into Georgia, and African-American Democrats: We were all in same party but not with the same values. That started to fracture in the ’90s. It completely fell apart in 2002, and Democrats hit our nadir in 2010 with the tea party.”

    This is something that hardly gets talked about. In my view – looking at historical partisanship of a state is meaningless. In the early 90s – the legislature in Georgia was 80% dem, the governor was a dem and both senators were dem, and the us house delegation was 9-1 (with newt being the only republican). But in a weird way while the number of democrats have gone down (there only like 40% of the legislature now and 40% of the house delegation) the number of liberals have probably gone up.

    So its like the democratic party became “med-resistant” in a way.

  126. @216

    Speaking from personal experience? So, Charlie Chan, what did he exactly say?

     

    Must you be so insensitive?

    We can have a discussion here without resorting to use of ethnic slurs.

    Put the bugman Corvinus on your ignore list. He is pure troll.

  127. @Mr. XYZ
    Is Rand in favor of less immigration to the U.S.?

    He’s waffly to be generous, but he’s sharp, has shown he can calibrate, and doesn’t appear to care about elite opinion.

  128. @Mr McKenna

    Because many white women will not want a black woman to be president first.
     
    99% of white women don't think that way. They'd be elated to see a black woman president.

    The trouble with Kamala is that she's not very smart, and also that she's made of plastic.

    However, these are not really barriers to high office in Current Year USA.

    Indeed, they’re features rather than bugs.

  129. @EliteCommInc.
    Excuse the delay -- I missed this comment

    Uhhhh, no. In fact as white women and asians comprise 70% or more of the AA action beneficiaries, and have since the late seventies, I think, It is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

    One of the many mistakes in yanking on the color card repeatedly without paying to the data about the same is that a polity is established that eventually doesn't make any sense.


    Republican should have been the first to embrace civil liberties and ride Lincoln's coat tails for eternity. But out color analysis has been shoddy and opportunistic to gain advantage instead of fostering healthy policies to advantage, After more than 200 years of identity politics , rooted in rather shallow and benign traits, especially color. I have to be honest, it sounds like whining now that the opposition has fostered a relationship with blacks to gain advantage from the same tactics engaged by whites period.

    Now we are caught trying to leverage IQ, morality etc as justification and benefit. AA is so rooted in white ethos, that white women think it was created exclusively for them. I doubt there is any advantage there muchless an opportunity for a split.


    Continued behavior of democrats is to our advantage -- that and issues that the country cares about. A country looking for national healthcare is not going to upend AA, especially since whites, yellows and lighter browns are the big winners.

    Polling data shows affirmative action is not popular. I’m skeptical of the assertion that most people vote their pocketbooks, incidentally–a lot of people vote aspirationally, especially ideologically so. If they tell you they are X on an issue, they’re going tend to vote for the person who says he’s X on the issue, too.

    And how has affirmative action benefited Asians and whites in higher education?

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    Women.
    , @EliteCommInc.
    Polling data among whites. Polling data among repub kicans and conservatives, primarily men.

    But ever since I took a peak at the numbers from the dept of labor in the early 90's, I think it was around 1994, white women comprised 60% of the beneficiaries. Given the demographic collection in which asians and latinos select white as to categorical distinction, that number is easily above 70%. Add, the special programs Title IX, the African American community which makes up just over 13% of the entire population and considering the employment on the table, are not the problem. Ever since AA was developed (and it was not what it is today -- not even close) Republicans have been pounding the table about those dastardly blacks getting preferential treatment ----

    when in fact, the impact was from women, mostly white women. look the country spent most of its history giving preferential treatment and passes to whites to the tune of 100%, regardless of the depth of profecient blacks, who could not and would not even be considered. It's a rather obtuse move to make hay about a program that primarily benefits whites. And short cuts a programs intended as redress that has only application to 20-30% of the black population and my guess, that goes largely to black women.

    Good fortune telling white women, you want to end programs intended to improve black citizens and unfairly went to them but should ended anyway -- because it's preferential -- in a country predicated on preferential treatment based on light skin tones.

    , @EliteCommInc.
    I think my references here even overweight the benefit to african americans because that division gets divided among native americans, same sex practitioners, latinos, Islanders, etc.
  130. @Charles Pewitt
    Bernie Sanders was correct when he said that open borders was a Koch brothers proposal.

    Vermont Bronx Bernie Sanders also defended nation-state sovereignty in the video.

    Video from 2015:

    https://youtu.be/vf-k6qOfXz0

    Tweet from 2014:

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/505069174163775488

    He was chastised by Klein for it in the course of the interview, but he didn’t break immediately. He broke five minutes after the cameras stopped rolling, though, and he’s been mum on open borders ever since.

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    Bernie Sanders is a hypocrite coward, just like most politicians. Bernie Sanders attacked open borders as a Koch proposal to lower wages for workers, but he changed his tune when certain cohorts in the Democrat Party told him to shut the Hell up.

    The Koch Boys and Trump and the GOP Cheap Labor Faction push mass legal immigration and illegal immigration to lower wages, increase housing costs and to increase income inequality.

    The Democrat Party globalizers push mass legal immigration and illegal immigration to lower wages, increase housing costs and to increase income inequality.

    The beauty of running a Sam Francis/Pat Buchanan GOP presidential primary challenge to Trump is that you can mildly hammer Trump on his mass legal immigration boosterism and weakness on illegal immigration and simultaneously pound the living Hell out of the Democrat Party globalizer presidential primary candidates for their open borders policy.

    Throw some stuff in there about student loan debt repudiations and massive increases in the corporate tax rate and a wealth tax to financially liquidate the plutocrats who push open borders mass legal immigration, and you might find some voters.
  131. “People like to locate where other people share their values, their history, their ethnicity.”

    People of color like to locate where white folks are prospering so they can shake them down for more gibs.– fixed that for you Stacey

  132. @Big Dick Bandit
    call it "Democratic Socialism" or whatever you'd like--socialist programs (free education, national healthcare, etc etc) absent Government Ownership of private firms.

    places like Australia, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Taiwan, or Japan all to some extent or another have programs in place that can reasonably be defined as "socialist", and a skilled Right Winger could even avoid the dreaded "S" word (Tucker does this) so long as they're advocating for policies that favor the many instead of the oligarchs.

    by "modern economics" i mean "the reality that the current US economy is overwhelmingly slanted to favor a tiny handful of oligarchs at the expense of everybody else, most especially middle class families"

    I know exactly what you mean. And as I noted, your list of referenced countries , not a one comes close in size or population of the US.

    I am not the least bit afraid of the word. What it suggests as to polity is another matter. The socialist system actually has some effective and helpful mechanisms for smaller states and states whose populations are deeply oriented towards cooperative systems and links, and each of the states you reference unlike the US has more than seven hundred years of developing who they are and how that functions as a society. That simply is not the US in any manner. The imagined system you study in poli-sci, philosophy, and economics classes is great for theoretical frame working. But as each of the states you mention and those dysfunctional systems you avoid demonstrate, it’s a very tough system to set in place and harder to maintain, the idea that a nation as young as the US founded not as n ation state but initially as a conglomeration of states will suddenly see your imagined light and it is imagined — socialism even in states in which by all appearances operates with some sanity, requires very intense controls that no US citizen would embrace upon experience and shouldn’t.

    And I find it curious that you have lived in the US and I presume raised here, educated here and cannot distinguish between noting a flaw in the system worthy of correction, say the marriage between our elected officials and business does not require socialist fixes. You don’t think oligarchs exist in socialist systems — you don’t need to remake the wheel or make a new fangled system to when there are mechanisms to repair faults in the one in front of you.

    It’s like the little who truck wheel falls off and thinks he must get a new truck. Unfortunately, my generation and the generation before have utterly failed to exemplify repair over replacement.

    hint: Socialism is not a fix for greed, and circumventing the system. Our socialist program to assist with retired citizens is bankrupt. That’s not the fault of capitalism, that’s just lousy management and careless accounting . . . the last thing our poor managers need is a system that requires more managerial integrity.

    • Replies: @Big Dick Bandit
    that's a whole lot of words for the tired old assertion that socialism can't work in a large, diverse population. Germany is 80 million people; Japan is 130 million. ratios are ratios, it doesn't matter whether you're dealing with 3 million or 3 billion people.

    if you're talking about scaling a centrally planned economy including the means of production, sure, managerial difficulties might be a thing. again, that's not what we're talking about. things like increasing the estate tax, imposing a wealth tax etc aren't huge administrative challenges (for example Liz Warren's plan has pretty good enforcement mechanisms.)

    it's adorable that you'd trot out "Social Security is going bankrupt!" as that's probably the best example of where simply changing the amount of Payroll taxes on the rich--well past the current cap of $128,400--introduces instant solvency. this has nothing to do with "scale" or "managerialism", it's just simply a question of whether Congress wants to do so.

    the relevant point is: do you want to restrict immigration? then make it a part of a comprehensive progressive economics package. people (specifically, GoodWhites and even some minorities especially close to the problems) will happily support measures to increase wages, and decrease classroom sizes...those same people have zero interest in restricting immigration because of CRIMINAL MIGRANT CARAVANS FILLED WITH MS-13 RAPISTS YARRRGH

  133. @Audacious Epigone
    Polling data shows affirmative action is not popular. I'm skeptical of the assertion that most people vote their pocketbooks, incidentally--a lot of people vote aspirationally, especially ideologically so. If they tell you they are X on an issue, they're going tend to vote for the person who says he's X on the issue, too.

    And how has affirmative action benefited Asians and whites in higher education?

    Women.

  134. @Audacious Epigone
    Polling data shows affirmative action is not popular. I'm skeptical of the assertion that most people vote their pocketbooks, incidentally--a lot of people vote aspirationally, especially ideologically so. If they tell you they are X on an issue, they're going tend to vote for the person who says he's X on the issue, too.

    And how has affirmative action benefited Asians and whites in higher education?

    Polling data among whites. Polling data among repub kicans and conservatives, primarily men.

    But ever since I took a peak at the numbers from the dept of labor in the early 90’s, I think it was around 1994, white women comprised 60% of the beneficiaries. Given the demographic collection in which asians and latinos select white as to categorical distinction, that number is easily above 70%. Add, the special programs Title IX, the African American community which makes up just over 13% of the entire population and considering the employment on the table, are not the problem. Ever since AA was developed (and it was not what it is today — not even close) Republicans have been pounding the table about those dastardly blacks getting preferential treatment —-

    when in fact, the impact was from women, mostly white women. look the country spent most of its history giving preferential treatment and passes to whites to the tune of 100%, regardless of the depth of profecient blacks, who could not and would not even be considered. It’s a rather obtuse move to make hay about a program that primarily benefits whites. And short cuts a programs intended as redress that has only application to 20-30% of the black population and my guess, that goes largely to black women.

    Good fortune telling white women, you want to end programs intended to improve black citizens and unfairly went to them but should ended anyway — because it’s preferential — in a country predicated on preferential treatment based on light skin tones.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    A lot of college-educated whites are aware of the fact that blacks can score 200+ points worse on college/graduate entrance exams than whites and still be admitted at the expense of said whites. That happens in every program and at every prestigious school in the country, probably almost without exception.
  135. @prime noticer
    thought this was gonna be about elliott abrams. and how neocons like him just keep coming back no matter what.

    the ascent of a useless do nothing like stacey abrams makes sense, due to demographics. they're the least impressive people on earth.

    but how these neocons keep coming back is seriously impressive. i've never seen anything like it in 40 years of watching politics. they're hanging around in democrat administrations too, it's not just a republican thing.

    Elliot Abrams is like a large floating turd that won’t flush down no matter how many times you flush.

  136. @Audacious Epigone
    Polling data shows affirmative action is not popular. I'm skeptical of the assertion that most people vote their pocketbooks, incidentally--a lot of people vote aspirationally, especially ideologically so. If they tell you they are X on an issue, they're going tend to vote for the person who says he's X on the issue, too.

    And how has affirmative action benefited Asians and whites in higher education?

    I think my references here even overweight the benefit to african americans because that division gets divided among native americans, same sex practitioners, latinos, Islanders, etc.

  137. @EliteCommInc.
    I know exactly what you mean. And as I noted, your list of referenced countries , not a one comes close in size or population of the US.


    I am not the least bit afraid of the word. What it suggests as to polity is another matter. The socialist system actually has some effective and helpful mechanisms for smaller states and states whose populations are deeply oriented towards cooperative systems and links, and each of the states you reference unlike the US has more than seven hundred years of developing who they are and how that functions as a society. That simply is not the US in any manner. The imagined system you study in poli-sci, philosophy, and economics classes is great for theoretical frame working. But as each of the states you mention and those dysfunctional systems you avoid demonstrate, it's a very tough system to set in place and harder to maintain, the idea that a nation as young as the US founded not as n ation state but initially as a conglomeration of states will suddenly see your imagined light and it is imagined -- socialism even in states in which by all appearances operates with some sanity, requires very intense controls that no US citizen would embrace upon experience and shouldn't.


    And I find it curious that you have lived in the US and I presume raised here, educated here and cannot distinguish between noting a flaw in the system worthy of correction, say the marriage between our elected officials and business does not require socialist fixes. You don't think oligarchs exist in socialist systems -- you don't need to remake the wheel or make a new fangled system to when there are mechanisms to repair faults in the one in front of you.

    It's like the little who truck wheel falls off and thinks he must get a new truck. Unfortunately, my generation and the generation before have utterly failed to exemplify repair over replacement.

    hint: Socialism is not a fix for greed, and circumventing the system. Our socialist program to assist with retired citizens is bankrupt. That's not the fault of capitalism, that's just lousy management and careless accounting . . . the last thing our poor managers need is a system that requires more managerial integrity.

    that’s a whole lot of words for the tired old assertion that socialism can’t work in a large, diverse population. Germany is 80 million people; Japan is 130 million. ratios are ratios, it doesn’t matter whether you’re dealing with 3 million or 3 billion people.

    if you’re talking about scaling a centrally planned economy including the means of production, sure, managerial difficulties might be a thing. again, that’s not what we’re talking about. things like increasing the estate tax, imposing a wealth tax etc aren’t huge administrative challenges (for example Liz Warren’s plan has pretty good enforcement mechanisms.)

    it’s adorable that you’d trot out “Social Security is going bankrupt!” as that’s probably the best example of where simply changing the amount of Payroll taxes on the rich–well past the current cap of $128,400–introduces instant solvency. this has nothing to do with “scale” or “managerialism”, it’s just simply a question of whether Congress wants to do so.

    the relevant point is: do you want to restrict immigration? then make it a part of a comprehensive progressive economics package. people (specifically, GoodWhites and even some minorities especially close to the problems) will happily support measures to increase wages, and decrease classroom sizes…those same people have zero interest in restricting immigration because of CRIMINAL MIGRANT CARAVANS FILLED WITH MS-13 RAPISTS YARRRGH

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    Ohh good grief.

    Stop dissecting and consider the comments in context and stop making up arguments i don't make.

    1. Size matters to composition

    2. Composition matters as to polity, culture, etc

    3. Composition matters as to management

    4. Size and population matter as to management

    Nothing about the management ethos and practices historically lend themselves to a national policy of socialist style policy and implementation. And when compared top the countries in question -- we don't have their history and we don't have their longevity to have developed the kind of ethos that would make a social policy of that nature operative.

    ------

    As comments indicate it's not merely size. Hence I "trotted out" one example of a large social program. And you would be wise to consider not that is going bankrupt, but that it is bankrupt. As i said there is theory of imagined realities and there are realities. And the point is bit to one example of how the people who manage the system operate. And that has been long enough to establish a pattern of a national ethos on big budget national management -- a very poor record. I would comment on the national debt and government debt and deficits --- but I will take your "trotting out" response as standard and utterly missing the point. Socialism is not going to resolve the high price of healthcare, no doubt in your repetoire of responses. Comparing the US to the states you mention ignores a very real issue -- the nature of health practices in those countries explains a lot. So I am assuming there's a socialist agenda for mandatory healthy living to reduce the citizens being at risk for preventative healthcare issues. Outlaw smoking and drinking would be great starts, ohh and of course over eating and sugar intake . . . type, and level of processed foods . . .


    Laughing. So the solution is not lower expenses, it's increased taxes. Ohhh good grief. And when that doesn't cover the rising costs of healthcare, never mind the politicking that will be required to change the tax code or the debate over what constitutes rich or why the rich in the first place, they use far fewer government resources. I would love to hear that debate on establishing arbitrary cuts offs and addins in the name of equality and fairness. Bottom line -- you have to nationalize not only the industries, but the culture that makes up the same. And eventually you'll continue to raise taxes on those with the least because you woefully underestimated the costs of healthcare. So in abid to cut prices you start making hospice decisions over what treatments the system can afford and not too mention encouraging people to die sooner, after all they have lived a long life and it's just not right to cause everyone the pain of their cost of living . . . think I am exaggerating -- do your homework on socialized medicine.

    you are completely out of your depth. I hate to be blunt. But anyone who wants to shift an entire organization from a this to a that and then says, it has nothing to do with managerial issues - just the will -- has absolutely no business even broaching the subject. And every single member of government services in each of the countries you referenced is not only rolling their eyes, they would are dumbfounded by the your suggestion. Governance is management. And if anything it's the lack of managerial comprehension that makes bureacracy so inabling in people's lives. Apparently you have never been in a waiting room anywhere for any reason. All one need do is take a trip to the local DMV. It's not about management -- you did claim you were married with children --- resources, time, distribution, effectiveness, effeciency, -- and that's just a family.

    Back to SS, which is a prime example of ineffective management of time, people, resources and distribution . . . the more will to increase the size of bureacracy, the better you had better be at management. long term management and contingency plans ---

    I won't mention something as unknown vie expectation or impact as disaster relief.
    And heaven forbid I introduce, training and education -- and that just for the bureacratic end --

    You are young and as I said, we have not done a very effective job of teaching you beyond enticing fanciful notions of quick and easy solutions that don't exist and in the case of socialism, completely misses the point, when there are more effecient and more obtainable solutions.

    -----------------------------------


    I am unclear how to respond to someone who wants to over haul and exchange a national government, but thinks management is not an issue. I am not even sure how to respond to someone who wants to increase classroom size and fill those spaces with nonassimilated students. i take it issues like continuity, budget, teaching skill to capacity to time against student emphasis are just resolved by will as opposed to management. I am unclear what country you actually live in now if you are talking to people who advocate increasing classroom size and the composition of said increase to be inclusive requires a teacher to learn a new language or languages so at to meet your accommodation. This sound like panic. we don't have space for US students in many cities, classrooms are in fact over crowded to the teaching effect, but your solution is to include immigrants and of course more esl classes. I assume that the costs (though I understand it's all just will-- not management) are included in taxing the rich, whatever that turns out to be. I take it your dumping the lunch programs as too expensive, though costs don't really matter. I assume you have made plans to rid the system of teacher's unions who might have an opinion on your dream educational system that is all about will. Will to power -- I get it. And your convinced that the local communities who actually pay taxes are all in decreasing the level of resources for their children to accommodate foreigners -- on your insurance that it the best way -- will it into existence and all will be well.


    And then there is this curious "good whites" introduction. I take it only good whites are those that support your will to make it happen mystigue policy . . . you might want to talk with the good whites close to the problem who are clamoring for restricted immigration policies. Ohh wait, those aren't good whites, those are bad whites. Those are the same bad whites who along with minority citizens in school systems right now, today who are lacking resources you claim are going to embrace increasing the load on their communities who don';t have ant rich people bur upon who you intend to increase wages, which by definition of the socialist model requires taxing said community. You need to consider that no community has the same economy and that is not a will issue.

    -------------

    I take responsibility, as someone who has spent time teaching, training and facilitating I am part of a completely failure to effectively teach several post generations, who engage in this level of critical thought.


    I won't bother even to address criminal justice. In your view our over crowded courtrooms and ill served citizens should expect to entreat foreign gangs, and various criminals as part of the will to power agenda.

    good grief. not a management issue

    A lack of further response is not to ability -- it's just that I know the problem and I am in mourning of the failure, mine and my peers. And it's catastrophic.

    , @EliteCommInc.
    My peers and i have utterly failed to teach some basic critical thinking skills. In HS one usually learns that things don't happen because they can. It requires active participation, planning, budget, implementation, how many, how much, when, how, who how many who's,


    The depth of our failure in my view is catastrophic.

    Oyy Veh!!!
    , @EliteCommInc.
    and complaints about my failure to proof read are valid and legitimate criticisms.
  138. @Big Dick Bandit
    that's a whole lot of words for the tired old assertion that socialism can't work in a large, diverse population. Germany is 80 million people; Japan is 130 million. ratios are ratios, it doesn't matter whether you're dealing with 3 million or 3 billion people.

    if you're talking about scaling a centrally planned economy including the means of production, sure, managerial difficulties might be a thing. again, that's not what we're talking about. things like increasing the estate tax, imposing a wealth tax etc aren't huge administrative challenges (for example Liz Warren's plan has pretty good enforcement mechanisms.)

    it's adorable that you'd trot out "Social Security is going bankrupt!" as that's probably the best example of where simply changing the amount of Payroll taxes on the rich--well past the current cap of $128,400--introduces instant solvency. this has nothing to do with "scale" or "managerialism", it's just simply a question of whether Congress wants to do so.

    the relevant point is: do you want to restrict immigration? then make it a part of a comprehensive progressive economics package. people (specifically, GoodWhites and even some minorities especially close to the problems) will happily support measures to increase wages, and decrease classroom sizes...those same people have zero interest in restricting immigration because of CRIMINAL MIGRANT CARAVANS FILLED WITH MS-13 RAPISTS YARRRGH

    Ohh good grief.

    Stop dissecting and consider the comments in context and stop making up arguments i don’t make.

    1. Size matters to composition

    2. Composition matters as to polity, culture, etc

    3. Composition matters as to management

    4. Size and population matter as to management

    Nothing about the management ethos and practices historically lend themselves to a national policy of socialist style policy and implementation. And when compared top the countries in question — we don’t have their history and we don’t have their longevity to have developed the kind of ethos that would make a social policy of that nature operative.

    ——

    As comments indicate it’s not merely size. Hence I “trotted out” one example of a large social program. And you would be wise to consider not that is going bankrupt, but that it is bankrupt. As i said there is theory of imagined realities and there are realities. And the point is bit to one example of how the people who manage the system operate. And that has been long enough to establish a pattern of a national ethos on big budget national management — a very poor record. I would comment on the national debt and government debt and deficits — but I will take your “trotting out” response as standard and utterly missing the point. Socialism is not going to resolve the high price of healthcare, no doubt in your repetoire of responses. Comparing the US to the states you mention ignores a very real issue — the nature of health practices in those countries explains a lot. So I am assuming there’s a socialist agenda for mandatory healthy living to reduce the citizens being at risk for preventative healthcare issues. Outlaw smoking and drinking would be great starts, ohh and of course over eating and sugar intake . . . type, and level of processed foods . . .

    Laughing. So the solution is not lower expenses, it’s increased taxes. Ohhh good grief. And when that doesn’t cover the rising costs of healthcare, never mind the politicking that will be required to change the tax code or the debate over what constitutes rich or why the rich in the first place, they use far fewer government resources. I would love to hear that debate on establishing arbitrary cuts offs and addins in the name of equality and fairness. Bottom line — you have to nationalize not only the industries, but the culture that makes up the same. And eventually you’ll continue to raise taxes on those with the least because you woefully underestimated the costs of healthcare. So in abid to cut prices you start making hospice decisions over what treatments the system can afford and not too mention encouraging people to die sooner, after all they have lived a long life and it’s just not right to cause everyone the pain of their cost of living . . . think I am exaggerating — do your homework on socialized medicine.

    you are completely out of your depth. I hate to be blunt. But anyone who wants to shift an entire organization from a this to a that and then says, it has nothing to do with managerial issues – just the will — has absolutely no business even broaching the subject. And every single member of government services in each of the countries you referenced is not only rolling their eyes, they would are dumbfounded by the your suggestion. Governance is management. And if anything it’s the lack of managerial comprehension that makes bureacracy so inabling in people’s lives. Apparently you have never been in a waiting room anywhere for any reason. All one need do is take a trip to the local DMV. It’s not about management — you did claim you were married with children — resources, time, distribution, effectiveness, effeciency, — and that’s just a family.

    Back to SS, which is a prime example of ineffective management of time, people, resources and distribution . . . the more will to increase the size of bureacracy, the better you had better be at management. long term management and contingency plans —

    I won’t mention something as unknown vie expectation or impact as disaster relief.
    And heaven forbid I introduce, training and education — and that just for the bureacratic end —

    You are young and as I said, we have not done a very effective job of teaching you beyond enticing fanciful notions of quick and easy solutions that don’t exist and in the case of socialism, completely misses the point, when there are more effecient and more obtainable solutions.

    ———————————–

    I am unclear how to respond to someone who wants to over haul and exchange a national government, but thinks management is not an issue. I am not even sure how to respond to someone who wants to increase classroom size and fill those spaces with nonassimilated students. i take it issues like continuity, budget, teaching skill to capacity to time against student emphasis are just resolved by will as opposed to management. I am unclear what country you actually live in now if you are talking to people who advocate increasing classroom size and the composition of said increase to be inclusive requires a teacher to learn a new language or languages so at to meet your accommodation. This sound like panic. we don’t have space for US students in many cities, classrooms are in fact over crowded to the teaching effect, but your solution is to include immigrants and of course more esl classes. I assume that the costs (though I understand it’s all just will– not management) are included in taxing the rich, whatever that turns out to be. I take it your dumping the lunch programs as too expensive, though costs don’t really matter. I assume you have made plans to rid the system of teacher’s unions who might have an opinion on your dream educational system that is all about will. Will to power — I get it. And your convinced that the local communities who actually pay taxes are all in decreasing the level of resources for their children to accommodate foreigners — on your insurance that it the best way — will it into existence and all will be well.

    And then there is this curious “good whites” introduction. I take it only good whites are those that support your will to make it happen mystigue policy . . . you might want to talk with the good whites close to the problem who are clamoring for restricted immigration policies. Ohh wait, those aren’t good whites, those are bad whites. Those are the same bad whites who along with minority citizens in school systems right now, today who are lacking resources you claim are going to embrace increasing the load on their communities who don’;t have ant rich people bur upon who you intend to increase wages, which by definition of the socialist model requires taxing said community. You need to consider that no community has the same economy and that is not a will issue.

    ————-

    I take responsibility, as someone who has spent time teaching, training and facilitating I am part of a completely failure to effectively teach several post generations, who engage in this level of critical thought.

    I won’t bother even to address criminal justice. In your view our over crowded courtrooms and ill served citizens should expect to entreat foreign gangs, and various criminals as part of the will to power agenda.

    good grief. not a management issue

    A lack of further response is not to ability — it’s just that I know the problem and I am in mourning of the failure, mine and my peers. And it’s catastrophic.

    • Replies: @Big Dick Bandit
    .....reading genius, my whole point was that people are *against* the increased classroom sizes (and lack of assimilated students) that immigration brings. that's why they're willing to support immigration restrictions as part of a broad based "policies for the working class" narrative, not a "WE MUST PRESERVE OUR RACIAL PURITY FROM CRIMINALS" one.

    again, lot of words to say a lot of nothing--raising taxes and paying out social programs isn't anywhere near the managerial difficulty of assigning production orders and distribution of specific companies. it's just not. your (incoherent, meandering) attempts to make it sound like it is are completely baseless--does the government have a tough time paying out social security checks? of course not.

    you've provided a perfect example of the limp-dick heehawing that BoomerCons offer when presented with the idea "hey, maybe we should tax rich guys somewhat more fairly for the benefit of everybody else."

    either you care about getting popular consensus to stop immigration, or you care about rich guys preserving their precious capital. it's clear which side you're on.
  139. Note to self:

    Advocate walls to bar foreign instructors from teaching economics, or political science courses to impressionable US students of any color.

    Oyy veh.!!

  140. @Audacious Epigone
    Georgia, Texas, or Florida will be the next state it works in--but the other two of those states will be close behind the one that goes first. Those states become blue and the electoral college becomes unwinnable for the GOP, even if it holds on upperhand in the Midwest.

    What is the first state the strategy worked in?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    California! It was a middle class, reliably Republican paradise fifty years ago. The only thing that has stayed the same since then is the weather and the landscape.
  141. @Big Dick Bandit
    that's a whole lot of words for the tired old assertion that socialism can't work in a large, diverse population. Germany is 80 million people; Japan is 130 million. ratios are ratios, it doesn't matter whether you're dealing with 3 million or 3 billion people.

    if you're talking about scaling a centrally planned economy including the means of production, sure, managerial difficulties might be a thing. again, that's not what we're talking about. things like increasing the estate tax, imposing a wealth tax etc aren't huge administrative challenges (for example Liz Warren's plan has pretty good enforcement mechanisms.)

    it's adorable that you'd trot out "Social Security is going bankrupt!" as that's probably the best example of where simply changing the amount of Payroll taxes on the rich--well past the current cap of $128,400--introduces instant solvency. this has nothing to do with "scale" or "managerialism", it's just simply a question of whether Congress wants to do so.

    the relevant point is: do you want to restrict immigration? then make it a part of a comprehensive progressive economics package. people (specifically, GoodWhites and even some minorities especially close to the problems) will happily support measures to increase wages, and decrease classroom sizes...those same people have zero interest in restricting immigration because of CRIMINAL MIGRANT CARAVANS FILLED WITH MS-13 RAPISTS YARRRGH

    My peers and i have utterly failed to teach some basic critical thinking skills. In HS one usually learns that things don’t happen because they can. It requires active participation, planning, budget, implementation, how many, how much, when, how, who how many who’s,

    The depth of our failure in my view is catastrophic.

    Oyy Veh!!!

  142. @Big Dick Bandit
    that's a whole lot of words for the tired old assertion that socialism can't work in a large, diverse population. Germany is 80 million people; Japan is 130 million. ratios are ratios, it doesn't matter whether you're dealing with 3 million or 3 billion people.

    if you're talking about scaling a centrally planned economy including the means of production, sure, managerial difficulties might be a thing. again, that's not what we're talking about. things like increasing the estate tax, imposing a wealth tax etc aren't huge administrative challenges (for example Liz Warren's plan has pretty good enforcement mechanisms.)

    it's adorable that you'd trot out "Social Security is going bankrupt!" as that's probably the best example of where simply changing the amount of Payroll taxes on the rich--well past the current cap of $128,400--introduces instant solvency. this has nothing to do with "scale" or "managerialism", it's just simply a question of whether Congress wants to do so.

    the relevant point is: do you want to restrict immigration? then make it a part of a comprehensive progressive economics package. people (specifically, GoodWhites and even some minorities especially close to the problems) will happily support measures to increase wages, and decrease classroom sizes...those same people have zero interest in restricting immigration because of CRIMINAL MIGRANT CARAVANS FILLED WITH MS-13 RAPISTS YARRRGH

    and complaints about my failure to proof read are valid and legitimate criticisms.

  143. Corey Booker throws his hat in the ring!

    https://6abc.com/politics/cory-booker-2020-nj-senator-running-for-president/5116069/?fbclid=IwAR1BCRZ4-hX_-nlB9d7WqpDoDYT6arKfuig-f0v0ngOQPR5tLa8J6sYzsEk&sf207023230=1

    Karmasutra may need to get out the knee pads.

    Maybe we can get Kanye to jump in as an independent!

    I wonder if President Trump is funding Corey?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Yeah, that's not what the guy who has been audaciously asserting the nominee will be Harris wants to see. Maybe it means she's weak. Otoh, maybe it means that the strikingly white lineup means there's room for a few POCs to get a lot of attention from running.
  144. @Audacious Epigone
    He was chastised by Klein for it in the course of the interview, but he didn't break immediately. He broke five minutes after the cameras stopped rolling, though, and he's been mum on open borders ever since.

    Bernie Sanders is a hypocrite coward, just like most politicians. Bernie Sanders attacked open borders as a Koch proposal to lower wages for workers, but he changed his tune when certain cohorts in the Democrat Party told him to shut the Hell up.

    The Koch Boys and Trump and the GOP Cheap Labor Faction push mass legal immigration and illegal immigration to lower wages, increase housing costs and to increase income inequality.

    The Democrat Party globalizers push mass legal immigration and illegal immigration to lower wages, increase housing costs and to increase income inequality.

    The beauty of running a Sam Francis/Pat Buchanan GOP presidential primary challenge to Trump is that you can mildly hammer Trump on his mass legal immigration boosterism and weakness on illegal immigration and simultaneously pound the living Hell out of the Democrat Party globalizer presidential primary candidates for their open borders policy.

    Throw some stuff in there about student loan debt repudiations and massive increases in the corporate tax rate and a wealth tax to financially liquidate the plutocrats who push open borders mass legal immigration, and you might find some voters.

  145. @EliteCommInc.
    Ohh good grief.

    Stop dissecting and consider the comments in context and stop making up arguments i don't make.

    1. Size matters to composition

    2. Composition matters as to polity, culture, etc

    3. Composition matters as to management

    4. Size and population matter as to management

    Nothing about the management ethos and practices historically lend themselves to a national policy of socialist style policy and implementation. And when compared top the countries in question -- we don't have their history and we don't have their longevity to have developed the kind of ethos that would make a social policy of that nature operative.

    ------

    As comments indicate it's not merely size. Hence I "trotted out" one example of a large social program. And you would be wise to consider not that is going bankrupt, but that it is bankrupt. As i said there is theory of imagined realities and there are realities. And the point is bit to one example of how the people who manage the system operate. And that has been long enough to establish a pattern of a national ethos on big budget national management -- a very poor record. I would comment on the national debt and government debt and deficits --- but I will take your "trotting out" response as standard and utterly missing the point. Socialism is not going to resolve the high price of healthcare, no doubt in your repetoire of responses. Comparing the US to the states you mention ignores a very real issue -- the nature of health practices in those countries explains a lot. So I am assuming there's a socialist agenda for mandatory healthy living to reduce the citizens being at risk for preventative healthcare issues. Outlaw smoking and drinking would be great starts, ohh and of course over eating and sugar intake . . . type, and level of processed foods . . .


    Laughing. So the solution is not lower expenses, it's increased taxes. Ohhh good grief. And when that doesn't cover the rising costs of healthcare, never mind the politicking that will be required to change the tax code or the debate over what constitutes rich or why the rich in the first place, they use far fewer government resources. I would love to hear that debate on establishing arbitrary cuts offs and addins in the name of equality and fairness. Bottom line -- you have to nationalize not only the industries, but the culture that makes up the same. And eventually you'll continue to raise taxes on those with the least because you woefully underestimated the costs of healthcare. So in abid to cut prices you start making hospice decisions over what treatments the system can afford and not too mention encouraging people to die sooner, after all they have lived a long life and it's just not right to cause everyone the pain of their cost of living . . . think I am exaggerating -- do your homework on socialized medicine.

    you are completely out of your depth. I hate to be blunt. But anyone who wants to shift an entire organization from a this to a that and then says, it has nothing to do with managerial issues - just the will -- has absolutely no business even broaching the subject. And every single member of government services in each of the countries you referenced is not only rolling their eyes, they would are dumbfounded by the your suggestion. Governance is management. And if anything it's the lack of managerial comprehension that makes bureacracy so inabling in people's lives. Apparently you have never been in a waiting room anywhere for any reason. All one need do is take a trip to the local DMV. It's not about management -- you did claim you were married with children --- resources, time, distribution, effectiveness, effeciency, -- and that's just a family.

    Back to SS, which is a prime example of ineffective management of time, people, resources and distribution . . . the more will to increase the size of bureacracy, the better you had better be at management. long term management and contingency plans ---

    I won't mention something as unknown vie expectation or impact as disaster relief.
    And heaven forbid I introduce, training and education -- and that just for the bureacratic end --

    You are young and as I said, we have not done a very effective job of teaching you beyond enticing fanciful notions of quick and easy solutions that don't exist and in the case of socialism, completely misses the point, when there are more effecient and more obtainable solutions.

    -----------------------------------


    I am unclear how to respond to someone who wants to over haul and exchange a national government, but thinks management is not an issue. I am not even sure how to respond to someone who wants to increase classroom size and fill those spaces with nonassimilated students. i take it issues like continuity, budget, teaching skill to capacity to time against student emphasis are just resolved by will as opposed to management. I am unclear what country you actually live in now if you are talking to people who advocate increasing classroom size and the composition of said increase to be inclusive requires a teacher to learn a new language or languages so at to meet your accommodation. This sound like panic. we don't have space for US students in many cities, classrooms are in fact over crowded to the teaching effect, but your solution is to include immigrants and of course more esl classes. I assume that the costs (though I understand it's all just will-- not management) are included in taxing the rich, whatever that turns out to be. I take it your dumping the lunch programs as too expensive, though costs don't really matter. I assume you have made plans to rid the system of teacher's unions who might have an opinion on your dream educational system that is all about will. Will to power -- I get it. And your convinced that the local communities who actually pay taxes are all in decreasing the level of resources for their children to accommodate foreigners -- on your insurance that it the best way -- will it into existence and all will be well.


    And then there is this curious "good whites" introduction. I take it only good whites are those that support your will to make it happen mystigue policy . . . you might want to talk with the good whites close to the problem who are clamoring for restricted immigration policies. Ohh wait, those aren't good whites, those are bad whites. Those are the same bad whites who along with minority citizens in school systems right now, today who are lacking resources you claim are going to embrace increasing the load on their communities who don';t have ant rich people bur upon who you intend to increase wages, which by definition of the socialist model requires taxing said community. You need to consider that no community has the same economy and that is not a will issue.

    -------------

    I take responsibility, as someone who has spent time teaching, training and facilitating I am part of a completely failure to effectively teach several post generations, who engage in this level of critical thought.


    I won't bother even to address criminal justice. In your view our over crowded courtrooms and ill served citizens should expect to entreat foreign gangs, and various criminals as part of the will to power agenda.

    good grief. not a management issue

    A lack of further response is not to ability -- it's just that I know the problem and I am in mourning of the failure, mine and my peers. And it's catastrophic.

    …..reading genius, my whole point was that people are *against* the increased classroom sizes (and lack of assimilated students) that immigration brings. that’s why they’re willing to support immigration restrictions as part of a broad based “policies for the working class” narrative, not a “WE MUST PRESERVE OUR RACIAL PURITY FROM CRIMINALS” one.

    again, lot of words to say a lot of nothing–raising taxes and paying out social programs isn’t anywhere near the managerial difficulty of assigning production orders and distribution of specific companies. it’s just not. your (incoherent, meandering) attempts to make it sound like it is are completely baseless–does the government have a tough time paying out social security checks? of course not.

    you’ve provided a perfect example of the limp-dick heehawing that BoomerCons offer when presented with the idea “hey, maybe we should tax rich guys somewhat more fairly for the benefit of everybody else.”

    either you care about getting popular consensus to stop immigration, or you care about rich guys preserving their precious capital. it’s clear which side you’re on.

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    I have to agree with you. As a student, I see up close the disastrous effects of mass importations of dull, scheming and low IQ brown people.

    At this point the economic system is not of concern. We need these people out of the country. I would vote for a communist, centrist, fascist, anybody who would reduce immigration and get rid of these immigrant thieves.

    Yet they're all wrong. Right and left wing. All support mass immigration.

    Anyways, all we can do is make these intelligent arguments to people, and have white babies. Prepare yourself for the future, though as a political solution does not seem forthcoming.
    , @EliteCommInc.
    I appreciate you clarifying the issue on immigration ---- at least a tad. Though it makes no sense. And is unresponsive to my detailed response on the matter. Your assumption for support is really counter to the record. And your dismissing the costs because it it is inconvenient to at least address the details says a good deal about the veracity of your assail. The history of the US regarding introducing new populations, even when those populations are citizens totally rebutts your claim. As is common place here, the issue of violence to social issues is not uncommon and one of the staples of white violence has been whites rioting by the mere introduction of blacks and that even to lower income (working class populations) Based on that record, you simply are out of your depth. i am unclear how to respond to a socialist that doesn't have a basic knowledge of class warfare in the US and whites managed to engage it as policy across the country. And that in response to wide range comprehensive programs to include other citizens, much less immigrants in need of assimilation ---

    https://www.westernjournal.com/impact-immigration-americas-working-class-communities/

    Have a look at the history of New York City. As I said, the responses here were predictable and remain devoid of content and real world context.

    The only person who interjected color into this discussion is you. And your lack of working knowledge on that is peculiar given your advance on socialist polity. I would encourage you learn the difference between national identity and color identity politics, there are some differences.
    ----------------------

    side-note: I am a free speech advocate and of course you may use whatever references you desire. However, for my part, I would prefer you avoid colloquial crude references in exchanges with me.

    In response to the issue of management, I am confident my response is coherent enough for you to get the point and as expected skip the messy details to the assertion, that turning out a SS check isn't hard. I suppose your eyes just glazed over that there is no money in SS and all of those checks are deficit spending. Unaware of how government engages in budgeting makes the matter moot. And your dismissal of what has to happen take place to get those checks out -- lets just chalk it up to youthful exuberance.

    The country has been debating taxes since there was a country, who to tax, how much to tax, how to tax, how to spend the tax . . . taxing wealthy people is neither new, or lacks consideration. But at least you have some comprehension of the polity, but none as to what it means in the real. You can't ignore issues presented because you don't have answers, even generic answers for very real issues as to managing any system to include the distribution of resources. I even handed you healthcare, a huge program in need of managerial redress if not a complete deconstruction/removal. Want to know how hard medicare is ---

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?destination=%2fbusiness%2feconomy%2fmedicare-pricing-drives-high-health-care-costs%2f2013%2f12%2f31%2f24befa46-7248-11e3-8b3f-b1666705ca3b_story.html%3f&utm_term=.5d36fc26e6bb

    And that is just one issue. Have a look at the VA and it delivery history ---

    Management is the issue. Financing is the issue.

    Your supposed tax increase on the wealthy doesn't come close to dealing with these issues.
    -----


    What I care about is the US and its citizens. They come first. And before i go about spouting the cure for foreigners I am going to take a hard look at what ails US citizens. I noticed you skipped the criminal justice matter as well the specifics on education.

    The answer to the abuses of our system is not socialism. And your false comparisons simply have no weight once you actually examine what's involved. And you know, I even care about the rich. And as long as they make their dough honestly and don't leverage their wealth to buy policy makers and managers (as i think is heavily the case) none of my concern. We can curtail their influence, and manipulation minus a national psychic economic and government overhaul that upon completion won't solve the issues you claim are the problem, but will expand an already mismanaged affair. And given your position, the matter will only get worse.

    Again the little boy who is looking at his truck with a missing wheel who thinks the answer is a new truck without taking a look and dealing with specifics 9having to deal all the words and what they mean). We have utterly failed to teach you appropriate critical thinking to application.

  146. hey, maybe we should tax rich guys somewhat more fairly for the benefit of everybody else.

    That’s an interesting concept.

    What do you consider fair taxation is, and in what way is the current taxation system unfair?

    Does illegals getting an EITC seem fair or unfair to you?

    Should my hard work be taxed to help someone who simply will not work?

    Should my hard work be taxed to help someone who would like a better job but they cant get one because off all the low-wage illegals in the country?

    • Replies: @Big Dick Bandit
    ....what?

    i'm saying that people would happily support *reducing* immigration because it's unfair for immigrants to suppress wages, collect benefits, and crowd classrooms.

    i'm teaching you how to argue against immigration, genius.
  147. @Peripatetic Commenter
    hey, maybe we should tax rich guys somewhat more fairly for the benefit of everybody else.

    That's an interesting concept.

    What do you consider fair taxation is, and in what way is the current taxation system unfair?

    Does illegals getting an EITC seem fair or unfair to you?

    Should my hard work be taxed to help someone who simply will not work?

    Should my hard work be taxed to help someone who would like a better job but they cant get one because off all the low-wage illegals in the country?

    ….what?

    i’m saying that people would happily support *reducing* immigration because it’s unfair for immigrants to suppress wages, collect benefits, and crowd classrooms.

    i’m teaching you how to argue against immigration, genius.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    i’m saying that people would happily support *reducing* immigration because it’s unfair for immigrants to suppress wages, collect benefits, and crowd classrooms.

    i’m teaching you how to argue against immigration, genius.
     
    Argue against immigration? Polls have consistently shown that no such arguments are needed. The problem is that the elites don’t give a shit what the public wants. The elites want wages suppressed and costs externalized. The elites’ children aren’t sitting in classrooms full of mestizos and negroes.

    Quit stealing large cocks and pay attention genius. Beat those giant phalluses against the inside of your head until you come up with the genius plan to make the politicians who crave and need vast sums of money to gain and keep their privileges suddenly reverse course and do what the majority wants rather than what their elite benefactors want.
  148. @follyofwar
    I've remarked before about Kamala's childlessness. In this, she is like failed Euro leaders (and proponents of mass third world immigration) Edna May, Emmanuel Macron, and Angela Merkel - all childless. Rulers without children have no skin in the country's future. Electing them should be avoided.

    You’re dead wrong here, she has a racial agenda. The other three are actively working to destroy their own nations and peoples and deny them a future, Harris is working to rob and destroy some of the same people for the future benefit of her own people. They’re working for the same goals but she has a future orientation for her people the others don’t.

  149. @216
    There's just something odd to me about seeing so many high-level Dem politicians grab the narrative by the horns. Ordinarily their advisors would caution against this, unless there is more evidence that we aren't seeing. Springing the trap on the right, after it screamed "hoax", would severely damage our public standing.

    At the very least, Trump could counter-signal and collectively blame his own supporters. Like it or not, that's the price you pay when 90% of the media is on the other side. Having Coulter and Spencer criticizing him probably boosts his numbers in the center.

    It simply doesn’t matter anymore, the vast number of non-white colonizers who vote in solid anti-white racial blocs have eliminated the need for Democrats to fear the sensible, white, “Silent Majority.” The ADL knows, and all these Dem candidates know this is a hoax, it doesn’t matter. In fact it’s better, since vomiting hate on whites over an obviously fake incident is a stronger virtue signal, it indicates that your contempt for dehumanized whites is over their existence not their actions. Making your victims kowtow for patently false accusations is also a good way to humiliate them and demonstrate their powerlessness. So, no, downstream from mass-migration anti-white is a winner.

    • Agree: Trevor H.
    • Replies: @216
    The Dem base has poor turnout, which is why they need to be cajoled with "registration drives" and the Dems continuously fight to keep voters from being deregistered when certified mail isn't returned.

    Now they want to make Election Day a holiday, and have automatic registration. So the Dems still have to worry about alienating white/Asian moderates that could put the GOP back to its shares earned in the '10 and '14 midterms.

    Contrary to many in the Dissident movemenst, I believe the Admin's focus on black/hispanic unemployment is actually a good thing. It won't move a substaintial number of their voters, but it probably will reduce anger and thus turnout. It may help out with white moderates. Tackling the student debt issue would be a good way of rehabilitating the party with white(asian) millennials, but this speaks to a broader cultural failure of conservatives.
  150. @bro3886
    It simply doesn't matter anymore, the vast number of non-white colonizers who vote in solid anti-white racial blocs have eliminated the need for Democrats to fear the sensible, white, "Silent Majority." The ADL knows, and all these Dem candidates know this is a hoax, it doesn't matter. In fact it's better, since vomiting hate on whites over an obviously fake incident is a stronger virtue signal, it indicates that your contempt for dehumanized whites is over their existence not their actions. Making your victims kowtow for patently false accusations is also a good way to humiliate them and demonstrate their powerlessness. So, no, downstream from mass-migration anti-white is a winner.

    The Dem base has poor turnout, which is why they need to be cajoled with “registration drives” and the Dems continuously fight to keep voters from being deregistered when certified mail isn’t returned.

    Now they want to make Election Day a holiday, and have automatic registration. So the Dems still have to worry about alienating white/Asian moderates that could put the GOP back to its shares earned in the ’10 and ’14 midterms.

    Contrary to many in the Dissident movemenst, I believe the Admin’s focus on black/hispanic unemployment is actually a good thing. It won’t move a substaintial number of their voters, but it probably will reduce anger and thus turnout. It may help out with white moderates. Tackling the student debt issue would be a good way of rehabilitating the party with white(asian) millennials, but this speaks to a broader cultural failure of conservatives.

  151. @Big Dick Bandit
    .....reading genius, my whole point was that people are *against* the increased classroom sizes (and lack of assimilated students) that immigration brings. that's why they're willing to support immigration restrictions as part of a broad based "policies for the working class" narrative, not a "WE MUST PRESERVE OUR RACIAL PURITY FROM CRIMINALS" one.

    again, lot of words to say a lot of nothing--raising taxes and paying out social programs isn't anywhere near the managerial difficulty of assigning production orders and distribution of specific companies. it's just not. your (incoherent, meandering) attempts to make it sound like it is are completely baseless--does the government have a tough time paying out social security checks? of course not.

    you've provided a perfect example of the limp-dick heehawing that BoomerCons offer when presented with the idea "hey, maybe we should tax rich guys somewhat more fairly for the benefit of everybody else."

    either you care about getting popular consensus to stop immigration, or you care about rich guys preserving their precious capital. it's clear which side you're on.

    I have to agree with you. As a student, I see up close the disastrous effects of mass importations of dull, scheming and low IQ brown people.

    At this point the economic system is not of concern. We need these people out of the country. I would vote for a communist, centrist, fascist, anybody who would reduce immigration and get rid of these immigrant thieves.

    Yet they’re all wrong. Right and left wing. All support mass immigration.

    Anyways, all we can do is make these intelligent arguments to people, and have white babies. Prepare yourself for the future, though as a political solution does not seem forthcoming.

  152. @216
    Contd: The Chicago Lynching

    https://twitter.com/RobElgasABC7/status/1090791953384554496

    This now makes two people that could potentially be held liable here if they are caught lying.

    It's reasonable to think that this was black-on-black, and "MAGA" was substituted for something else.

    The left's rage here should not be underestimated, and a victory for us means a total destruction of the case and conviction of both accusers. If the attack was genuine, but done by vengeful blacks we will still pay a penalty.


    https://twitter.com/Fox_Summit/status/1090744972591222785

    The left is moving towards accelerationism.

    The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion (to which few members of other civilizations were converted) but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

    Samuel P. Huntington
     

    A small aside, we shouldn’t accept the oxymoron of ‘majority minority’. It describes a coalition of all other races against one: White. It is more accurate, and describes the future more clearly, to use ‘white minority’ country instead. To contemplate no longer being tolerant of minorities but being a minority, one held in open hostility, should sober up a few borderline SJWs.

  153. @Big Dick Bandit
    .....reading genius, my whole point was that people are *against* the increased classroom sizes (and lack of assimilated students) that immigration brings. that's why they're willing to support immigration restrictions as part of a broad based "policies for the working class" narrative, not a "WE MUST PRESERVE OUR RACIAL PURITY FROM CRIMINALS" one.

    again, lot of words to say a lot of nothing--raising taxes and paying out social programs isn't anywhere near the managerial difficulty of assigning production orders and distribution of specific companies. it's just not. your (incoherent, meandering) attempts to make it sound like it is are completely baseless--does the government have a tough time paying out social security checks? of course not.

    you've provided a perfect example of the limp-dick heehawing that BoomerCons offer when presented with the idea "hey, maybe we should tax rich guys somewhat more fairly for the benefit of everybody else."

    either you care about getting popular consensus to stop immigration, or you care about rich guys preserving their precious capital. it's clear which side you're on.

    I appreciate you clarifying the issue on immigration —- at least a tad. Though it makes no sense. And is unresponsive to my detailed response on the matter. Your assumption for support is really counter to the record. And your dismissing the costs because it it is inconvenient to at least address the details says a good deal about the veracity of your assail. The history of the US regarding introducing new populations, even when those populations are citizens totally rebutts your claim. As is common place here, the issue of violence to social issues is not uncommon and one of the staples of white violence has been whites rioting by the mere introduction of blacks and that even to lower income (working class populations) Based on that record, you simply are out of your depth. i am unclear how to respond to a socialist that doesn’t have a basic knowledge of class warfare in the US and whites managed to engage it as policy across the country. And that in response to wide range comprehensive programs to include other citizens, much less immigrants in need of assimilation —

    https://www.westernjournal.com/impact-immigration-americas-working-class-communities/

    Have a look at the history of New York City. As I said, the responses here were predictable and remain devoid of content and real world context.

    The only person who interjected color into this discussion is you. And your lack of working knowledge on that is peculiar given your advance on socialist polity. I would encourage you learn the difference between national identity and color identity politics, there are some differences.
    ———————-

    side-note: I am a free speech advocate and of course you may use whatever references you desire. However, for my part, I would prefer you avoid colloquial crude references in exchanges with me.

    In response to the issue of management, I am confident my response is coherent enough for you to get the point and as expected skip the messy details to the assertion, that turning out a SS check isn’t hard. I suppose your eyes just glazed over that there is no money in SS and all of those checks are deficit spending. Unaware of how government engages in budgeting makes the matter moot. And your dismissal of what has to happen take place to get those checks out — lets just chalk it up to youthful exuberance.

    The country has been debating taxes since there was a country, who to tax, how much to tax, how to tax, how to spend the tax . . . taxing wealthy people is neither new, or lacks consideration. But at least you have some comprehension of the polity, but none as to what it means in the real. You can’t ignore issues presented because you don’t have answers, even generic answers for very real issues as to managing any system to include the distribution of resources. I even handed you healthcare, a huge program in need of managerial redress if not a complete deconstruction/removal. Want to know how hard medicare is —

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?destination=%2fbusiness%2feconomy%2fmedicare-pricing-drives-high-health-care-costs%2f2013%2f12%2f31%2f24befa46-7248-11e3-8b3f-b1666705ca3b_story.html%3f&utm_term=.5d36fc26e6bb

    And that is just one issue. Have a look at the VA and it delivery history —

    Management is the issue. Financing is the issue.

    Your supposed tax increase on the wealthy doesn’t come close to dealing with these issues.
    —–

    What I care about is the US and its citizens. They come first. And before i go about spouting the cure for foreigners I am going to take a hard look at what ails US citizens. I noticed you skipped the criminal justice matter as well the specifics on education.

    The answer to the abuses of our system is not socialism. And your false comparisons simply have no weight once you actually examine what’s involved. And you know, I even care about the rich. And as long as they make their dough honestly and don’t leverage their wealth to buy policy makers and managers (as i think is heavily the case) none of my concern. We can curtail their influence, and manipulation minus a national psychic economic and government overhaul that upon completion won’t solve the issues you claim are the problem, but will expand an already mismanaged affair. And given your position, the matter will only get worse.

    Again the little boy who is looking at his truck with a missing wheel who thinks the answer is a new truck without taking a look and dealing with specifics 9having to deal all the words and what they mean). We have utterly failed to teach you appropriate critical thinking to application.

  154. and that makes sense. Wait a minute, if management isn’t an issue, you’ll have to explain to me how you intend to decrease illegal immigrants and keep them out of the country . . .

    drones, personnell, weapons, cameras, vehicles . . . training, payroll, detention, facilities . . .

    But skipping the details, I think we can agree – curbing immigration 360 is a smart management decision.

  155. Guess she won’t have the soon to be ex Gov of Virginia by her side at her SOTU response!

  156. @EldnahYm
    What is the first state the strategy worked in?

    California! It was a middle class, reliably Republican paradise fifty years ago. The only thing that has stayed the same since then is the weather and the landscape.

  157. @Peripatetic Commenter
    Corey Booker throws his hat in the ring!

    https://6abc.com/politics/cory-booker-2020-nj-senator-running-for-president/5116069/?fbclid=IwAR1BCRZ4-hX_-nlB9d7WqpDoDYT6arKfuig-f0v0ngOQPR5tLa8J6sYzsEk&sf207023230=1

    Karmasutra may need to get out the knee pads.

    Maybe we can get Kanye to jump in as an independent!

    I wonder if President Trump is funding Corey?

    Yeah, that’s not what the guy who has been audaciously asserting the nominee will be Harris wants to see. Maybe it means she’s weak. Otoh, maybe it means that the strikingly white lineup means there’s room for a few POCs to get a lot of attention from running.

  158. @EliteCommInc.
    Polling data among whites. Polling data among repub kicans and conservatives, primarily men.

    But ever since I took a peak at the numbers from the dept of labor in the early 90's, I think it was around 1994, white women comprised 60% of the beneficiaries. Given the demographic collection in which asians and latinos select white as to categorical distinction, that number is easily above 70%. Add, the special programs Title IX, the African American community which makes up just over 13% of the entire population and considering the employment on the table, are not the problem. Ever since AA was developed (and it was not what it is today -- not even close) Republicans have been pounding the table about those dastardly blacks getting preferential treatment ----

    when in fact, the impact was from women, mostly white women. look the country spent most of its history giving preferential treatment and passes to whites to the tune of 100%, regardless of the depth of profecient blacks, who could not and would not even be considered. It's a rather obtuse move to make hay about a program that primarily benefits whites. And short cuts a programs intended as redress that has only application to 20-30% of the black population and my guess, that goes largely to black women.

    Good fortune telling white women, you want to end programs intended to improve black citizens and unfairly went to them but should ended anyway -- because it's preferential -- in a country predicated on preferential treatment based on light skin tones.

    A lot of college-educated whites are aware of the fact that blacks can score 200+ points worse on college/graduate entrance exams than whites and still be admitted at the expense of said whites. That happens in every program and at every prestigious school in the country, probably almost without exception.

    • Replies: @216
    In an earlier period of my life, I considered going to law school. The same people that admit that so-called URMs are boosted ban any criticism of it on their forums. The notorious "Above the Law" is example number one, where Elie Mystal has unleashed torrents of anti-white racism for more than a decade.

    These same people then turn around again and claim it is conservative lawyers that are the true AA recipients, when it comes to judicial selection. The one minority, the best minority, that somehow isn't supposed to be entitled to "representation matters"

    So there are certain people whom I have no sympathy for their student debt burden, J.D.s are #1 on that list.

    , @EliteCommInc.
    i have no idea of how many or what score or how far below . . .


    But I am very confident that whites who score below x limit or standard have been getting in to various colleges, workplaces, etc. And in the case of Affirmative Action, women have all manner of set asides, in my view.



    However, I walk carefully because one of the successful turns of who we are in this country has been the repeated success of people who score below the standard and even excell beyond those who meet the same and more. And that is why despite the standards strictly adhered to by Europeans and Asians the US is resilient --- performance over test. it is our very peculiar history with outliers.

    It's this guy: Henry Ford, not a college test score to his name, if I recall.

    It's this guy: Garrett Morgan, not a college test score to his name.

    It's this guy: Vivien Thomas

    or any of the hundreds of people who never went to college couldn't have gotten into college based on tests scores or some other prevention: however,

    https://jamesaconrad.com/TK/famous-scientists-who-never-had-a-science-degree.html

    I am not dismissing standards, nor I am advocating dumping them or ignoring them. I am saying, blacks are not alone and far and away the last of US citizens to have been provided opportunity, who failed or did not meet said established standards. The curved tube by which we focus of a particular construct while ignoring the same elsewhere creates false narrative constructs. Nor am I defending the practice of lowering standards -- but I don't live in a naive existence concerning distributive parity. Getting in the door is one thing, and you do while in it is another. And what we know is that blacks matriculate about about the pace as whites. In fact, I think a look at the numbers suggests that blacks males outpace degree attainment. Now i guess one might contend that's because blacks get degrees they don't really earn --- but I suspect that is hardly the case.
  159. @Audacious Epigone
    A lot of college-educated whites are aware of the fact that blacks can score 200+ points worse on college/graduate entrance exams than whites and still be admitted at the expense of said whites. That happens in every program and at every prestigious school in the country, probably almost without exception.

    In an earlier period of my life, I considered going to law school. The same people that admit that so-called URMs are boosted ban any criticism of it on their forums. The notorious “Above the Law” is example number one, where Elie Mystal has unleashed torrents of anti-white racism for more than a decade.

    These same people then turn around again and claim it is conservative lawyers that are the true AA recipients, when it comes to judicial selection. The one minority, the best minority, that somehow isn’t supposed to be entitled to “representation matters”

    So there are certain people whom I have no sympathy for their student debt burden, J.D.s are #1 on that list.

  160. @EldnaYm
    Georgia has the third highest percentage of Black people among U.S. states. Abrams' strategy seems unlikely to win in many other U.S. states.

    whites need to move out of minority states and into states they can hold the ground in they need to poison pill their new states eliminate all welfare prosecute crimes ruthlessly etc push the jews out along with their proxy mud army

  161. @216
    This near-junvenile behavior disgusts me, but not surprising from a woman that blasphemed one of her own prophets.

    https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1090803458628898817

    When you are at the top of the progressive stack, you can literally make jokes insulting the mentally ill.

    We were told how much the Third World was oppressed by colonialism, but when we gave them independence they invaded our lands.

    Deport Omar.

    Its gonna be kind of fun watching the Democrat party struggle to deal with its anti-semitic rising stars.

  162. @dvorak

    Democrats pushing Stacey Abrams is fine with me. If anything it paints them into the corner as the antiwhite, antimale party.
     
    The Dems don't need white men. They need white women and POC, and a Harris-Abrams ticket could be competitive in Florida, Ohio, PA, MI and WI. Even Iowa would be in play because of naïve white women who live in a fifty-years-ago whitopia.

    The Ohio black vote: Little (and not so little) old black ladies turned out massively to reelect Obama. h/t iSteve

    Two black women? No way the dems are stupid enough to do that.

  163. @Priss Factor
    Israel has a right and duty to defend itself.

    Israel isn't only defending itself. It is occupying West Bank and denying Palestinians the last hope for nationhood. Also, it is aiding terrorists throughout places like Syria and pressuring US foreign policy to subvert Iran. The way Israelis treat Palestinians in West Bank is very much how Jewish elites treat white people in US and EU: As Occupied People who exist to be censured, censored, deplatformed, fired, blacklisted, and even bullied by Antifa thugs.

    I can support Israel's defense of nationhood or nationalism. But NO to Zionist Occupation and Imperialism.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnCsWzAczIo

    Israel offered a two state solution in the 90s but the Palestinian leadership nixed it.

  164. @c matt

    Of course people are “allowed” to speak about race!
     
    reminds me of that old USSR joke:

    American: In America we have freedom of speech because we can say "the US sucks!"

    Russian: In Russia we too have freedom of speech because we can also say "the US sucks!"

    Much like modern marriage:
    Wives are free to do whatever they want, husbands to do whatever their wives want – that’s what equality means.

  165. @M. Hartley
    The USA was a one-party state in the 1800s?

    It was for a few years after the War of 1812 when the Federalists collapsed. Also the Republicans were very dominant 1860-1896.

  166. @dvorak

    Democrats pushing Stacey Abrams is fine with me. If anything it paints them into the corner as the antiwhite, antimale party.
     
    The Dems don't need white men. They need white women and POC, and a Harris-Abrams ticket could be competitive in Florida, Ohio, PA, MI and WI. Even Iowa would be in play because of naïve white women who live in a fifty-years-ago whitopia.

    The Ohio black vote: Little (and not so little) old black ladies turned out massively to reelect Obama. h/t iSteve

    “Even Iowa would be in play because of naïve white women who live in a fifty-years-ago whitopia.”

    I grew up in Iowa. It’s a cross between neighboring states Wisconsin (blue) and Missouri (red.) The current Republican woman Senator is a character out of a country and western song.

  167. @Corvinus
    "Everybody looks at pocketbook issues."

    Especially white Americans, and for a number of them, this issue is priority number one.

    "And in case you haven’t noticed, whites aren’t allowed to speak about race"

    Of course people are "allowed" to speak about race! What a ridiculous assertion you are making. Americans of different races are constantly talking about it, whether it be in the media, at work, at school, etc.

    "I guess the fear is we pale faces will gather together and decide to form the Fourth Reich."

    Highly doubtful.

    “Americans of different races are constantly talking about it, whether it be in the media, at work, at school, etc.”

    Not white employees where I work. Twenty five years ago some of us (mostly about the age I am now but including some younger people) talked about it constantly. Times have changed.

  168. @216

    Speaking from personal experience? So, Charlie Chan, what did he exactly say?

     

    Must you be so insensitive?

    We can have a discussion here without resorting to use of ethnic slurs.

    Hoisted by his own petard.

  169. @Charles Pewitt
    Bernie Sanders was correct when he said that open borders was a Koch brothers proposal.

    Vermont Bronx Bernie Sanders also defended nation-state sovereignty in the video.

    Video from 2015:

    https://youtu.be/vf-k6qOfXz0

    Tweet from 2014:

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/505069174163775488

    He’s from Brooklyn.

  170. @Audacious Epigone
    A lot of college-educated whites are aware of the fact that blacks can score 200+ points worse on college/graduate entrance exams than whites and still be admitted at the expense of said whites. That happens in every program and at every prestigious school in the country, probably almost without exception.

    i have no idea of how many or what score or how far below . . .

    But I am very confident that whites who score below x limit or standard have been getting in to various colleges, workplaces, etc. And in the case of Affirmative Action, women have all manner of set asides, in my view.

    However, I walk carefully because one of the successful turns of who we are in this country has been the repeated success of people who score below the standard and even excell beyond those who meet the same and more. And that is why despite the standards strictly adhered to by Europeans and Asians the US is resilient — performance over test. it is our very peculiar history with outliers.

    It’s this guy: Henry Ford, not a college test score to his name, if I recall.

    It’s this guy: Garrett Morgan, not a college test score to his name.

    It’s this guy: Vivien Thomas

    or any of the hundreds of people who never went to college couldn’t have gotten into college based on tests scores or some other prevention: however,

    https://jamesaconrad.com/TK/famous-scientists-who-never-had-a-science-degree.html

    I am not dismissing standards, nor I am advocating dumping them or ignoring them. I am saying, blacks are not alone and far and away the last of US citizens to have been provided opportunity, who failed or did not meet said established standards. The curved tube by which we focus of a particular construct while ignoring the same elsewhere creates false narrative constructs. Nor am I defending the practice of lowering standards — but I don’t live in a naive existence concerning distributive parity. Getting in the door is one thing, and you do while in it is another. And what we know is that blacks matriculate about about the pace as whites. In fact, I think a look at the numbers suggests that blacks males outpace degree attainment. Now i guess one might contend that’s because blacks get degrees they don’t really earn — but I suspect that is hardly the case.

  171. Anon[316] • Disclaimer says:

    “Whites are in power and despite election results, they govern largely by a white inclined polity, inspite of the rhetoric.. The last president in office was purported be black, but his governance was almost exclusively what whites wanted, including a foreign policy and domestic policy he campaigned against.”

    No, they don’t. Polls repeatedly show white republicans are for things that the “white” Ruling Class is against, so what does it matter if the guy running the show physically resembles you without supporting your interests? I’ve never understood this logic by civnats. It reminds me of the tale of the Indian who assured his followers that by drawing a magic line in the dirt, those supporters inside couldn’t be harmed by white bullets – wrong and terribly misguided, but they only realized that when the firing started.

    Besides, even if that’s true now, it won’t be true for long (and rhetoric has a strange way of turning into reality over time). Can people not extrapolate a trend or is the convenient lie just too comforting to abandon? Ignorance is bliss, I guess. Look at the democratic primary map. Soon, no white candidate can win the democratic nomination and, therefore, no white can be president. Hillary crushed Sanders in the black vote and won; Obama crushed Hillary in the black vote and won. That’s your future: no white males need apply. That will be true as early as 2020. Despite what some have asserted, American electoral politics will NOT resemble Californian electoral politics in the future. And once this happens, there will be little of the current “white polity” restraint. Such a state is transitory.

    “they govern largely by a white inclined polity”

    That will change. The current system is only metastable. It will collapse eventually. According to most polls, overwhelming majorities of people support policies the elite don’t want, such as AOC’s 70% marginal tax rate. Combine that with a rising tide of non-whites voting for the Cortezs of the world, and there’s your trend for the future. Why can’t some people make that obvious, simple connection? Metastable systems collapse in the long-run – Venezuela, Rome, the Soviet Union…the United States.

    “Indeed. Division may end up being our deliverance.”

    Then you better get on it. Things will get harder on that front the further into the future we move. People have a tendency to embrace proposals presented as a plan of action or with some backing in text. Thus, all the many “manifestos” presented by wannabe revolutionaries of yesteryear. Merely saying something isn’t going to make it happen. Writing about how it could might.

    “From what I understand fundamentalist Christians were solidly behind it. That shows they were not smart enough to understand the political ramifications.”

    Now we know how Christianity destroyed Rome. Universalism makes borders and social cohesion by rational self and group interest difficult. Asians don’t seem to have quite that same problem. Perhaps a change of group ethos is in order.

    “A whole stream of targeted harassment against an elected official in the replies.”

    I’m shocked /s.

    “We were told how much the Third World was oppressed by colonialism, but when we gave them independence they invaded our lands.”

    Well, we either fight them over there or we fight them over here. That’s what happens when you let off the brakes.

    “Because many white women will not want a black woman to be president first.”

    They supported Oprah for years. I could see it happening.

    “Then they use the nuclear option in the Senate and pack the Supreme Court and it’s time to turn out the lights.”

    Exactly. And there have already been published NYT editorials in favor of this option. Constitutionalists think that piece of paper will save them, but they aren’t smart enough to realize 1. it’s a vague document open to interpretation and reinterpretation depending on who’s doing the interpreting 2. nothing sets a limit on the number of Supreme Court justices, meaning the court could be seized and turned against them at any time; at that point, anything the left wants is deemed constitutional.

    “Polling data shows affirmative action is not popular.”

    True. It’s a great way to galvanize white voters, especially the youth, despite what EC thinks. Lots of white women don’t really benefit from it anymore as colleges have added lots of useless degrees and made it so that they get admitted regardless of AA status. Older voters won’t care as much either as they have already benefited from AA and younger white voters are against it. There’s an opportunity with that demographic, not just in terms of votes but in terms of attracting talent and energy (and exposing the current system as an immoral racial redistribution program).

    “I’m skeptical of the assertion that most people vote their pocketbooks.”

    They do, unfortunately. But in a reactionary way. Voters are too stupid to think about the consequences of economic policy, thus we got the very foreseeable Housing Crisis of 2007/8. However, they do notice when gas prices go up or the stock market goes down. They reflexively blame the party in power when it does without thinking much how it happened in the first place. Voters, even white voters, are selfish and shortsighted when it comes to economic issues. That’s why more hasn’t been done on immigration or trade. Just as with the Housing Crisis, these ignoramuses will learn too late that their actions and inattention will have consequences when someone like Cortez drastically raises their energy bill and shutters their jobs to fight the Climate Change boogeyman.

    “the relevant point is: do you want to restrict immigration? then make it a part of a comprehensive progressive economics package”

    MAGA and brains don’t go together, unfortunately. So, I wouldn’t count on it.

    “Advocate walls to bar foreign instructors from teaching economics, or political science courses to impressionable US students of any color.”

    Not a bad idea, even if you’re not serious.

    “What do you consider fair taxation is, and in what way is the current taxation system unfair?”

    Personally, I’m against any tax cut for people who vote against my interests. Thus, I’m fine with sticking it to the rich with tax increases just like they stuck it to me with immigration and free trade. Who cares how much or for what reason? They stuck it to us while advocating open borders, so I say we stick it back to them. Make open borders guys like the Koch brothers pay. Why is that a bad thing? And why do Boomercons defend the pocketbooks of people who openly work against the national interest? Answer: Boomers are greedy and short-sighted; these are the same Chamber of Commerce types who gave us Reagan’s ’86 amnesty. As long as it doesn’t immediately affect their wallets, they are fine with it.

    “Does illegals getting an EITC seem fair or unfair to you? Should my hard work be taxed to help someone who simply will not work?”

    Uh, the unemployment rate is at an all time low, or nearly so. And I’m sure few are in favor of giving free money to illegals, so don’t erroneously conflate the two issues. That’s not a problem here. Is it fair for working class Americans to work for crap wages because guys like you shipped all their jobs overseas with bad trade deals or imported immigrants to do their jobs at half the wage? Boomercons, smh. These people are greedy and self-interested; they embrace economic dogma because they don’t want to fork over even a penny of their money after having milked the system for years to everyone else’s detriment – huge deficits, huge tuition hikes, fines and penalties everywhere because they don’t want to pay taxes…eventually, they’ll pay when some future Hugo Chavez type comes to power and makes them pay. That’s what happened in Venezuela. The upper-class failed to address critical issues and make reforms until there was a massive backlash against them. It will one day happen here, too. I can’t say I will shed too many tears.

    “i’m teaching you how to argue against immigration, genius.”

    Like I said, MAGA and brains…conservatards aren’t good with long-term thinking or planning.

    “The history of the US regarding introducing new populations, even when those populations are citizens totally rebutts your claim.”

    I forget was the claim was exactly, but my first instinct is to say the following:

    “It doesn’t. You’re making an Apples-to-Oranges comparison. Nearly all of those populations were white European, with a small admixture of Chinese. That’s very different from post-1965 immigration demographics. It’s also very different from future immigration demographics should the Ruling Class get its way and double legal immigration; expect lots of Africans in that case.”

    “Based on that record, you simply are out of your depth. i am unclear how to respond to a socialist that doesn’t have a basic knowledge of class warfare”

    All you did was post a wall of text in the hope that it would scare away replies. I didn’t see much in the way of cogent points being made. And let’s be honest, you’re just another Boomer who doesn’t want to pay taxes. Like most of your generation, you embrace bizarre economic dogmas as an excuse to scare off those who might want to raise your taxes 0.1% (or taxes that wouldn’t even affect you like the Estate Tax). However, your mentality is instructive. Boomers like you are why civic nationalism will never work. It’s hard to have any kind of civic virtue among people whose highest loyalty is themselves and their own pocketbooks, defending it at any cost – even through mendacity and shortsighted, but ultimately ruinous, trade and immigration policies.

    “Wait a minute, if management isn’t an issue, you’ll have to explain to me how you intend to decrease illegal immigrants and keep them out of the country . .”

    Raising the minimum wage to make low-end jobs more competitive for native born Americans would go a long way towards that end. Also, raising taxes on the rich to make them pay for all the illegals they support would do nicely in that regard. And management isn’t a problem because the system that governs both is already in place. Your management argument strikes me as an attempt at deflection – “we need to enforce the laws” kind of argument because you don’t want any new proposals to rock the boat. Well, we’ve had no luck on that front, so perhaps we’d be better off changing the system itself so as to bias the result in our favor. For example, raise the minimum wage and crowd out illegals or raise the taxes of the people who favor open borders in order to shift the burden onto them, making said group less likely to continue supporting immigration, legal and illegal.

    “California! It was a middle class, reliably Republican paradise fifty years ago. The only thing that has stayed the same since then is the weather and the landscape.”

    Didn’t the republican north try to secede from the Democrat south not long ago? Portent of the future, perhaps?

    “These same people then turn around again and claim it is conservative lawyers that are the true AA recipients.”

    You see that a lot on social media. They never break it down and explain how. It would seem reasonable to assume that if only so many seats are available, automatically setting aside some for POC would make it more difficult for whites to get the remaining seats if selection is merit-based – fewer seats equals more competition for those that remain.

    • Replies: @Big Dick Bandit
    prrrrrreeeeeeach it brother! let them hear you in the back of the congregation!
  172. @Anon
    “Whites are in power and despite election results, they govern largely by a white inclined polity, inspite of the rhetoric.. The last president in office was purported be black, but his governance was almost exclusively what whites wanted, including a foreign policy and domestic policy he campaigned against.”

    No, they don’t. Polls repeatedly show white republicans are for things that the “white” Ruling Class is against, so what does it matter if the guy running the show physically resembles you without supporting your interests? I’ve never understood this logic by civnats. It reminds me of the tale of the Indian who assured his followers that by drawing a magic line in the dirt, those supporters inside couldn’t be harmed by white bullets - wrong and terribly misguided, but they only realized that when the firing started.

    Besides, even if that’s true now, it won’t be true for long (and rhetoric has a strange way of turning into reality over time). Can people not extrapolate a trend or is the convenient lie just too comforting to abandon? Ignorance is bliss, I guess. Look at the democratic primary map. Soon, no white candidate can win the democratic nomination and, therefore, no white can be president. Hillary crushed Sanders in the black vote and won; Obama crushed Hillary in the black vote and won. That’s your future: no white males need apply. That will be true as early as 2020. Despite what some have asserted, American electoral politics will NOT resemble Californian electoral politics in the future. And once this happens, there will be little of the current "white polity" restraint. Such a state is transitory.

    “they govern largely by a white inclined polity”

    That will change. The current system is only metastable. It will collapse eventually. According to most polls, overwhelming majorities of people support policies the elite don’t want, such as AOC’s 70% marginal tax rate. Combine that with a rising tide of non-whites voting for the Cortezs of the world, and there’s your trend for the future. Why can’t some people make that obvious, simple connection? Metastable systems collapse in the long-run – Venezuela, Rome, the Soviet Union…the United States.

    “Indeed. Division may end up being our deliverance.”

    Then you better get on it. Things will get harder on that front the further into the future we move. People have a tendency to embrace proposals presented as a plan of action or with some backing in text. Thus, all the many “manifestos” presented by wannabe revolutionaries of yesteryear. Merely saying something isn’t going to make it happen. Writing about how it could might.

    “From what I understand fundamentalist Christians were solidly behind it. That shows they were not smart enough to understand the political ramifications.”

    Now we know how Christianity destroyed Rome. Universalism makes borders and social cohesion by rational self and group interest difficult. Asians don't seem to have quite that same problem. Perhaps a change of group ethos is in order.

    “A whole stream of targeted harassment against an elected official in the replies.”

    I’m shocked /s.

    “We were told how much the Third World was oppressed by colonialism, but when we gave them independence they invaded our lands.”

    Well, we either fight them over there or we fight them over here. That’s what happens when you let off the brakes.

    “Because many white women will not want a black woman to be president first.”

    They supported Oprah for years. I could see it happening.

    “Then they use the nuclear option in the Senate and pack the Supreme Court and it’s time to turn out the lights.”

    Exactly. And there have already been published NYT editorials in favor of this option. Constitutionalists think that piece of paper will save them, but they aren’t smart enough to realize 1. it’s a vague document open to interpretation and reinterpretation depending on who’s doing the interpreting 2. nothing sets a limit on the number of Supreme Court justices, meaning the court could be seized and turned against them at any time; at that point, anything the left wants is deemed constitutional.

    “Polling data shows affirmative action is not popular.”

    True. It’s a great way to galvanize white voters, especially the youth, despite what EC thinks. Lots of white women don’t really benefit from it anymore as colleges have added lots of useless degrees and made it so that they get admitted regardless of AA status. Older voters won’t care as much either as they have already benefited from AA and younger white voters are against it. There’s an opportunity with that demographic, not just in terms of votes but in terms of attracting talent and energy (and exposing the current system as an immoral racial redistribution program).

    “I’m skeptical of the assertion that most people vote their pocketbooks.”

    They do, unfortunately. But in a reactionary way. Voters are too stupid to think about the consequences of economic policy, thus we got the very foreseeable Housing Crisis of 2007/8. However, they do notice when gas prices go up or the stock market goes down. They reflexively blame the party in power when it does without thinking much how it happened in the first place. Voters, even white voters, are selfish and shortsighted when it comes to economic issues. That’s why more hasn’t been done on immigration or trade. Just as with the Housing Crisis, these ignoramuses will learn too late that their actions and inattention will have consequences when someone like Cortez drastically raises their energy bill and shutters their jobs to fight the Climate Change boogeyman.

    “the relevant point is: do you want to restrict immigration? then make it a part of a comprehensive progressive economics package”

    MAGA and brains don’t go together, unfortunately. So, I wouldn’t count on it.

    “Advocate walls to bar foreign instructors from teaching economics, or political science courses to impressionable US students of any color.”

    Not a bad idea, even if you’re not serious.

    “What do you consider fair taxation is, and in what way is the current taxation system unfair?”

    Personally, I’m against any tax cut for people who vote against my interests. Thus, I’m fine with sticking it to the rich with tax increases just like they stuck it to me with immigration and free trade. Who cares how much or for what reason? They stuck it to us while advocating open borders, so I say we stick it back to them. Make open borders guys like the Koch brothers pay. Why is that a bad thing? And why do Boomercons defend the pocketbooks of people who openly work against the national interest? Answer: Boomers are greedy and short-sighted; these are the same Chamber of Commerce types who gave us Reagan's '86 amnesty. As long as it doesn't immediately affect their wallets, they are fine with it.

    “Does illegals getting an EITC seem fair or unfair to you? Should my hard work be taxed to help someone who simply will not work?”

    Uh, the unemployment rate is at an all time low, or nearly so. And I'm sure few are in favor of giving free money to illegals, so don't erroneously conflate the two issues. That’s not a problem here. Is it fair for working class Americans to work for crap wages because guys like you shipped all their jobs overseas with bad trade deals or imported immigrants to do their jobs at half the wage? Boomercons, smh. These people are greedy and self-interested; they embrace economic dogma because they don’t want to fork over even a penny of their money after having milked the system for years to everyone else’s detriment – huge deficits, huge tuition hikes, fines and penalties everywhere because they don’t want to pay taxes…eventually, they’ll pay when some future Hugo Chavez type comes to power and makes them pay. That’s what happened in Venezuela. The upper-class failed to address critical issues and make reforms until there was a massive backlash against them. It will one day happen here, too. I can’t say I will shed too many tears.

    “i’m teaching you how to argue against immigration, genius.”

    Like I said, MAGA and brains…conservatards aren't good with long-term thinking or planning.

    “The history of the US regarding introducing new populations, even when those populations are citizens totally rebutts your claim.”

    I forget was the claim was exactly, but my first instinct is to say the following:

    “It doesn’t. You’re making an Apples-to-Oranges comparison. Nearly all of those populations were white European, with a small admixture of Chinese. That’s very different from post-1965 immigration demographics. It’s also very different from future immigration demographics should the Ruling Class get its way and double legal immigration; expect lots of Africans in that case.”

    “Based on that record, you simply are out of your depth. i am unclear how to respond to a socialist that doesn’t have a basic knowledge of class warfare”

    All you did was post a wall of text in the hope that it would scare away replies. I didn’t see much in the way of cogent points being made. And let’s be honest, you’re just another Boomer who doesn’t want to pay taxes. Like most of your generation, you embrace bizarre economic dogmas as an excuse to scare off those who might want to raise your taxes 0.1% (or taxes that wouldn’t even affect you like the Estate Tax). However, your mentality is instructive. Boomers like you are why civic nationalism will never work. It’s hard to have any kind of civic virtue among people whose highest loyalty is themselves and their own pocketbooks, defending it at any cost – even through mendacity and shortsighted, but ultimately ruinous, trade and immigration policies.

    “Wait a minute, if management isn’t an issue, you’ll have to explain to me how you intend to decrease illegal immigrants and keep them out of the country . .”

    Raising the minimum wage to make low-end jobs more competitive for native born Americans would go a long way towards that end. Also, raising taxes on the rich to make them pay for all the illegals they support would do nicely in that regard. And management isn’t a problem because the system that governs both is already in place. Your management argument strikes me as an attempt at deflection - "we need to enforce the laws" kind of argument because you don't want any new proposals to rock the boat. Well, we've had no luck on that front, so perhaps we'd be better off changing the system itself so as to bias the result in our favor. For example, raise the minimum wage and crowd out illegals or raise the taxes of the people who favor open borders in order to shift the burden onto them, making said group less likely to continue supporting immigration, legal and illegal.

    “California! It was a middle class, reliably Republican paradise fifty years ago. The only thing that has stayed the same since then is the weather and the landscape.”

    Didn’t the republican north try to secede from the Democrat south not long ago? Portent of the future, perhaps?

    “These same people then turn around again and claim it is conservative lawyers that are the true AA recipients.”

    You see that a lot on social media. They never break it down and explain how. It would seem reasonable to assume that if only so many seats are available, automatically setting aside some for POC would make it more difficult for whites to get the remaining seats if selection is merit-based – fewer seats equals more competition for those that remain.

    prrrrrreeeeeeach it brother! let them hear you in the back of the congregation!

  173. @Peripatetic Commenter

    The only way for the GOP to counter the pro-POC party will be to become the pro-white party, something unthinkable as currently constituted.
     
    The GoP will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to that platform. They still think they can get a decent percentage of the Hispanic vote.

    Perhaps it is not worth it.

    Perhaps we have to do everything we can to ensure Whites see what is going on and that the Democrats are truly, the Black Party.

    As Steve Sailer has suggested, the GOP doesn’t need to explicitly be the White party, they just have to make sure that the Dems are perceived as the Black party. Especially by Hispanics and Asians. That could scramble the electorate.

  174. A politician who not only owns but emphatically promotes focusing on POCs without regard to whites is jettisoned to the top of the Democrat party.

    I haven’t read all the comments so this may be redundant, but just doing my part to keep things pedantic I’ll note that one doesn’t jettison things to the top, but overboard.

    Also, POCs would be pronounced POX? And wouldn’t POX be more appropriate given that Latinx is not a color? And that the party of the POX is gender inclusive? Pee-oh-seas just doesn’t have the same ring to it that pox has does it?

  175. @Big Dick Bandit
    ....what?

    i'm saying that people would happily support *reducing* immigration because it's unfair for immigrants to suppress wages, collect benefits, and crowd classrooms.

    i'm teaching you how to argue against immigration, genius.

    i’m saying that people would happily support *reducing* immigration because it’s unfair for immigrants to suppress wages, collect benefits, and crowd classrooms.

    i’m teaching you how to argue against immigration, genius.

    Argue against immigration? Polls have consistently shown that no such arguments are needed. The problem is that the elites don’t give a shit what the public wants. The elites want wages suppressed and costs externalized. The elites’ children aren’t sitting in classrooms full of mestizos and negroes.

    Quit stealing large cocks and pay attention genius. Beat those giant phalluses against the inside of your head until you come up with the genius plan to make the politicians who crave and need vast sums of money to gain and keep their privileges suddenly reverse course and do what the majority wants rather than what their elite benefactors want.

    • Replies: @Big Dick Bandit
    if self-identifying white progressives cared half as much about immigration as your average MAGA, the wall would have shovels in the ground tomorrow--no matter what the elites think.

    according to Gallup, only 13% of Democrats want to decrease immigration. that is nothing, and could very easily be a big something...if the case is made correctly as part of a progressive economics pitch.

    keep bleating in your little bubble of decrepit conspiracy theorists tho! it's making a difference, really!!
  176. @Stan d Mute

    i’m saying that people would happily support *reducing* immigration because it’s unfair for immigrants to suppress wages, collect benefits, and crowd classrooms.

    i’m teaching you how to argue against immigration, genius.
     
    Argue against immigration? Polls have consistently shown that no such arguments are needed. The problem is that the elites don’t give a shit what the public wants. The elites want wages suppressed and costs externalized. The elites’ children aren’t sitting in classrooms full of mestizos and negroes.

    Quit stealing large cocks and pay attention genius. Beat those giant phalluses against the inside of your head until you come up with the genius plan to make the politicians who crave and need vast sums of money to gain and keep their privileges suddenly reverse course and do what the majority wants rather than what their elite benefactors want.

    if self-identifying white progressives cared half as much about immigration as your average MAGA, the wall would have shovels in the ground tomorrow–no matter what the elites think.

    according to Gallup, only 13% of Democrats want to decrease immigration. that is nothing, and could very easily be a big something…if the case is made correctly as part of a progressive economics pitch.

    keep bleating in your little bubble of decrepit conspiracy theorists tho! it’s making a difference, really!!

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS