RSS
It’s hard not to feel for the audacious engineer on the AI team that that put Pete Buttigieg together. He thought, reasonably enough, that crossing a couple of wires on the back end to give the staid Midwestern bot a bit of extra flair would be a nice touch. Now he’s out of a job. It appears that while the country is ready for “I do”, it’s not there yet on “si, se puede”.
The percentages of people, by selected demographic characteristics, who say they hope to see a gay president during their lifetimes follows. “Not sure” responses, constituting 32% of the total, are excluded. The residual values are thus the percentages who answered “no” to the question, explicitly saying that they do not hope to have a gay president during their lifetimes:
A familiar pattern emerges. Woke white Democrats and based blacks are way out of sync. The survey does not break results out by both race and partisan affiliation, but given the strong Democrat leaning among non-whites, it’s easy to deduce that white Democrats are almost unanimously excited about the prospect–and no one else much is.
Another recurring pattern that crops up here is that of millennials representing Peak Wokeness, with Zoomers moderating a bit from the generation preceding them.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Persian
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
His real problem is not his sexuality: his real problem is that he’s a walking, talking resume, and everybody knows it. With the failures of the ruling class in the United States, who wants to trust a man that would have been the type to screw you over if that meant getting a step up on the road to joining them?
The Twinkie demographic (older Asian male Republicans) least woke, again!
Getting slightly damaged goods on the top shelf BECAUSE they are damaged?
What would the technical advantages be?
Except showing to everybody the galactic-tier progressivism that can be had on Planet Woke?
And winning a gotcha moment over all the Deplorables of the Axis of PeopleIdontlike.
And have a feel-good conversation in the gaybar?
I don’t trust gays, they hate the men, look down on the Women and they hate themselves. They’ll have sex with anything that moves and will exploit everyone and every opportunity. they’re parasites.
This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read on this website.
I'm in an industry where gays have a lot of power. I've never found this to be true.Replies: @Michael S
The poll omits, apparently, an option for, “A person’s sexual preference is utterly irrelevant to my choice for president.”
Sort of goes along with the thing about gender. It’s okay for a woman to vote for a woman candidate because she’s a woman candidate. In fact it’s actually required. But to suggest that a man might vote for a man because he’s a man is to accuse him of a crime against nature. This whole “identity politics” thing is “voodoo politics” at it’s very worst. It’s boiling down to throw all the candidates in the millpond and choose whichever one doesn’t sink.
The Maltese ButtPlug ain’t getting the Blacks and Mestizos and Asians all kinds of hot and bothered?
Good!
This Buttigieg guy is a damn fraud and he knows it!
Buttigieg is a nasty politician whore for evil and immoral plutocrat globalizer scoundrels!
Buttigieg goes to WINE CAVE donor orgies where all kinds of horrible and gruesome things must occur. Buttigieg bends over and grabs that donor cash like a bastard. H. P. Lovecraft could write a good horror story about the unspeakable doings and dreadfully indecent things going on in the BUTTIGIEG WINE CAVE donor orgies. Harry Truman wouldn’t have gone to such a wild and debauched thing, and neither would his wife, Bess!
Harry Truman was a crooked crook from some Democrat Party Organized Crime Syndicate out somewhere in what some explorers call “the Midwest.” But Harry Truman ain’t no ButtPlug, and Harry Truman ate steaks and conducted his Kansas City crookery with decency and no funny business of a Buttigieg kind.
All kidding aside, I would vote for a Pim Fortuyn type gay political leader that calls for the implementation of an immigration moratorium and the deportation of all the illegal alien invaders without any hesitation of any kind.
https://vdare.com/articles/pim-fortuyn-s-murderer-revealed-as-immigration-enthusiast
It’s a very strange possibility. Mr first, guy, dude, man – certainly not husband. The entire enterprise is socially gosh. Because this dynamic is hinged on behavior as well as state of mind. It is relevent for political considration. Unlike skin color or hair, or eye color, height it is not benign. It has a definitive meaning. And for me that ,meaning is retro — against the very existence of living. There is nothing about the behavior that moves humans forward, it produces nothing. It’s value in a social context is one that no society would adopt as any kind of foundation. But or does reflect just how bankrupt the argument by whites is regarding HBD and policy or social structure.
Here is a dynamic that utterly is anti everything a community desires, yet look at what ease they have moved from a private domain to not just public acceptance but advocacy —
And the primary promoters have been whites in and out of church, in and out of science, in and out politics, almost exclusively in academia (though out as well). It runs counter to the very purpose of living — human flourishing and sustaining — it takes and gives very little in return.
Now i a,m going to defend anyone’s right to their choice of expression with another human being, most of which is best kept private. However, as policy given its meaning, I am going to reject it as wholly detrimental to community and certainly not a model I will endorse for the country’s future generations.
President of the US, not on a bet. And while the country has been about berating blacks, this population has been infiltrating into the most influential sectors of our society — and here’s the kicker,
they did so by claiming the effects of discrimination that we claim doesn’t exist for blacks. That’s a clear sign of just how bankrupt your hbd nonsense is and how how duplicitous it has been in deconstructing the country. All almost to a man and women in the forefront of effective advocacy like murdering children in the womb — led by whites.
It is embarrassing to listen to listen men and women with PHD’s twattel on and on about skin color and moral decay as they have embraced this dynamic as normal and even superior to people of black skin all the while using the black social history as the cause for advance, something that simply has no support in reality by way of comparison.
And its no wonder why a community would see white leadership a tad more than empty hat filling on social acceptability having actively or inactively endorsed this behavior. It’s a kin to a legal profession that demands one submit evidence that might be tainted as fraudulent all the while holding suspect the one who questions the same.
Untrustworthy . . . the system that can arrest by way of false accusation and openly engage in deceptive practices —–
who upon seeing such behavior would take the system seriously.
Now the gentleman in question may be a fan person, smart, a good speaker, nice polite, etc. (though apperantly just as willing to use b;lacks as targets to boost his tough on crime credientials for smoking marijuana –)
Laugh. As someone who wants to keep marijuana illegal — I have to say it’s uproarious to watch the hypocrisy Candidate whose life is backwards to any real existence and growth literally, who claims to be socially progressive but is tough on crime by making sure those black dangerous pot smokers stay off the streets.
Ahhh, white superiority at its finest. As a conservative — it’s embarrassing to say the least.
You get very worked up over facts that cast your group into a bad light, such as the murder rate. You're all about the "Not ALL" when it comes to your people, your group. But you can not, will not, apply the same "not ALL" to wypipo. Never seen you do that. Never. This is tribalism. Tribalism is killing my country, has killed the country my parents grew up in. "More tribalism" won't fix the problems of tribalism. But either Bernie or Bloomberg are most likely to be nominated by the D's. More tribalism.
Why weren’t things like this when Saving Private Ryan was still showing in the movie house back in ’98, would Captain Miller defect to the Waffen SS if he knew this is the outcome of victory?
“Ahhh, white superiority at its finest. As a conservative — it’s embarrassing to say the least.”
I am looking forward to the genetic frequency dissertation that explains the superior status of same sex behavior over hair color.
Has a country ever elected a gay leader?
I know there have been gay leaders of countries, but this is a separate point. I mean one actually elected by a vote of the people. Not the inner party apparatus, or some coalition of politicians. I mean a gay who won at least 50.1% in a wide election.
I’m going to guess no.
Abraham Lincoln was directly responsible for the deaths of over 700, 000 Americans in Abraham Lincoln's War Of Northern Aggression.
George W Bush and Dickweed Cheney are bend over boys for the JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire.Replies: @songbird
So, as you say, no.
Also, all of them were "elected" since the massive globohomo propaganda campaign, two of the five are lesbians, which is barely a real thing, and all of them are in small unimportant countries.Replies: @songbird
Why do we have to know? I would have never suspected Senator Larry “Widestance’ Craig was a Tearoom Cowboy until he got caught invading the stall next to him at a Minneapolis? airport. That may have destroyed his marriage and political career but he was a better Senator than John McCain, Mitt Romney or Lamar Alexander.
I know there have been gay leaders of countries, but this is a separate point. I mean one actually elected by a vote of the people. Not the inner party apparatus, or some coalition of politicians. I mean a gay who won at least 50.1% in a wide election.
I'm going to guess no.Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Almost Missouri, @Tlotsi
Abraham Lincoln was a drug addict homosexual lawyer.
Abraham Lincoln was directly responsible for the deaths of over 700, 000 Americans in Abraham Lincoln’s War Of Northern Aggression.
George W Bush and Dickweed Cheney are bend over boys for the JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire.
I know there have been gay leaders of countries, but this is a separate point. I mean one actually elected by a vote of the people. Not the inner party apparatus, or some coalition of politicians. I mean a gay who won at least 50.1% in a wide election.
I'm going to guess no.Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Almost Missouri, @Tlotsi
According to Wiki, five, but all of them were, as you shrewdly put it, elected by the inner party apparatus or some coalition of politicians.
So, as you say, no.
Also, all of them were “elected” since the massive globohomo propaganda campaign, two of the five are lesbians, which is barely a real thing, and all of them are in small unimportant countries.
So, as you say, no.
Also, all of them were "elected" since the massive globohomo propaganda campaign, two of the five are lesbians, which is barely a real thing, and all of them are in small unimportant countries.Replies: @songbird
That’s interesting. Perhaps, their wokeness is really part of signalling against bigger countries. An ego thing, about demonstrating how much better they are.
Abraham Lincoln was directly responsible for the deaths of over 700, 000 Americans in Abraham Lincoln's War Of Northern Aggression.
George W Bush and Dickweed Cheney are bend over boys for the JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire.Replies: @songbird
A certain amount of gay revisionism might be considered strategic, when you put it in those terms.
“Has a country ever elected a gay leader?”
Frankly none of my business, unless said candidate makes it a social or policy issue.
We have had a president who was affiliated with being a dandy — and hung out with a group of men so referenced. What that meant is however, speculative.
I see the male-female gap rearing it’s ugly head again as well. Not that any of us should be surprised.
The Democratic base is being split into the single white female millennial bloc and the minority boomer and gen-X bloc. And they can’t agree on anything anymore except Orange Man Bad.
And it looks like the woke white bloc is winning, so I expect to see low turnout for them in the general. Strange as it sounds, Mike Bloomberg might be the party’s best chance, as neither bloc particularly likes him, but probably neither hates him enough to “forget” to vote either.
Frankly none of my business, unless said candidate makes it a social or policy issue.
We have had a president who was affiliated with being a dandy -- and hung out with a group of men so referenced. What that meant is however, speculative.Replies: @songbird
So, if I understand correctly, you would support a president who frequented the bathhouses of San Fran, if it were a kept secret? And think that there would be no linkage to politics whatsoever, if he did not promote specifically gay policies?
Peace.Replies: @songbird
Well, if it was kept a solid secret, how would we know to have an opinion about it?
Peace.
My position is that it is a moral fallacy to suppose that gayness does not matter whatsoever, if it is kept reasonably secret. In the Cold War, gays were specially targeted for blackmail - I don't think it was 100% just because the social taboos, though obviously they were a necessary pre-condition.
Or, to take homosexuality out of it, I don't believe that Ted Kennedy's exploits were widely printed, before he met the Devil. It only came out after he was dead that he once rented an entire whorehouse in Chile. Would he have been involved in so many political corruptions, like AIPAC, if he believed marriage was a holy thing? I doubt it.Replies: @Talha
Gays “hate the men.”
I’m in an industry where gays have a lot of power. I’ve never found this to be true.
Buttigieg is a proxy for the elites who desire demographic change in Western countries and the erasure of nation states. The same elites who openly mock normies while funding the destruction of civilization. Buttigieg is an obvious puppet. He even has the face of a ventriloquist dummy.
I'm in an industry where gays have a lot of power. I've never found this to be true.Replies: @Michael S
Probably more accurate to say that gays have a love-hate relationship with masculinity. They want masculine men for their own relations (to use the term loosely), but also seek to lower the status of hetero men and boys wherever they go in sufficient numbers (churches, scouts, etc.). They then force everyone else to swear fealty – just look at any corporate Twitter feed during “pride month”.
Giving any institution a “gay-friendly” or “LGBT-friendly” image is necessarily going to lower the status of heterosexual men. When every single one of them stops using the term “homophobic”, that’s when I’ll believe that their interests might align with those of mainstream society. Otherwise they are, at best, unreliable friends and frequent enemies.
As usual, personal exemptions apply, but this being Unz, not Twitter, I assume we all understand the concept of group differences and group interests.
By design, gays are typically exempt from female influence, and often tend to be either contemptuous behind their back, or outright misogynistic at worst.
Gays aren't numerous enough, even with all the phony bisexual younger women, to bend corporations to their will. Pride is top down, and in many cases the typical gay line employee is just as disinterested as everyone else.One of the worst aspect of the gay kulturkampf was that it created a hyper-masculine backlash with conservative men. This is particularly pronounced with Gen Xers like Mike Cernovich and other manosphere "early adopters".Replies: @Cloudbuster
Wasn’t the woke thing meant to refer to an understanding of white racism, the evils of whites, and the lasting effects of them?
Here is a dynamic that utterly is anti everything a community desires, yet look at what ease they have moved from a private domain to not just public acceptance but advocacy --
And the primary promoters have been whites in and out of church, in and out of science, in and out politics, almost exclusively in academia (though out as well). It runs counter to the very purpose of living -- human flourishing and sustaining -- it takes and gives very little in return.
Now i a,m going to defend anyone's right to their choice of expression with another human being, most of which is best kept private. However, as policy given its meaning, I am going to reject it as wholly detrimental to community and certainly not a model I will endorse for the country's future generations.
President of the US, not on a bet. And while the country has been about berating blacks, this population has been infiltrating into the most influential sectors of our society --- and here's the kicker,
they did so by claiming the effects of discrimination that we claim doesn't exist for blacks. That's a clear sign of just how bankrupt your hbd nonsense is and how how duplicitous it has been in deconstructing the country. All almost to a man and women in the forefront of effective advocacy like murdering children in the womb -- led by whites.
It is embarrassing to listen to listen men and women with PHD's twattel on and on about skin color and moral decay as they have embraced this dynamic as normal and even superior to people of black skin all the while using the black social history as the cause for advance, something that simply has no support in reality by way of comparison.
And its no wonder why a community would see white leadership a tad more than empty hat filling on social acceptability having actively or inactively endorsed this behavior. It's a kin to a legal profession that demands one submit evidence that might be tainted as fraudulent all the while holding suspect the one who questions the same.
Untrustworthy . . . the system that can arrest by way of false accusation and openly engage in deceptive practices -----
who upon seeing such behavior would take the system seriously.
Now the gentleman in question may be a fan person, smart, a good speaker, nice polite, etc. (though apperantly just as willing to use b;lacks as targets to boost his tough on crime credientials for smoking marijuana --)
Laugh. As someone who wants to keep marijuana illegal -- I have to say it's uproarious to watch the hypocrisy Candidate whose life is backwards to any real existence and growth literally, who claims to be socially progressive but is tough on crime by making sure those black dangerous pot smokers stay off the streets.
Ahhh, white superiority at its finest. As a conservative -- it's embarrassing to say the least.Replies: @anon
And the primary promoters have been whites in and out of church, in and out of science, in and out politics, almost exclusively in academia (though out as well).
Laughing.
You get very worked up over facts that cast your group into a bad light, such as the murder rate. You’re all about the “Not ALL” when it comes to your people, your group.
But you can not, will not, apply the same “not ALL” to wypipo. Never seen you do that. Never.
This is tribalism. Tribalism is killing my country, has killed the country my parents grew up in. “More tribalism” won’t fix the problems of tribalism. But either Bernie or Bloomberg are most likely to be nominated by the D’s. More tribalism.
Peace.Replies: @songbird
Well, to clean up my grammar, let’s specify that it was a secret known only to a few.
My position is that it is a moral fallacy to suppose that gayness does not matter whatsoever, if it is kept reasonably secret. In the Cold War, gays were specially targeted for blackmail – I don’t think it was 100% just because the social taboos, though obviously they were a necessary pre-condition.
Or, to take homosexuality out of it, I don’t believe that Ted Kennedy’s exploits were widely printed, before he met the Devil. It only came out after he was dead that he once rented an entire whorehouse in Chile. Would he have been involved in so many political corruptions, like AIPAC, if he believed marriage was a holy thing? I doubt it.
The thing is, if it was kept a secret, you could only realistically judge him on the policy he advocates, which would be the case whether straight (plenty of hetero people are full-throttle gay madness rights) or gay.
Peace.Replies: @songbird
I’m not a fan of the subversive tendencies of gays, but your thinking is outside of my experience.
By design, gays are typically exempt from female influence, and often tend to be either contemptuous behind their back, or outright misogynistic at worst.
Gays aren’t numerous enough, even with all the phony bisexual younger women, to bend corporations to their will. Pride is top down, and in many cases the typical gay line employee is just as disinterested as everyone else.
One of the worst aspect of the gay kulturkampf was that it created a hyper-masculine backlash with conservative men. This is particularly pronounced with Gen Xers like Mike Cernovich and other manosphere “early adopters”.
Yet, weirdly, virtually every major corporation in the country toes the Pride line.
I think you are wrong.
It doesn't take large numbers. It takes persistence and a loud minority.Replies: @216
By design, gays are typically exempt from female influence, and often tend to be either contemptuous behind their back, or outright misogynistic at worst.
Gays aren't numerous enough, even with all the phony bisexual younger women, to bend corporations to their will. Pride is top down, and in many cases the typical gay line employee is just as disinterested as everyone else.One of the worst aspect of the gay kulturkampf was that it created a hyper-masculine backlash with conservative men. This is particularly pronounced with Gen Xers like Mike Cernovich and other manosphere "early adopters".Replies: @Cloudbuster
Gays aren’t numerous enough, even with all the phony bisexual younger women, to bend corporations to their will.
Yet, weirdly, virtually every major corporation in the country toes the Pride line.
I think you are wrong.
It doesn’t take large numbers. It takes persistence and a loud minority.
Signalling on environmentalism, labor rights, that costs a lot more. Paid family leave, oof.
Conservatives have repeatedly shown no efficacy in boycotting a company to change its behavior. It only works on companies in the firearms industry (which isn't representative of the US at large).
Gays agitating for Pride, could just as easily turn around and organize unions, demand green energy and recycling, and call for a "global living wage" policy. But they don't. It's top down.Replies: @Michael S
Yet, weirdly, virtually every major corporation in the country toes the Pride line.
I think you are wrong.
It doesn't take large numbers. It takes persistence and a loud minority.Replies: @216
Signalling on GayPride costs you little in the West, and as long as you don’t run gay advertisements abroad in the Third World it doesn’t cost you there either.
Signalling on environmentalism, labor rights, that costs a lot more. Paid family leave, oof.
Conservatives have repeatedly shown no efficacy in boycotting a company to change its behavior. It only works on companies in the firearms industry (which isn’t representative of the US at large).
Gays agitating for Pride, could just as easily turn around and organize unions, demand green energy and recycling, and call for a “global living wage” policy. But they don’t. It’s top down.
It's standard entryism. There's no difference between what the trannies are doing today and what the gays have been doing for the past 2 decades; the only difference is that the tranny stuff is more novel and still more creepy to most normies, but expect "conservatives" to fix that in another 5-10 years, and then you'll all be saying you don't see the big deal with them either, they're just like anyone else!Replies: @216
Signalling on environmentalism, labor rights, that costs a lot more. Paid family leave, oof.
Conservatives have repeatedly shown no efficacy in boycotting a company to change its behavior. It only works on companies in the firearms industry (which isn't representative of the US at large).
Gays agitating for Pride, could just as easily turn around and organize unions, demand green energy and recycling, and call for a "global living wage" policy. But they don't. It's top down.Replies: @Michael S
Yes, it’s top down. Do you not think there are some gays either at the top or influencing the top who are pushing this?
It’s standard entryism. There’s no difference between what the trannies are doing today and what the gays have been doing for the past 2 decades; the only difference is that the tranny stuff is more novel and still more creepy to most normies, but expect “conservatives” to fix that in another 5-10 years, and then you’ll all be saying you don’t see the big deal with them either, they’re just like anyone else!
It's standard entryism. There's no difference between what the trannies are doing today and what the gays have been doing for the past 2 decades; the only difference is that the tranny stuff is more novel and still more creepy to most normies, but expect "conservatives" to fix that in another 5-10 years, and then you'll all be saying you don't see the big deal with them either, they're just like anyone else!Replies: @216
Brad Polumbo has already talked up “FTM” as superior to “MTF”, because it allows the inclusion of the TERF movement into Conservatism Inc.
My position is that it is a moral fallacy to suppose that gayness does not matter whatsoever, if it is kept reasonably secret. In the Cold War, gays were specially targeted for blackmail - I don't think it was 100% just because the social taboos, though obviously they were a necessary pre-condition.
Or, to take homosexuality out of it, I don't believe that Ted Kennedy's exploits were widely printed, before he met the Devil. It only came out after he was dead that he once rented an entire whorehouse in Chile. Would he have been involved in so many political corruptions, like AIPAC, if he believed marriage was a holy thing? I doubt it.Replies: @Talha
I agree here.
The thing is, if it was kept a secret, you could only realistically judge him on the policy he advocates, which would be the case whether straight (plenty of hetero people are full-throttle gay madness rights) or gay.
Peace.
But take two candidates expressing the same policies. I would probably prefer the one with children than the one without.
Well, duh.
There have been British veterans of WW2 that have stated in the papers that if they had known how the country would turn out, they’d have never have volunteered.
I know there have been gay leaders of countries, but this is a separate point. I mean one actually elected by a vote of the people. Not the inner party apparatus, or some coalition of politicians. I mean a gay who won at least 50.1% in a wide election.
I'm going to guess no.Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Almost Missouri, @Tlotsi
Ever hear of Obama?
Macron is almost certainly gay, though.
“But you can not, will not, apply the same “not ALL” to wypipo. Never seen you do that. Never.
This is tribalism. Tribalism is killing my country, has killed the country my parents grew up in. “More tribalism” won’t fix the problems of tribalism. But either Bernie or Bloomberg are most likely to be nominated by the D’s. More tribalism.”
I have no idea what the second sentence actually means however,
I think I will allow my record of views concerning my group, conservatives speak for itself, They have been more than critical.
Tribalism is a term intended to imply warfare by “native peoples” as savages. The problem is that the descriptive in modern terms doesn’t work. Because tribalism is applicable to any and all groups engaged in vying for influence at any level. And that has been in play before the founding.
So if tribalism, is killing the country, our founders were deep in the game as are we. My pushback is to HBD as a primary means of political sharing or if you prefer tribalism”. As to my comments about same relational behavior – it applies across the board regardless of one’s political of biological disposition.
“So, if I understand correctly, you would support a president who frequented the bathhouses of San Fran, if it were a kept secret? And think that there would be no linkage to politics whatsoever, if he did not promote specifically gay policies?”
Laughing.
uhhh, excuse me . . . if someone did something in secret — I wouldn’t know it. Hence the term secret . . . .
As to your second question — no apparently, you do not get me correctly — at all, in any manner or anyway. It is very clear I would not vote for anyone who engaged such behavior. It was a very very tough hurdle to vote for the current executive based on his views on the behavior.
“This is tribalism. Tribalism is killing my country, has killed the country my parents grew up in. “More tribalism” won’t fix the problems of tribalism. But either Bernie or Bloomberg are most likely to be nominated by the D’s. More tribalism.”
Politics is tribalism . . . I can’t solve that for you. But I am not inclined to embrace same relational behavior regardless what political tribe advances or condones it.
Put Obama next to Deval Patrick and tell me which one seems gay. Obama would seem masculine by comparison.
Macron is almost certainly gay, though.
The thing is, if it was kept a secret, you could only realistically judge him on the policy he advocates, which would be the case whether straight (plenty of hetero people are full-throttle gay madness rights) or gay.
Peace.Replies: @songbird
I concur.
Well, I’m mainly thinking in hypotheticals – I guess that is the weakness of my argument.
But take two candidates expressing the same policies. I would probably prefer the one with children than the one without.
Yes, it seems like a bizarre thing to actively hope for.
We are heading into an increasingly superstitious world.