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 One-Fifths Compromise
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

The civic nationalists want to believe it. A part of me would like to believe it, too. I’ve mostly shed that part of myself over the last couple of years as it has become obvious that Trump’s Authentic American (whites and blacks) vs Fake American (invaders) paradigm isn’t going to materialize, but I’m a pragmatist. If we can believe it, let’s use it.

Believe what? This:

Trump at 36 percent approval among African-Americans, new poll finds

Rasmussen’s approval tracking has consistently been better for Trump than others have been, but the differences are often exaggerated. We’re generally looking at about 5 points better from Rasmussen than the rest of the field. Reuters-Ipsos is my go-to even though it has a moderate left bias because it’s free, user-friendly and allows all kinds of fun filters for cross-tabbing purposes.

For the 2016 presidential election, the last poll Rasmussen put out had Clinton +2 in the popular vote while the last R-I poll had Clinton +3. The official results were Clinton +2.1, so these two outfits were the cream of the crop.

R-I currently has Trump’s approval among black voters at a far more plausible 14.6%. The monthly high point came back in May, when it hit 16.1% on the strength of Kanye West and, by extension, Candace Owen.

One thing that immediately becomes apparent from looking at the month-by-month figures is that the gains in approval have come entirely from picking off “mixed feelings” respondents. The “disapprove” figure for blacks hasn’t budged. It’s never dipped below 80%. Four out of five blacks are knee-jerk Never Trumpers. It’s the Sailer Strategy or bust for the GOP.

Trump’s double-digit approval among blacks isn’t translating into better prospects for GOP pols in November, either. Just 7.8% of registered blacks saying they intend on voting Republican in their districts’ congressional elections.

The following graph shows R-I’s results on the expressed electoral intentions of registered voters six weeks from now in two-way races with “don’t know” and “will not vote” responses excluded (N = 40,925–another reason R-I is great!):

Every time I look the marriage gap among women gets wider than before.

Without scaling for the size of each demographic group, it initially appears as though an impending blue wave is cresting. R-I estimates, however, that whites will account for about 73% of all congressional votes cast in November. Asians and Hispanics don’t vote at rates anything like that of whites and blacks, especially in non-presidential years.

If the GOP could manage to get whites at a 2-to-1 margin, they’d scarcely need a single non-white vote to win, enact an immigration moratorium, repatriate all non-citizens living in the US, get back to making babies of their own, and Make America Great Again.

That said, back in the early Spring I estimated that Democrats would come out of the November mid-terms with a 15-seat advantage in the House while Republicans would retain the Senate. Despite taking flak from people smarter than myself for the prediction, here we are several months on and I don’t think that prognostication is in need of any calibration.

Parenthetically, regular prolific commenter Feryl is now running a blog. It is up to this point primarily GSS outputs with limited accompanying commentary. We cannot have too many people look at the primary source data, so consider paying it a visit.

(Republished from The Audacious Epigone by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 16 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. A better source for Trump's slightly increased black support is this article by data journalist Harry Enten: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/18/politics/poll-of-the-week-trump-black-voters/index.html

  2. Another relevant article, from obnoxious leftist Eric Levitz: "Rick Scott's strength with Puerto Rican voters raises an alarming possibility: The Republican Party might not actually have to choose between feeding its base (overtly racist) white identity politics and making *some* inroads with nonwhite voters"

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/08/trump-gop-racist-nonwhite-voters-rick-scott-minority-outreach.html

  3. Anonymous[] • Disclaimer says:

    Trump's problem is that contra the media narrative the Republican party isn't 'Trump's party now'. In a lot of districts Trump's new coalition is being asked to vote for a smarmy guy who wants to cut the upper tax bands,(Or even 'broaden the tax base' and increase taxes on the poor) give more giveaways to corporations and fight wars for Israel and who likely has a lot of good things to say about 'hard-working' immigrants who work cheap and 'know their place'.

    There aren't many Trump-Republican candidates and even if Trump is immune to social pressures, decent candidates aren't, they aren't showing up. Those kinds of people don't feel welcome in Republican Inc yet. The political realignment that will happen will happen, but will it take place in time to save Trump's first term? It's a lot of trust to vote for a guy who will intensify the neoliberal and neocon agenda more than his Democrat opponent in the hope that Trump can use him as a legislative weapon to deal with immigration, free trade and neocon foreign policy. It's certainly not obvious that it will be the case.

  4. When do we start hearing that lesbians are "natural conservatives"? Fake it 'til you make it, or as Karl Rove once said, we "make our own reality". David Kaiser's HOF posts on Boomers creating a "post-truth" society have never rung more true. These posts pre-date the Trump era, so it's not just partisan finger pointing. Kaiser observed this trend back in the 2000's/early 2010's, when he analyzed Boomer leadership that really went into effect in the late 90's. Boomers would stubbornly cling to a viewpoint, or a narrative, whether it reflected empirical reality or not.

    Boomer "conservatives" are so individualistic, and so committed to neo-liberalism, that in their minds anyone (anyone!) can with the right conditioning be taught to respect the "free market" (in reality, monopolies and corporate welfare run amok), and "traditional values". I heard Rush say that all bad liberals are that way because of what they hear in schools and to some extent the home. This smacks of the (useless) 80's and 90's attitude that all bad things (in the estimation of a particular individual or ideology group) are so because of the wrong programming. The very possibility that

    1) Some people (and some groups) are inherently pre-disposed to a particular culture.
    2) There will always be a diversity of ideology and mindsets among humanity
    And, 3) One must reconcile themselves with the reality that some people (and some problems) are beyond our grasp in order to live life with anything resembling peace of mind.

    is never accepted by these charlatans.

    And don't get me started on how Boomer conservatives don't think that, say, the Muslim Brotherhood is conservative. Laughably, all outbreaks of tribalism (up to and including National Soczialism) are labeled "Leftist", as though any attempt to assert a group identity and downplay individualism can't possibly be regarded as a healthy impulse. Conservatives will sometimes act as if some point in the past was a highpoint of non-collectivism, without noticing such things as, the one-drop rule and mandatory segregation enforced with varying degrees of severity.

    Boomer neo-liberal conservatism is being shown the door, because muh tax cuts and Ayn Rand are no way to bind a tribe together. There insistence on asserting the "goodness" of the individual, who is held to be capable of any good thing under the correct programming, is rapidly losing relevance because invariably, a particular time period or generation can only ignore the underlying reality of human nature so long; we want to belong to something greater than our mere selves, and in fact being uprooted or alienated from a tribe can only be tolerated for so long.

  5. Such things as "sun down towns" were obvious evidence that whites were collectively asserting an identity, and a resource claim, with relatively little opposition from within the tribe prior to 1946. It was understood that whites (and those of other races) had to repress or ignore certain impulses for the sake of tribal continuity and strength.

    Now interestingly, the experience of conquistadors in the New World seems to be much more in keeping with the individualism of post-WW2 America. The conquistadors had no strictly enforced laws about race mixing (and thus one would imagine that segregation in general was much weaker than it was in the Anglo New World), and there were few to no cultural restrictions on wealth acquisition (aka greed).

    It's true that Anglo America has been individualistic, however, there are degrees of individualism. Before 1946, it's evident that we went to great lengths to repress certain hedonistic impulses (be they rooted in lust or greed) in order to respect tribal tradition and security. Anglo Boomers have fought so ferociously to discard these taboos (as I've said before, the only taboos that Boomers notice are ones that have an immediate effect on security and safety, such as pollution and street crime; WRT everything else, they just push the "consenting adults" meme).

  6. What we're witnessing is the GOP trying its best to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. While nationalism is what the base wants, the GOP tries their best to talk about tax cuts and regulation instead. At least they're not stupid enough to trot out privatizing social security…yet.

    I suspect Donald Trump will campaign hard in 2018, almost as much as he did in 2016. That will help and it is definitely needed but people aren't voting for Trump, they are voting for their local cuckservative congressperson who put out egregious statements about how we all need to come together for our love of tax cuts and small government and how the real issue with minority outreach is that they just haven't read the constitution enough.

    I think the make or break moment is the September budget. If Trump fights hard and wins lots of concessions like wall funding, e-verify, etc. then the party might be in good shape. Anything other than total victory will be seen as defeat and the turnout will be reflected accordingly. Trump is going to have to be at his "A game" here because he has to be. A Democrat controlled House just means nothing but impeachment BS from here on out.

  7. RDI –

    To be fair to cuckservatives, their agenda actually was popular with most Americans in the 80's, 90's, and 2000's. As you can imagine, their platform which did them so much good for so long will not be easily discarded. It seems like a no-brainer to us, but how do you suppose many 50, 60, and 70 year old people feel?

    Hate to say it, but Agnostic has a point about re-alignment. When one party gains greater esteem and clout for 30-40 years, with even the other party often serving up a me-too version of the dominant party's platform (like Clinton and Obama doing more to crassly appease the super wealthy and the conglomerates than Reagan ever did).

    Now it's also true that all sides can let us down, instead of one side seizing on a common sense reform program while the other side begrudgingly goes along with it. Like the Dem's gaining the upper hand in the 1930's and 1940's, while the GOP didn't nakedly promote the interests of greedy business owners. On the other hand, during the Civil War era both sides were over zealously committed to what a certain element of corrupt elites wanted, so ultimately we descended into corruption, division, and violence with no clear and immediate way out.

    The Dems need to knock off the SJW and race replacement crap, while the GOP needs to stop the pandering to corrupt business interests (who ironically play into the hands of the corrupt strain of Leftism) and super elites who feel no obligation to listen to proles.

    But maybe, just maybe, the older generations have reaped so much from the neo-liberal era, and are so tone deaf to what it's done to young people, that they'll refuse to relent. How do you tell a 70 year old person, who entered the workforce when entry level wages were 3-4 times higher for most jobs than they are now, that they're fools for having bought into the meme, back in the 80's and 90's, that rich people and businesses were the "victims" of over-active government and social activists?

  8. Phillipe,

    Lesbians. It was my intention to change that but I forgot to.

    IHTG,

    I think R-I's sample is even better since it more than twice as large as Gallup's. But the results are, as laid out in the body of the post, almost the same.

    That second paragraph is such intentionally misleading, mendacious bullshit that I can't read beyond it. Life is too short.

    Anon,

    It'd be nice to see a nationwide assessment of primary races across the country in terms of Trump Republican candidates versus Republican, Inc candidates. Kemp in Georgia and Kobach here are two that I've followed closely, and their successes have been encouraging, but those are both governors.

    Feryl,

    Ben Shapiro is a Rush Limbaugh reboot for the next generation. He'll never attain the reach and significance that Rush did because the sun is setting on that brand.

    Random Dude,

    Trump will have another opportunity to go to the mat on the MAGA agenda. If he cucks again this time, he will pay the price.

  9. Feryl,

    VDare is carrying this post and the editor, James Fulford, left the last paragraph in about your blog. Hopefully that'll drive a little traffic your way.

  10. Blacks are "authentic Americans"? In what manner?

  11. Moderate White Guy trick could work like a charm in Texas.

    http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/NBC-News_Marist-Poll_Texas-Nature-of-the-Sample-and-Tables_August-2018_1808201203.pdf

    Cruz with Hispanics only down 10 in a group that voted for Trump by much less, but not getting the amount of white support that Greg Abbott is getting. Surprised that 27% of blacks would be voting for Abbott, even accounting for Southern blacks being marginally more conservative than blacks in the rest of the country.

  12. AE,

    by 15 seat advantage do you mean Dems 225 Reps 210, or do you mean Democrats pick up 15 seats?

    If the Democrats do pick up the house, it is unlikely that Republicans will win it back under Trump. The only incumbent president to lose the house and then win it back while running for re-election was Truman in 1948 (Garfield did help the Republicans win back the house in 1880, but he was not the Republican incumbent.) When you add to the fact a "blue wave" could swing state houses, its likely going to become much harder for the GOP or any right leaning party to win back the house after 2020 due to redistricting.

    Historically though, there really shouldn't be any "wave" this year. Since the Great Depression, when the out-party makes real gains it is usually due to either (1) war, (2) recession/weak economy, (3) the six year itch, or more recently, (4) healthcare. We don't have the first three and Democrats aren't running on healthcare. (Contra Agnostic, the white Bernie bros and gals continue to underperform especially when you compare them to districts Bernie won in 2016). What message do they have except "muh Russia" impeachment, demographic replacement, and SJW-corporate censorship? If they win in this environment, the country really is moving very far to the left and our chances in a hot civil war aren't look very good.

  13. *looking very good.*

  14. If they win in this environment, the country really is moving very far to the left and our chances in a hot civil war aren't look very good.

    Elections and shooting wars don't motivate the same types of people. It's entirely possible that rural white America will just roll over and show papers whenever asked; but the more I look at demographic maps of the Southeast, the more they remind me of Bosnia, with nonwhites in the Bosnian Muslim role, and without any big external power willing and able to step in and prevent the problem from being solved.

    Clearance rate on murders in Chicago is 17%. Think about that: you kill someone in Chicago, you have a 4 out of 5 chance of getting away with it scot free. Now apply that awareness to the entire rest of the country. That's the step that hasn't happened yet; whites are generally law-abiding and therefore voluntarily keep crime uncommon enough that white-district police departments are capable of handling it. That's entirely based on illusion and inertia, which it would take just one extended crisis to dispel.

    Not that this would be a good thing.

    As for taking flak for predictions, it is always tremendously instructive to see who goes back and honestly revisits their own past predictions, and who deliberately avoids talking about them.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS