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
The End of Isonomy
🔊 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

Net support (opposition) to California’s Proposition 16 follows. If passed it will allow for racial and sexual characteristics to be used in considerations of public employment, contracts, and education by repealing Proposition 209, a 1996 amendment that prohibited the use of race and sex in government employment and educational placement:

Proposition 209 was modeled on the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We are entering an era when that landmark piece of legislation, considered progressive at the time, becomes a major legal bulwark frustrating the contemporary progressive drive to privilege blacks and Hispanics at the expense of whites and Asians. As the latter man the barricades of the CRA, they’d be wise to further expand the protections the law provides to include political orientation while they still have some hope of doing so.

Isonomy is yesterday’s progressivism and tomorrow’s reaction. When lawfare ceases to offer protection to the persecuted, warfare will. We should really try to avoid that, but it doesn’t look like we will.

Parenthetically, the relatively tepid support among women relative to men is unexpected, but I double-checked the data and that’s what they say.

 
Hide 54 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. MattinLA says:

    If this continues, Prop 16 will fail and racial quotas will be defeated. Not that this will stop them from cheating and implementing them anyway…

  2. Asians seem to be proving their stereotype as the smartest race by net opposing it. Better than the sorry lot of Whites with net support of a measure that not only flies in the face of their own interests, but is counter to historical White support for “egalitarianism.”

    • Replies: @Realist
  3. nebulafox says:

    >We are entering an era when that landmark piece of legislation, considered progressive at the time, becomes a major legal bulwark frustrating the contemporary progressive drive to privilege blacks and Hispanics at the expense of whites and Asians.

    Correction: middle/working class whites and Asians, particularly the males. The race factor is there, but there’s also a massive class factor in all of this: if you cannot present WokePoints or have access to UMC activities/guidance, then it doesn’t matter how bright you are, you have strikes against you. They are the ones who have the potential to pose problems for elites should they have access to elite pipelines. But more significantly, those are the demographics who the entry class is scared might pose a threat to their ordinary kids. The oligarchs might dictate policy, but it is the upper-middle class that is driving the cultural zeitgeist of the age.

    Of course, we can’t say that, because “ordinary” means you might as well have Down’s Syndrome in UMC America today. On a less judgemental level, it does mean declassment in an era where the consequences of that are severe and harder to reverse. The UMC might have expanded massively in the past 30 years, but the reverse side of that is more precariousness.

    If your system is such that even the majority of the winners are more miserable than they were before, then that tells you something.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @anon
  4. Twinkie says:

    to privilege blacks and Hispanics at the expense of whites and Asians.

    WTF. Why is the net support among whites positive? Are Cali whites that cucked or that afraid to answer a survey honestly? Cripes, these people in Cali deserve to be ruled by the Dictatorship of the Woketariat. Those of you who are undeserving of this “honor,” please exit the state and find new homes and hopefully strengthen the sane fraction in the next domino states, please.

    Setting aside the sex category, the Twinkie demographic is again the only sane one (Asian, 50-64, conservative).

    People talk about “white flight,” but maybe “(Fancy) Asian flight” is a better predictor/canary in the mine for residential/real estate issues.

    • Agree: Jack Armstrong
    • Replies: @Realist
    , @res
  5. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:

    You don’t know what you’re talking about, Twinkie. Neither does Nebulafox.

    Affirmative Action doesn’t hurt white people in states like California, because they’re the minority now.

    Affirmative Action becomes meritocratic for whites when whites are the minority. The trope of “less qualified minorities getting selected over more qualified whites” has died, because there’s no longer a huge pool of overqualified whites like there was in 1980 when California was 79% white.

    Under majority-minority affirmative action, there are enough Hispanics and Blacks on the right end of the bell curve of their respective populations, to supllant whites of a similar academic achievement. That’s why university systems across the country are coming out strong in defense of affirmative action now. There’s no longer an IQ argument against it.

    The only people who are mad about affirmative action now are criminal-minded thug Asians such as yourself, who came to this country as a student bloc (one trick ponies) and attempted to subvert our institutions and make them Asian. Affirmative action is in the best interest of Old Stock Americans since Asian-Americans never really contributed anything of an historically significant nature to this country.

    As for women, they’re probably mad that more black and Hispanic women will have means with education, meaning more competition for mates with white and Asian women. As usual, it’s just totally undeserved privilege and exclusion getting checked, and the affected parties freaking out and acting like a snot-nosed brat when they are made to share with others, or maybe try to become more appealling to the opposite sex (something that is difficult to do with the angry, in-your-face attitude, pancake gluteal dimensions and the crackwhore strut that is ubiquitous among middle and upper class females.)

  6. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:

    Forgot to add Cloudbuster to the list of Unz contributors without a shred of knowledge or common sense on the issue of affirmative action.

  7. Realist says:
    @Cloudbuster

    Well said. There are lots of really stupid Whites.

    • Replies: @Svevlad
  8. Realist says:
    @Twinkie

    Are Cali whites that cucked or that afraid to answer a survey honestly?

    Yes, most Californians are fucking stupid.

  9. It is not clear to me what they want from U.S. whites, nor how they think about white people. Large numbers of U.S. blacks and Jews are just outright hostile, which simplifies things, I suppose; but what about the even larger number of U.S. nonwhites that are largely nonhostile? What outcome do they desire?

    I am slightly skeptical of Hispanic as a meaningful category. (I keep getting the impression that social divisions between various kinds of Hispanics might be as great as divisions between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites. The category might be a bad category.)

    I wish that I understood these things better.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  10. Mr Epigone says:

    Isonomy is yesterday’s progressivism and tomorrow’s reaction. When lawfare ceases to offer protection to the persecuted, warfare will. We should really try to avoid that, but it doesn’t look like we will.

    I say:

    You may fire on Fort Sumter when you’re ready, Mr Blogger!

    Civil War II and a concept of a CORE America and a CORE ancestral group and central banking and monetary extremism and anti-White propaganda and asset bubbles and the imminent destruction of the rancid Republican Party are the subtextual ingredients of DISSOLUTION and the inauguration of Biden as president will bring on the quick DISILLUSION of millions of Democrat Party voters when Biden slams on the brakes to all this Markey and AOC and Bernie Sanders talk about actually helping regular Americans a bit.

    I see Civil War II to be about sovereign(government) debt secessionism from young people who refuse to submit anymore to all this debt being slopped out to Greedy White Geezers like nobody’s ever seen before.

    I don’t foresee the upcoming Civil War II to be all that bloody and it will just mean that SECESSIONISM has many contexts and meanings and not just some English Northerners and English Southerners butchering each other with wild abandon till exhaustion.

    Yeah, I know they weren’t all English and some weren’t English at all — I have three ancestors who fought in the American Secessionary War from the British Empire and they were German, Welsh and Irish and I hope somewhere I got one who was English — but Kevin Phillips and others who talk of the English and their cousins’ wars have a point.

    Had to look up ISONOMY.

    My reaction is the law is an ass and most men and women are crooked and men and women say what the law is. Harrumph!

    Tweets from 2014 and 2015:

  11. anon[123] • Disclaimer says:

    I don’t think more affirmative action is likely to cause a war. I’m more concerned about the sudden and widespread perversion of the law wrt mob violence. It’s obviously coordinated and I really worry what happens when we end up with a malevolent DNC AG. It really is time to start taking this secession stuff seriously — other than finding a way to circle the wagons as best you can, this is the only political project worth pursuing. Can’t negotiate with terrorists, etc…

  12. t says:

    FYI there was another poll that showed much lower levels of support. On affirmative action a lot depends on the wording.

    https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4cd2r446

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    , @res
  13. @V. K. Ovelund

    It is not clear to me what they want from U.S. whites

    Submission.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  14. @Cloudbuster

    It is not clear to me what they want from U.S. whites

    Submission.

    I do not say that you are wrong, but how do you know this?

    One suspects that the truth of the matter is multifaceted and complex. One wishes that we had never de-whited the U.S. for, if we hadn’t, then we’d not have to deal with the problem; but since we do have to deal with it, I would like to know more about it.

    If I must oppose the nonwhite position (or positions) then I would at least like to know what it is that I am to oppose.

  15. @t

    Those results diverge significantly from these. I guess we will see in a month who did a better job calling it.

  16. res says:
    @Twinkie

    Are Cali whites that cucked or that afraid to answer a survey honestly?

    I’d say some of both with the former being more important.

    Those of you who are undeserving of this “honor,” please exit the state and find new homes and hopefully strengthen the sane fraction in the next domino states, please.

    The people in surrounding states have not been enjoying that process playing out over the last few decades. It’s the Will Rogers phenomenon in political form.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Rogers_phenomenon

    In other words, the more conservative Californians moving to more sympathetic states tends to make both places more liberal. The corollary to that is the new arrivals then tend to want to change their new home to be more like CA. You can imagine how the locals feel about that. Then there is what the importation of CA real estate wealth does to housing prices in the receiving states.

    Setting aside the sex category, the Twinkie demographic is again the only sane one (Asian, 50-64, conservative).

    Worth mentioning that the sample for that question was 588 likely voters. They mention a credibility interval of +/- 5.4%, but don’t say if that applies only to the overall results or also to each of the crosstabs. The page AE linked allows presenting the results as counts rather than percentages so one can get an idea of the sample sizes involved and judge validity a bit.

    I don’t know if you saw Ron’s post on Prop 16, but in case not, here is a link.
    https://www.unz.com/runz/will-california-restore-affirmative-action/
    It is based on a PPIC poll from two weeks earlier.
    https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-government-september-2020.pdf

    What immediately leaps out at me is how much the total proportions have changed. (AE, would it be possible for you to include the total numbers in your graphic? They help give a quick bottom line for how the vote looks)

    Ron’s poll was 31/47/22% for yes/no/don’t know.
    This poll is 40/26/34%
    That is an immense change over just two weeks! (-16 to +14) And why would the don’t know proportion increase 50% as we get closer to the election? Is there some kind of major ad push going on?

    From the comments of Ron’s post, here is a poll I linked which focuses on Asians. I think you will like where your more detailed demographic falls. ; ) See question 16B.
    https://aapidata.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/aavs2020_crosstab_CAonly.html

    Ballotpedia has a poll aggregator for ballot measures.
    https://ballotpedia.org/2020_ballot_measure_polls#California

    It has not been updated with this poll yet, but it does show an additional poll: Berkeley IGS poll from 9/15 which gave a somewhat similar result to the PPIC poll: 33/41/26 or -8.
    The Berkeley poll also had a significantly smaller margin for error than the PPIC poll (+/- 2.0% vs. 4.3%)

    Looks to me like that PPIC poll missed by a bit. The 5x larger sample size of the Berkeley IGS poll should also allow for much more valid crosstabs (as an example, PPIC had a similar sample size to SurveyUSA and chose not to break out Asians and blacks because of sample size issues). I just looked at those crosstabs and the Asian and white numbers look very different from AE’s SurveyUSA results.

    AE, would it be possible to create versions of your graphic for all three polls so we can compare them?

    My initial inclination is to be very skeptical of the SurveyUSA results here. Hopefully there will be another larger sample poll soon.

    [MORE]

    (looking closer I see that this poll was online only, so presumably this does not apply, but I thought it was worth leaving in for informational purposes)
    One thing about that poll. Looking at their methodology page, I found this little nugget.
    https://www.surveyusa.net/methodology/

    The youngest male is requested on approximately 30% of calls to home phones, the youngest adult is requested on approximately 70% of calls.

    They go on to claim the following, but I wonder where exactly the bias needle lands.

    This method of intra-household selection reduces the potential for age and gender imbalance in the unweighted sample.

    They say that is only for survey’s conducted mixed mode, but it is odd they don’t have a sliding scale (based on just how mixed the mode is) given that.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  17. res says:
    @t

    Wording is a good point. Also worth noting that poll was two weeks ago and there was another poll which somewhat lined up with it THEN. See my comment just above for more on that.

    Let’s take a look at the different wordings used for the four different polls I have discussed along with the topline results.

    PPIC 9/13/20 (Ron’s poll): result 31/47/22% (yes/no/don’t know)
    https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-government-september-2020.pdf

    Proposition 16 is called the “Allows Diversity as a Factor in Public Employment, Education, and Contracting Decisions. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.” It permits government decision-making policies to consider race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in order to address diversity by repealing a constitutional provision prohibiting such policies. There would be no direct fiscal effect on state or local governments. The effects of the measure depend on the future choices of state and local government entities and are highly uncertain. If the election were being held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 16?

    Berkeley IGS 9/15/20 (your link): result 33/41/26
    https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4cd2r446

    In its latest statewide survey,the Berkeley IGS Pollpresented voters with the official “ballot labels” that voterswill see when voting on four of the most contentious and heavily contested propositions on the November 2020 statewide election ballot.Likely voters were then asked how they would vote if the election were held today.

    The ballot text is available here, but longer than I want to include.
    https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_16,_Repeal_Proposition_209_Affirmative_Action_Amendment_(2020)

    AAPI Asian only poll 9/15/20 (my link in Ron’s thread). This poll has multiple relevant questions which I will include separately.
    https://aapidata.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/aavs2020_crosstab_CAonly.html

    Q14_2: The government should do more to give Blacks equal rights with Whites
    result 7/6/25/19/7 Dstrong/Dsome/neither/Asome/Astrong/don’t know

    Q16A: Next, do you favor or oppose affirmative action programs designed to help [SPLIT SAMPLE Blacks/Black people], women, and other minorities get better access to higher education?
    result 62/18/20 favor/oppose/don’t know

    Q16B: This November, California voters will be asked to vote on ACA5 Proposition 16, which is a ballot measure that would restore affirmative action by repealing Proposition 209, which prohibited the state from considering race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, and public contracting.Thinking about this ballot measure, if the election were held today, would you vote Yes or No or are you undecided?
    result 35/21/36/7 yes/no/undecided/don’t know

    Note the important difference in wording in the split sample for Q16A. I did not see a breakout for the different versions.

    SurveyUSA 9/29/20 (AE’s link): result 40/26/34 Yes/No/Not certain
    https://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=d15fdb0d-701d-495c-a67f-e17bfcc3bf92

    6 The next statewide ballot measure, Proposition 16, would allow diversity to be considered as a factor in public employment, education, and contracting decisions. Are you …?

    Any thoughts on the different wordings? My take is that the SurveyUSA wording could generate more agreement.

    The Berkeley IGS poll (your link) appears superior to me. Both in sample size (5x the others) and in presenting the actual ballot text. I hope they do followups. The AAPI poll is useful for breaking Asians down into subgroups.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  18. @Anon

    You’re making a good point here but I think you’re taking the argument one step too far in the right direction. There is no “merit” on either side of this fight. What we have now is the undeserving children of the white middle class competing against undeserving AA minorities for the dwindling supply of academic, bureaucratic, and corporate make-work sinecures they’ve come to think of as their entitlements.

    Yes, it is unearned privilege all around. This is the classic “overproduction of elites” that precedes a collapse of the old order and a shakeup in the ruling establishment.

  19. @Anon

    Under majority-minority affirmative action, there are enough Hispanics and Blacks on the right end of the bell curve of their respective populations, to supllant whites of a similar academic achievement.

    Under your explanation, I’m still seeing “supplant Whites.” Explain a little more how this is beneficial to Whites.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Daniel H
  20. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Cloudbuster

    Well, that’s what affirmative action is. You’re hiring minority applicants to ensure that the workplace is diverse, which involves supplanting a white. Back when states like California were 80% white, that usually meant putting a less qualified and lower IQ nonwhite in a place where a better performing white person could have gone.

    And let’s not even pretend whites and nonwhites are going for the same jobs, especially white males. The only white males going for jobs/degrees that minorities compete for (humanities shit like art and history, filmmaking, bureacratic jobs, nursing, etc) are Jews, gays, and Leftists. Exactly the type of people the commenters on this website are always complaining about. Why not hurt them with affirmative action — unless you are one?

    Old American white males want to do stuff like diesel mechanic, welder, controlled demolition, police officer, etc. Things that women and minorities largely do not want to do. You guys are acting like working class white men were competing with women for Mexican American studies degrees or film degrees. It’s just so hilarious and pathetic how imperiled, fragile and schizophrenic some people are.

    As usual and in keeping with American history, Democrats are the party of Old Stock Americans while Republicans are the party of Negro factory workers, uppity Jewish females and undercover fags. It’s hilarious that they still have people brainwashed to believe otherwise. Vote for Biden (or you’re a crypto-carpetbagger and probable post-1848 descendant).

  21. Charlotte says:

    I don’t know why women are less likely to support Prop 16. That said, it occurs to me that women may not see removing a ban on considering sex as a law guaranteed to benefit women, even if Prop 16’s supporters do. For instance, couldn’t a state agency give preference to male applicants if Prop 16 passes? There are professions, like firefighting, where you could argue it’s logical to do so-maybe even well enough to head off challenges under federal law (I know, it’s laughable under the current state government, but still).

    Prop 16 strikes me as one of those socio-legal machinations beloved of people who fervently believe they’ll always control the levers of power.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  22. Rosie says:
    @Anon

    As for women, they’re probably mad that more black and Hispanic women will have means with education, meaning more competition for mates with white and Asian women.

    Whatever the data, misogynists will spin it as a reason to hate women.

    • Replies: @Anon
  23. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    I don’t hate women; I just said that White and Asian women were going to experience a more competitive dating market when Hispanic and Black women start getting more educated and monied, ending the insanity that is white and fancy Asian female privilege. Note that keyword, privilege. Meaning here a totally undeserved, unwarranted, anti-social status that is bestowed upon specific groups of women who then take that privilege and use it to run our country in to the ground. What a tunnel-visioned beyotch.

    You see, that’s the problem with white women. They’re so mentally unhinged on that 2rd wave feminist propaganda that they interpret anything that does not glorify and worship middle class white “womanhood” as misogyny. They actually live under the assumption that nonwhite women do not exist. I implore you to absorb a 12 gauge shotgun blast to the forehead and rid this country of yet another spoiled, delusional, entitled, parasitic white female today. The COVID-19 lockdown showed us just how much more pleasant and sane this country could be if white women lost their stupid potemkin jobs and were forced to retreat to the 1950s life of daily whippings in the dungeon, strip dancing and sedative addiction that they actually deserve. The era of good feelings will return when we permanantly restore that way of life.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  24. anon[244] • Disclaimer says:
    @nebulafox

    if you cannot present WokePoints or have access to UMC activities/guidance, then it doesn’t matter how bright you are, you have strikes against you. They are the ones who have the potential to pose problems for elites should they have access to elite pipelines.

    Those are the people for whom the SAT was originally created….to find them. One test to find the farmer’s son in a Tennessee holler who just might have the Aptitude to finish college in a real subject and be a benefit to a community. It’s very telling that the social / economic elites do not want those guys to be found. They do not want the bright guy or gal from Nowhere, Kansas to show up their precious UMC snoflake in class at Harvard.

    We have a serious overproduction of elites, so pulling up the ladders isn’t a surprise. But it is not a good thing, either.

    This is one factor in a recipe for social upheaval on a scale not seen in the US for about 100+ years.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Rosie
  25. Daniel H says:
    @Cloudbuster

    Under your explanation, I’m still seeing “supplant Whites.” Explain a little more how this is beneficial to Whites.

    If Good Whites are made to suffer then it is good for the rest of us. There can be no progress until the Good Whites suffer grievously, and that they know from whence and whom the suffering comes.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • LOL: Cloudbuster
  26. Anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Old American white males want to do stuff like diesel mechanic, welder, controlled demolition, police officer, etc. Things that women and minorities largely do not want to do.

    Lots of women and minorities seek police officer and other blue collar jobs:

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  27. Anonymous[354] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Under majority-minority affirmative action, there are enough Hispanics and Blacks on the right end of the bell curve of their respective populations, to supllant whites of a similar academic achievement. That’s why university systems across the country are coming out strong in defense of affirmative action now. There’s no longer an IQ argument against it.

    This makes no sense. You’re claiming that affirmative action is being promoted now precisely because there’s no need for it any longer.

    The black population of California has been declining over the past few decades. There aren’t more blacks, and even with a large black population, the “right end of the bell curve” of the black population isn’t enough to supplant whites.

    Affirmative action is not about representation relative to population. That’s the point of “majority-minority affirmative action.” Even with more blacks and Hispanics, there aren’t enough of them to supplant whites by ability.

    • Replies: @Anon
  28. Anonymous[378] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Old American white males want to do stuff like diesel mechanic, welder, controlled demolition, police officer, etc. Things that women and minorities largely do not want to do. You guys are acting like working class white men were competing with women for Mexican American studies degrees or film degrees. It’s just so hilarious and pathetic how imperiled, fragile and schizophrenic some people are.

    This actually isn’t true. Women and minorities do increasingly do those jobs.

    At any rate, your argument appears to be that affirmative action in favor of blacks and Hispanics is good because blacks and Hispanics are just as good if not better than whites are at academic and white collar work, and because a small minority of white men will be able to do blue collar and law enforcement work that blacks and Hispanics will either not seek or not enjoy an affirmative action advantage over whites.

    The premises of this argument aren’t true. Blacks and Hispanics aren’t just as good or better than whites at academics and white collar work. Blacks and Hispanics do pursue and benefit from affirmative action in blue collar and law enforcement work.

    But even if we assumed that these premises were true, this is not a very appealing or convincing argument to most whites.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @V. K. Ovelund
  29. Rosie says:
    @Anon

    194 doesn’t hate women. He just things we’re “spoiled, delusional, entitled, parasitic” and “mentally unhinged” people who are running the country into the ground.

    Thanks, Anon, for clearing that up.

  30. anon[369] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    As usual and in keeping with American history, Democrats are the party of Old Stock Americans while Republicans are the party of Negro factory workers, uppity Jewish females and undercover fags.

    Ask your doctor to adjust the dosage of your meds before those hallucinations get worse.

    lol.

  31. @res

    The PPIC survey Ron used doesn’t breakdown yes/no/unsure by race and it combines blacks and Asians together so it’s not much use for comparative purposes. The most striking thing is of course the topline differences between the two polls. PredictIt has a market on Prop 15 (80% chance of being approved, 20% of being voted down) but not on Prop 16.

    • Replies: @res
  32. @Anonymous

    “Diverse” == “Wildly out of proportion to population representation.” Of course. Another example of “Diverse means anti-White.”

  33. res says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    The PPIC survey Ron used doesn’t breakdown yes/no/unsure by race and it combines blacks and Asians together so it’s not much use for comparative purposes.

    Could you use the Berkeley IGS poll?

    PredictIt has a market on Prop 15 (80% chance of being approved, 20% of being voted down) but not on Prop 16.

    Berkeley IGS shows Prop 15 as 49/34/17. Given that it probably seems like a free lunch to low information voters (companies pay!) that PredictIt split seems plausible to me even though the raw poll numbers aren’t that great (supposedly undecideds tend to break no, right?).

    Here is some analysis of Prop 15.
    https://prospect.org/politics/silence-of-the-dems-why-arent-there-more-prop-15-endorsement/

    I was going to comment on PredictIt not having Prop 16 as seeming significant (dog that did not bark), but after seeing they only have 7 state & local markets total for the whole country I’m not sure what to think.
    https://www.predictit.org/markets/14/State_Local

    P.S. The comments on the PredictIt Prop 15 page were at least a little bit interesting.

  34. nebulafox says:
    @anon

    Everybody talks about how new American resembles late Rome, but I’m more concerned it represents 19th Century China.

    Blue-collar Asian kids deal with the same problem-in some ways, like college admissions, it is even worse-but they tend to have more options because they are more likely to live in major urban centers. If you are a brilliant but poor second-generation Fujianese kid whose parents are dishwashers in Queens, you have the option of attempting to get into Bronx Science. You’ll have to work your ass off, but the option is there. More importantly, you and your parents know the option is there from Day 1 and come from a culture where they’d rather see you go barefoot than uneducated. This is the kind of thing that you just can’t compensate for.

    (I should also note that this isn’t as much of a racial thing as it sounds: Russian immigrants tended to fit the same mold as East Asians. It’s more about being off the boat in a place like NYC vs. being in small-town Texas and several hours away from any major urban center.)

  35. Rosie says:
    @anon

    They do not want the bright guy or gal from Nowhere, Kansas to show up their precious UMC snoflake in class at Harvard.

    So true, and they use anti-White politics to distract from what they’re doing.

  36. Twinkie says:
    @res

    My initial inclination is to be very skeptical of the SurveyUSA results here.

    I’m skeptical of many of these surveys since they are being pushed by advocacy (read pro-Democrat) organizations. For example, in the October of 2016, the National Asian American Survey claimed this:

    Then after the election, it published this:

    But as AE noted, the Cooperative Congressional Election Study found this:

    So according to the NAAS, Clinton led Trump 73-12 among Korean-Americans, then won their vote 75-18 when the last study actually found it much more competitive at 42-58.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @res
    , @Johann Ricke
  37. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    No dummy, my argument is that with whites a solid minority in California, there are now enough right-end-of-bell-curve blacks and Hispanics such that affirmative action can be meritocratic (and therefore not a threat to the functionality of whatever is hiring them). That’s the only viable argument that ever existed against affirmative action: that it would break the economy by putting incompetent people in power. Now that argument is finished. There was never a moral argument against affirmative action.

    And no, women and minorities don’t do these types of jobs. Cite a single study to indicate that they do, or you’re a bullshitter.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    , @Anonymous
  38. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    The world is never going to make sense when you’re mentally handicapped. What you don’t realize is that your ability to make sense of something is not related to everybody else’s ability to make sense of something. To put it in layman’s terms… You’re freaking dumb.

    Affirmative action is needed today. Look at the college admissions data in California. The of kids being admitted (whites and Asians) are minorities.

    The black population of California has been declining over the past few decades. There aren’t more blacks, and even with a large black population, the “right end of the bell curve” of the black population isn’t enough to supplant whites.

    That’s right, doofus, so we throw in another, much larger group in California who will benefit from affirmative action (Hispanics) and we get that effect. Maybe take off your Negro-colored glasses for a second and realize that I was talking about blacks and Hispanics? Hispanics are only 3-5 IQ points behind whites in the USA. You’re damn skippy there’s enough high IQ Hispanics to compensate for any whites that are denied a job in Cali over affirmative action.

    Anyway, the universities and corporations are all clammering for affirmative action, so I don’t know why you little fools are even bothring to argue with me. Do you really think you know better than elite academic institutions and the world’s most successful businesses? Let’s get you guys to go on a Ted Talk so you can tell Silicon Valley about how you know better than them. “Hey, Bill Gates! We got a basement dweller from some town in Texas who knows how to run your company better than you do. His name’s Bubby DeBoyd Billy Bubba Brickstain! Here’s his promotional cassette tape!”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  39. @Anonymous

    Women … increasingly do those jobs.

    Diesel mechanic? Welder? Controlled demolition? Really?

    Perhaps so, but I’ve seen little of it.

    Women as police officers, yes, unfortunately. What a mess.

    • Replies: @Anon
  40. SIMP simp says:

    The French Republic takes great pride in her legal isonomy, but in practice the end result is the same: mass immigration, black crime, hate speech laws etc.

    • Replies: @Anon
  41. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    In 2019, 87% of US police officers were male.

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/195324/gender-distribution-of-full-time-law-enforcement-employees-in-the-us/

    The US police force is as female as the US population was nonwhite in the year 1910.

    In the year 2000, the police force was 10% female. And in 1990, 8%:

    https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/lpd00.pdf

    Females comprised 10.6% of officers in 2000, up from 8.1% in 1990.

    So for the last 30 years, the female authorization rate has held steady at about 1 in 10 officers.

    Women are not becoming police officers. And those who do have a very high rate of turnover to non-officer police jobs, usually within a matter of 5 years or so.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  42. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @SIMP simp

    Crime is virtually non-existent in France.

    France has a murder rate of 1.31 per 100,000, compared to:

    2.12 per 100,000 in Estonia

    4.44 per 100,000 in Niger

    4.99 per 100,000 in Cuba

    5 per 100,000 in the USA

    5.16 per 100,000 in Sudan

    6.20 per 100,000 in Ukraine

    6.66 per 100,000 in Afghanistan

    8.21 per 100,000 in Russia

    29.7 per 100,000 in Mexico

    49 per 100,000 in US Virgin Islands

    52 per 100,000 in El Salvador

    In addition, rape is over 50% higher in the USA than in France.

    ————

    Sources:

    https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/France/United-States/Crime

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

  43. Svevlad says:
    @Realist

    Good. Let the dumbshits sign their own death warrants. Nothing better than seeing an idiot fall by his own hand. The ultimate justice.

    • Agree: Realist
  44. @Anon

    affirmative action can be meritocratic

    Oxy, meet moron.

  45. res says:
    @Twinkie

    I’m skeptical of many of these surveys since they are being pushed by advocacy (read pro-Democrat) organizations.

    Agreed. That is part of the reason I like the poll aggregators which allow tracking results over both time and source.

    There aren’t many Prop 16 polls to compare (and I don’t expect THAT many more before the election), but when you start looking at better known contests they can really help. Especially when you have prior year results available to evaluate bias as you did above.

    In the past I primarily used Real Clear Politics as a poll aggregator.
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

    The Ballotpedia ballot measure poll aggregator I linked looked decent, but I am not finding a good presentation of poll results there for other elections.

    Here is Wikipedia on the topic.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_aggregator

    PollyVote is an aggregator of aggregators. It appears to only have the presidential election, but looks like a good way to survey a broad range of coverage.
    https://pollyvote.com/en/

    Anyone have suggestions for another good poll aggregator?

  46. Anonymous[821] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    No dummy, my argument is that with whites a solid minority in California, there are now enough right-end-of-bell-curve blacks and Hispanics such that affirmative action can be meritocratic (and therefore not a threat to the functionality of whatever is hiring them).

    That’s exactly what I said when I summarized your argument. I wrote that your argument is based on the premise that blacks and Hispanics are just as good if not better than whites are at academic and white collar work because now the population of blacks and Hispanics is large enough.

    This premise isn’t even true. There aren’t now enough or more black and Hispanics than whites at the right of the bell curve. The black population hasn’t even increased but rather declined in California. And the whole point of affirmative action is that it isn’t meritocratic.

    Even if we granted the above false premise, it would not be a very convincing or appealing argument to most whites.

    That’s the only viable argument that ever existed against affirmative action: that it would break the economy by putting incompetent people in power. Now that argument is finished. There was never a moral argument against affirmative action.

    That was never the main argument against affirmative action. The main argument for whites and conservatives was always primarily moral: that it’s unfair, unjust, racist, against individualism, etc.

    And no, women and minorities don’t do these types of jobs. Cite a single study to indicate that they do, or you’re a bullshitter.

    Plenty of women and minorities do blue collar work. See for example the data on the LAPD recruit class above.

    • Replies: @Anon
  47. Anonymous[821] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Affirmative action is needed today. Look at the college admissions data in California. The of kids being admitted (whites and Asians) are minorities.

    I agree that affirmative action is necessary if you want to increase the numbers of black and Hispanic students.

    Your original claim was the contradiction that it’s necessary now because it’s now no longer really needed because the black and Hispanic population is sufficiently large.

    That’s right, doofus, so we throw in another, much larger group in California who will benefit from affirmative action (Hispanics) and we get that effect. Maybe take off your Negro-colored glasses for a second and realize that I was talking about blacks and Hispanics?

    So we should throw out blacks from this discussion since the black population hasn’t increased in California. The premise of your argument is that “there are now enough right-end-of-bell-curve blacks”, but if the black population hasn’t increased, that couldn’t be the case.

    Hispanics are only 3-5 IQ points behind whites in the USA. You’re damn skippy there’s enough high IQ Hispanics to compensate for any whites that are denied a job in Cali over affirmative action.

    This isn’t true. See Jason Richwine’s paper on this. Hispanic IQ is estimated at around 89, around 11 points behind whites.

    Anyway, the universities and corporations are all clammering for affirmative action, so I don’t know why you little fools are even bothring to argue with me. Do you really think you know better than elite academic institutions and the world’s most successful businesses?

    America’s legacy institutions were built before they were significantly affected by affirmative action. They can afford the burden of affirmative action since they’re established and have been already built up. Their long term prospects are another matter.

  48. @Twinkie

    So according to the NAAS, Clinton led Trump 73-12 among Korean-Americans, then won their vote 75-18 when the last study actually found it much more competitive at 42-58.

    I swallowed the prior set of numbers uncritically. Thanks for providing this other poll. I should have been way more suspicious. When I saw the stats you mentioned earlier, it boggled my mind that a demographic responsible for so many small business starts should be as anti-GOP as BLACKS. It appears these so-called Asian activist groups are basically the SPLC with a tan – they’re frauds whose primary interest lies in vacuuming up money from clueless Democrat donors, as well as the Federal government through Democratic appropriations.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  49. Twinkie says:
    @Johann Ricke

    The thanks belong to AE who earlier posted the last graph sourced from CCES (originally created by a researcher at Harvard).

  50. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:

    Your original claim was the contradiction that it’s necessary now because it’s now no longer really needed because the black and Hispanic population is sufficiently large.

    That was never my claim, and is entirely the the creation of your defective imagination.

    So we should throw out blacks from this discussion since the black population hasn’t increased in California. The premise of your argument is that “there are now enough right-end-of-bell-curve blacks”, but if the black population hasn’t increased, that couldn’t be the case

    The black population in California has increased more than fivefold relative to the white population, windowlicker.

    This isn’t true. See Jason Richwine’s paper on this. Hispanic IQ is estimated at around 89, around 11 points behind whites

    Jason Richwine is not a scientist and has never authored a paper in his life.

    The average IQ of Mestizos in Mexico is 94, which is comparable to the US white (and also Mexican white) average of 98.

    https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-biosocial-science/article/ethnic-and-racial-differences-on-the-standard-progressive-matrices-in-mexico/8C9D2C1A845C38D30C0577730177EF49

    Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices test was administered to a representative sample of 920 white, Mestizo and Native Mexican Indian children aged 7–10 years in Mexico. The mean IQs in relation to a British mean of 100 obtained from the 1979 British standardization sample and adjusted for the estimated subsequent increase were: 98·0 for whites, 94·3 for Mestizos and 83·3 for Native Mexican Indians.

    America’s legacy institutions were built before they were significantly affected by affirmative action. They can afford the burden of affirmative action since they’re established and have been already built up. Their long term prospects are another matter.

    Yes I’m sure a basement dweller from Texas has more foresight and planning than America’s “legacy institutions.”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  51. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    That’s exactly what I said when I summarized your argument. I wrote that your argument is based on the premise that blacks and Hispanics are just as good if not better than whites are at academic and white collar work because now the population of blacks and Hispanics is large enough.

    A premise is never going to seem true if the defective mind is not only incapable of understanding it, but imagining things that weren’t there. The “premise” (fact) is not that blacks and Hispanics are as good as whites, but that there are now enough blacks and Hispanics of high IQ to replace THE WHITES WHO GET PASSED OVER FOR AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION HIRE. READ: THOSE WHITES, NOT ALL WHITES.

    Even if we granted the above false premise, it would not be a very convincing or appealing argument to most whites.

    Who the fuck cares what whites think? Stupid god damned drug addicted and alcoholic minority that thinks they’re worth a fucking shit when corporate America could bury them in the ground tomorrow and save money for it.

    That was never the main argument against affirmative action. The main argument for whites and conservatives was always primarily moral: that it’s unfair, unjust, racist, against individualism, etc.

    Nope and you can’t cite a single case in which this was ever the main argument against AA.

    Plenty of women and minorities do blue collar work. See for example the data on the LAPD recruit class above.

    Moron, that tiny sample was not data and does not reflect LAPD which is sourced with officers from all around the country who weren’t recruited in LA. LAPD is disproportionately white compared to LA which speaks volumes to the popularity of policing among white men. LAPD is also one of the most female police forces in America with an astonishing 18% female population — I’m sure that scares you as a “male” with the circulating testoaterone levels of a gnat.

    This is basically the state of the altright in 2020: cite twitter shit as evidence. No wonder Donald Trump’s going down and you’re gonna lose big time in the legislative branch.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  52. Anonymous[267] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    That was never my claim, and is entirely the the creation of your defective imagination.

    That was your claim. Perhaps you’ve changed it since then, but it was your original claim.

    The black population in California has increased more than fivefold relative to the white population, windowlicker.

    Not true. California’s black population is currently around 5.8%. This is a decline from about 7.65% in 2000.

    Jason Richwine is not a scientist and has never authored a paper in his life.

    The average IQ of Mestizos in Mexico is 94, which is comparable to the US white (and also Mexican white) average of 98.

    Richwine’s paper cites a meta-analysis that finds Hispanic-American IQ at 89.2:

    Roth, Philip L, Craig A. Bevier, Philip Bobko, Fred S. Switzer, and Peggy Tyler. 2001. Ethnic group differences in cognitive ability in employment and educational settings: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology 54: 297-330

  53. Anonymous[221] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    The “premise” (fact) is not that blacks and Hispanics are as good as whites, but that there are now enough blacks and Hispanics of high IQ to replace THE WHITES WHO GET PASSED OVER FOR AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION HIRE. READ: THOSE WHITES, NOT ALL WHITES.

    The premise isn’t true because the difference in average IQ is significant. That’s why affirmative action is necessary.

    Who the fuck cares what whites think? Stupid god damned drug addicted and alcoholic minority that thinks they’re worth a fucking shit when corporate America could bury them in the ground tomorrow and save money for it.

    One of your original points was that affirmative action was fine because whites prefer blue collar work anyway. So your argument for affirmative action was based in part on what whites think.

    Nope and you can’t cite a single case in which this was ever the main argument against AA.

    The main argument against affirmative action among whites and conservatives has always been moral. The idea that it would lead to greater incompetence was always a given and assumed.

    Moron, that tiny sample was not data and does not reflect LAPD which is sourced with officers from all around the country who weren’t recruited in LA. LAPD is disproportionately white compared to LA which speaks volumes to the popularity of policing among white men.

    Recruit classes represent the future demographics. The white officers in the LAPD skew older and will retire, and they will be replaced by demographics like the recruit class above which is only 8% Caucasian.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS