RSS
The U.S. government fanatically collects data on some identity categories, such as non-Hispanic whites, Hispanics, and blacks. So we are, say, lectured that whites must pay reparations for blacks due to having much higher average net worths, which proves White Privilege.
On the other hand, Jewish organizations shot down in 1956 a Census Bureau Proposal to allow Jews to self-identify on the 1960 Census. So, we never ever hear about Jewish average net worth. It’s a mystery! Why would you want to know about that? And, therefore, we don’t hear about Jewish Privilege.
Similarly, the U.S. government collects very little data on citizenship, so we never hear much about it. And Democrats very much want to keep it that way.
From the New York Times:
Deceased G.O.P. Strategist’s Hard Drives Reveal New Details on the Census Citizenship Question
Thomas B. Hofeller, a leading Republican strategist, died in August and left a trove of computer files containing evidence that could now be relevant in a Supreme Court case.
By Michael Wines
May 30, 2019WASHINGTON — Thomas B. Hofeller achieved near-mythic status in the Republican Party as the Michelangelo of gerrymandering, the architect of partisan political maps that cemented the party’s dominance across the country.
But after he died last summer, his estranged daughter discovered hard drives in her father’s home that revealed something else: Mr. Hofeller had played a crucial role in the Trump administration’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. …
Mr. Hofeller’s exhaustive analysis of Texas state legislative districts concluded that such maps “would be advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites,” and would dilute the political power of the state’s Hispanics.
And you can’t have that! The only allowable reasons for the Executive branch doing anything are to help non-whites and Democrats.
But after he died last summer, his estranged daughter discovered hard drives in her father’s home that revealed something else:
The horror, the horror. The “estranged” daughter is likely a converged, cucked conservative if not an outright SWPL. She (and the NY Times) would probably have been less horrified if they had found a trove of tranny porn among her poor father’s effects.
If you read the article, Hofeller was hired by The Washington Free Beacon to figure out how Congressional districts would look if districting was done based upon American citizens of voting age rather than by total population as it is done now. (It's not clear whether the latter is a Constitutional requirement but billionaire Paul Singer, owner of the Beacon, certainly has the resources for a test case.) The former makes sense since these are the people who are actually entitled to vote but, going back to the 3/5ths rule, non-voting eligible residents (slaves) were always (partly) counted . Hofeller noted that there was no really good data on # of citizens in each district and mentioned that it would be nice if the census asked for this so good data would exist. Data is good, right?Well, data is NOT good, sometimes. Lebanon has not had a census since the 1930s since it would cause political problems to know how the ethnic composition of the country has changed (Muslim (esp. Shia) vs. Christian). Better not to know the truth. The reason this is an issue now is that the S. Ct. is about to rule on whether the citizenship question can remain on the Census and this is a last minute Hail Mary to change the outcome, which is otherwise an almost sure loser given the composition of the Court. So Stephanie Hofeller is this year's Christine Blasey Ford. The NY Times, just like in the case of Dr. Prof. Ford, prints a back story for her that presents her as just a "concerned citizen" who came forward as her patriotic duty and not someone who has been carefully prepared and groomed by Leftist activist organizations. The whole thing stinks. Mainly this will excite fund raising by these organizations and be used as a campaign issue - I doubt that it will actually change the outcome in court.
Jewish would indeed be inadvisable on the Census. However, Sephardic, Ashkenazi, and the like refer to ethnicities, not beliefs. Those terms should have been okay.
Lawrence Auster, and half of John Kerry and Madeleine Albright, could be listed accurately as Ashkenazi, while Sammy Davis Jr, Ivanka Trump, and David Klinghoffer would not.
So once again a White woman will end Republican chances. Proof if any needed that White women just hate most White men.
When we are ruled by President Harris for life be sure to thank White women.
Literally nobody gives a shit about this. It was top story for half a day, two days ago, because some media fags decided to push it. That's what she ransacked her father's possessions for.
More pygmie posts! What happened?! Why did you suddenly drop the pygmie posting?
Which should lead to most interesting excuse-making as Washington, DC continues to gentrify, and thus blanch.
Just what is the purpose of the Twenty-Third Amendment, if not a sop to blacks? How is it justified for white yuppies and SJWs?
Wealthy white yuppies and SJWs:
Hey Steve what do you suppose Hell might be like ? When I was like 6 years old I used to dream that I was in Hell , I would wake up and vomit from the terror . Now at 68 I think that God cannot rest with the cries of the dammed ringing in his ears .
The obsession over Republican “gerrymandering” is bullshit. The press was never much concerned about it until the Republicans managed to win control of the House after the 1994 elections. Since those elections, just 25 years ago, control of the House has changed three times.
Prior to that? Well, uh, we won’t talk about that. Why? Because the Democrats held control of the House for 40 straight years, all through most of the Eisenhower era and through all of the Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush I presidencies. Control of the House never changed. Not once. Why not? In large part because of Democratic Party gerrymandering.
And of course during that era the Democrats managed to come up with the ultimate gerrymander of all: electing a completely new American people.
I mean I can totally understand why the Dems are worried about gerrymandering. It is kind of evil. So in the spirit of compromise why don’t end one evil beneficial to the Democrats and one evil beneficial to the Republicans: we’ll end both gerrymandering and mass immigration/open borders. Sound like a compromise?
My god, first of all, why would you guys support Republicans? I thought you were all "different" and all that.
And here's the inarguable fact. Were districts allotted fairly, randomly, contiguously, there would be no more Republican party.
This, you may surprised to learn, does not make me happy. It frightens me. Republicans are bribed thieves and idiots. But Democrats are bribed insane incompetent foam at the mouth warmongers and simultaneously hypocritical and naive identity politickers.
The only reason the overwhelming majority of Americans vaguely support them is because the overwhelming majority of Americans are basically socialists (the real kind--the kind who, for instance, oppose immigration), and they think (wrongly) that Democrats are the best they can do in view of their actual beliefs.
Prior to that? Well, uh, we won't talk about that. Why? Because the Democrats held control of the House for 40 straight years, all through most of the Eisenhower era and through all of the Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush I presidencies. Control of the House never changed. Not once. Why not? In large part because of Democratic Party gerrymandering.
And of course during that era the Democrats managed to come up with the ultimate gerrymander of all: electing a completely new American people.
I mean I can totally understand why the Dems are worried about gerrymandering. It is kind of evil. So in the spirit of compromise why don't end one evil beneficial to the Democrats and one evil beneficial to the Republicans: we'll end both gerrymandering and mass immigration/open borders. Sound like a compromise?
all true.
they only care about any issue insofar as it pertains to them winning.
nothing is ever an issue unless it suddenly causes them to lose.
Similarly, the U.S. government collects very little data on citizenship, so we never hear much about it.
You don’t necessarily have to know how many citizens there are in a given district. All you have to do is compare vote totals between congressional districts.
In California’s 4th congressional district, 85.1% white and held by Republican Tom McClintock, 340,000 votes were cast in 2018.
In California’s 40th congressional district, 86.5% Hispanic and held by Democrat Lucille Roybal-Allard, only 121,000 votes were cast.
Yes, you got that right: nearly three times as many votes were cast in the 4th district as in the 40th district.
After the 1986 elections - the elections held the same year as the passage of Simpson-Mazzoli (aka the 1986 amnesty) - Republicans held 18 of Calfiornia's 45 House seats.
After the 2018 elections they hold only 7 of 53. Mass immigration has utterly devastated the Republican Party in that state. But let's worry about a little gerrymandering here and there.
the Democrat, Lucille Roybal-Allard looks quite white, but likely identifies as Hispanic and wears the Roman Catholic badge. Pretty typical.
To continue…
After the 1986 elections – the elections held the same year as the passage of Simpson-Mazzoli (aka the 1986 amnesty) – Republicans held 18 of Calfiornia’s 45 House seats.
After the 2018 elections they hold only 7 of 53. Mass immigration has utterly devastated the Republican Party in that state. But let’s worry about a little gerrymandering here and there.
After the 2018 elections they hold only 7 of 53. Mass immigration has utterly devastated the Republican Party in that state. But let’s worry about a little gerrymandering here and there.
Yeah, and the cucks have been, and still are, enthusiastically supporting this mass replacement. Not only do they betray us, but they are too stupid to look after their own hides. Screw 'em. Just say no to cucks.
It appears that Hofeller’s issue was quite different from what the Supreme Court is considering:
A count of citizens would be needed to analyze the effect of such a change in apportionment. But just asking the question would not necessarily change anyone’s power.
The most surprising thing in the article to me was this:
Can this be right? I thought that the census had a citizenship question for most of the censuses. Was it not asked of all respondents?
I believe that it was recent censuses had a “long form” given to 1 in 10 people that included the question.
Some of the old ones had only name, address, age, place of birth, race, and occupation and appear to have been compiled by people going door to door.
Did they ask some respondents?
OT
Remember in the summer of 2016 when progressives were setting up various organizations and systems to monitor and destroy pro-Trump “fake news.” And then in the space of only a couple of months Trump co-opted the phrase, using it to refer to CNN and its ilk. And you started seeing headlines like “How The Right Co-Opted ‘Fake News’” and “Why I’m done saying ‘fake news’”?
Today for the first time I saw the word “woke” being used in the sense of having a heightened awareness of a right-wing related topic. Yes! I think it is time to co-opt “woke,” to use it in contexts the opposite of how it has been used. For a start, “woke to” might be best, “He’s woke to the truth of HBD,” “She’s woke to the lies of pro-choice activists.” As the word is diluted, the “to” can be dropped it can become more subtly context sensitive.
Language control is how the left keeps the right on a short leash. Co-opting is a good counter tactic.
You could even just randomly misuse words. Call Ta-Nehisi Coates a white supremacist, without explanation. See how it’s interpreted. Maybe it will go somewhere interesting.
It’s as if America could benefit from a “two-state-solution”…
…where have I heard that term before?
The horror, the horror. The "estranged" daughter is likely a converged, cucked conservative if not an outright SWPL. She (and the NY Times) would probably have been less horrified if they had found a trove of tranny porn among her poor father's effects.
According to his NY Times obit from August, Hofeller was instrumental in getting Southern blacks to push for majority minority Congressional districts. So we partially have him to thank for the likes of Shelia Jackson Lee, etc.
OT
A guy hired a web developer and a data scraping specialist to build a website to analyze media, Media Analytics. New York Times since 1970 through 2017, timeline restrictions, word frequency. No users manual, but it doesn’t seem to handle multi-word phrases. But there is a natural language processing feature also: maybe that’s where you can do it, but it’s pretty complicated (here’s a too-much-information explanation fo the NLP software from another site: http://nlp.op-bit.nz/about )
https://media-analytics.op-bit.nz/timeline
The most surprising thing in the article to me was this:Can this be right? I thought that the census had a citizenship question for most of the censuses. Was it not asked of all respondents?
I don’t remember it listed in the 1840-1940 ones that have been declassified and digitized.
I believe that it was recent censuses had a “long form” given to 1 in 10 people that included the question.
Some of the old ones had only name, address, age, place of birth, race, and occupation and appear to have been compiled by people going door to door.
The most surprising thing in the article to me was this:Can this be right? I thought that the census had a citizenship question for most of the censuses. Was it not asked of all respondents?
“In nearly 230 years, the census has never asked all respondents whether they are American citizens.”
Did they ask some respondents?
After the 1986 elections - the elections held the same year as the passage of Simpson-Mazzoli (aka the 1986 amnesty) - Republicans held 18 of Calfiornia's 45 House seats.
After the 2018 elections they hold only 7 of 53. Mass immigration has utterly devastated the Republican Party in that state. But let's worry about a little gerrymandering here and there.
After the 1986 elections – the elections held the same year as the passage of Simpson-Mazzoli (aka the 1986 amnesty) – Republicans held 18 of Calfiornia’s 45 House seats.
After the 2018 elections they hold only 7 of 53. Mass immigration has utterly devastated the Republican Party in that state. But let’s worry about a little gerrymandering here and there.
Yeah, and the cucks have been, and still are, enthusiastically supporting this mass replacement. Not only do they betray us, but they are too stupid to look after their own hides. Screw ’em. Just say no to cucks.
Republicans benefit from the 1982 Voting Rights Act that encourages gerrymandering black and Latino districts. So we have a huge Black Caucus but Barack Obama didn’t have a career path to the House.
Democrats are really just steamed that Republican controlled State legislatures don't cave to media pressures and create Districts that are 52-48 Democrat instead of 52-48 Republican with the remainders.
I, for one, look forward to Rock'n'Roll being subversive again...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXsOJsXpDcE
How come Latin American countries don’t need strategizing and political machinations to keep their government and political offices totally controlled by white people??
As per usual, another lying propaganda piece from the NYT.
The case currently before the Supreme Court is challenging the addition of the citizenship question on some ticky-tack administrative procedure grounds. The referenced hard drive data had nothing to do with this legal dispute.
Rather, it sounds like the data was projecting what would happen in the theoretical event that the Supreme Court ever decided to change the legal basis of Congressional apportionment from the number of “residents” to “eligible voters” (which IIRC, the Court has already rejected as it would exclude children, etc.).
So the NYT is just spreading fake anti-Trump conspiracy theories again, which seems to be their specialty lately.
They will have to memory-hole Minor Threat for this. Like Morrissey/ The Smiths. All the English musicians professing sympathies for the BNP like Clapton? You’re next. Also ‘Brown Sugar’ is racist, while ‘Norwegian wood’ is sexist (and possibly Nordicist)
I, for one, look forward to Rock’n’Roll being subversive again…
And this burns the old-white-guy, reach-across-the-racial-divide Democrats. Because of the Latino, Black majority dem districts they know that they are the last of their kind.
But maybe that kind of polarization was inevitable. It's certainly happening everywhere else.
The Republicans wanted to keep political power but also wanted:
–de facto open borders
– to be the party White people vote for
– to not be seen as the White people’s party
– to raise their future estranged daughters to celebrate a colourblind America
Perhaps it’s for the best that this house of cards is finally falling? Maybe we Anglosphere Whites need to drop these roundabout techniques and oblique messages and simply work for what we want? Our White cousins in Eastern Europe, Latin America and Quebec seem to have far fewer estranged daughters snitching on their fathers and brothers.
Here I fixed it for you:These two areas now have among the lowest birth rates in the world. I really don't know of any area left outside of religious fanatic communities were daughters stay home and devote themselves to Kinder, Küche, Kirche anymore.
I, for one, look forward to Rock'n'Roll being subversive again...
Sorry, but I’m afraid the college/public rock stations won’t let that happen.
Citizens, what good are they?
https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/article/main_image/35471/blog_sem.jpg
They have 100x the Indian blood of Sen. Warren, a good 6% in some cases.
Prior to that? Well, uh, we won't talk about that. Why? Because the Democrats held control of the House for 40 straight years, all through most of the Eisenhower era and through all of the Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush I presidencies. Control of the House never changed. Not once. Why not? In large part because of Democratic Party gerrymandering.
And of course during that era the Democrats managed to come up with the ultimate gerrymander of all: electing a completely new American people.
I mean I can totally understand why the Dems are worried about gerrymandering. It is kind of evil. So in the spirit of compromise why don't end one evil beneficial to the Democrats and one evil beneficial to the Republicans: we'll end both gerrymandering and mass immigration/open borders. Sound like a compromise?
Trump is the fourth consecutive President to lose the House on his watch. Next year, he could be the fourth straight to be reelected.
Remember in the summer of 2016 when progressives were setting up various organizations and systems to monitor and destroy pro-Trump "fake news." And then in the space of only a couple of months Trump co-opted the phrase, using it to refer to CNN and its ilk. And you started seeing headlines like "How The Right Co-Opted ‘Fake News'" and "Why I'm done saying 'fake news'"?
Today for the first time I saw the word "woke" being used in the sense of having a heightened awareness of a right-wing related topic. Yes! I think it is time to co-opt "woke," to use it in contexts the opposite of how it has been used. For a start, "woke to" might be best, "He's woke to the truth of HBD," "She's woke to the lies of pro-choice activists." As the word is diluted, the "to" can be dropped it can become more subtly context sensitive.
Language control is how the left keeps the right on a short leash. Co-opting is a good counter tactic.
You could even just randomly misuse words. Call Ta-Nehisi Coates a white supremacist, without explanation. See how it's interpreted. Maybe it will go somewhere interesting.
Don’t think that’ll work. Right-wingers appear to be finding the term “woke” a useful phrase for discussing and attacking the left, so they can’t apply it to themselves.
Hard truth: The 1994 Republican Revolution was a disaster for the United States. The wiping out of the Southern conservative Democrats set that party on the path towards wokeness.
But maybe that kind of polarization was inevitable. It’s certainly happening everywhere else.
Recall that both Clinton and Gore had to change their positions on Abortion to get the 1992 nomination, from which the temporary compromise "Safe, Legal, and Rare" was born. This was also the year that Governor Bob Casey was denied a speaking slot at the party convention.
As with all other things, it is the change in demographics since the 1980s-1990s precipitated by legal immigration and immigration non-enforcement that has us where we are.
But maybe that kind of polarization was inevitable. It's certainly happening everywhere else.
Polarisation was inevitable. The Democrats and Republicans began to converge as a single party. Since third parties haven’t been viable at the federal level, wacky fringes had to pull the Democrats left since conservatives were not able to pull the Republicans right.
Did they ask some respondents?
Probably. There is a lot of statistical modeling used in lieu of total data gathering in the Bureau’s work.
When we are ruled by President Harris for life be sure to thank White women.
Still not gettin’ any, eh Whiskey?
Don’t wory, I’m sure there’s a shiksa out there for you somewhere.
Of course, you may have to move to the Philippines.
-de facto open borders
- to be the party White people vote for
- to not be seen as the White people's party
- to raise their future estranged daughters to celebrate a colourblind AmericaPerhaps it's for the best that this house of cards is finally falling? Maybe we Anglosphere Whites need to drop these roundabout techniques and oblique messages and simply work for what we want? Our White cousins in Eastern Europe, Latin America and Quebec seem to have far fewer estranged daughters snitching on their fathers and brothers.
This is it in a nutshell – the Republicans want to be the party that White people vote for without actually being the White people’s party. Well, to Hell with them. They are nothing but traitors to the interests of the people they purport to represent. The election of Donald Trump was a message that the GOP did not want to hear and has not heard (Donald Trump apparently didn’t hear it either).
This is a good point – gerrymandering to create majority-minority districts in order to augment the proportion of black and Hispanic representatives is really a gift to Republicans because the remaining population is much whiter and more Republican than the average.
Democrats are really just steamed that Republican controlled State legislatures don’t cave to media pressures and create Districts that are 52-48 Democrat instead of 52-48 Republican with the remainders.
> Thomas B. Hofeller achieved near-mythic status in the Republican Party as the Michelangelo of gerrymandering
Makes sense to the NYT's target audience! Republicans evil, gerrymandering evil, combine to get a gerrymandering Republican supervillian (a dead one, fortunately).
Of course there is that other part to the story that, Pravda style, we only discuss by omission. Inner Party members have no need for a reminder, so we can spare Outer Party members from the confusion it would cause.
"Majority minority" congressional districts drawn to meet the goals of the Voting Rights Act(s). Google searches bring up plenty of good-citizen type complaints about gerrymandering, including racial gerrymandering. And plenty of good-woke-citizen type websites on how to expand this idea to further build NAM power. Example, publicmapping.org.
From that site, here is a map of two VRA-inspired Chicago districts.
http://www.publicmapping.org/_/rsrc/1554732362543/what-is-redistricting/redistricting-criteria-the-voting-rights-act/IL-04.png?height=228&width=400
But maybe that kind of polarization was inevitable. It's certainly happening everywhere else.
Wasn’t party control already in the hands of the 68’ers by the nineties?
Recall that both Clinton and Gore had to change their positions on Abortion to get the 1992 nomination, from which the temporary compromise “Safe, Legal, and Rare” was born. This was also the year that Governor Bob Casey was denied a speaking slot at the party convention.
As with all other things, it is the change in demographics since the 1980s-1990s precipitated by legal immigration and immigration non-enforcement that has us where we are.
The horror, the horror. The "estranged" daughter is likely a converged, cucked conservative if not an outright SWPL. She (and the NY Times) would probably have been less horrified if they had found a trove of tranny porn among her poor father's effects.
No she ain’t. From the linked article:
She took the data she found to Common Cause, a Leftist organization. She was probably estranged because she rebelled against her Daddy. She’s probably a lesbian or at least a cat lady. If you are going to rebel against Daddy, you’re not going to do it by becoming a moderate Republican. Leftist women with conservative fathers and Daddy Issues are as common as dirt.
If you read the article, Hofeller was hired by The Washington Free Beacon to figure out how Congressional districts would look if districting was done based upon American citizens of voting age rather than by total population as it is done now. (It’s not clear whether the latter is a Constitutional requirement but billionaire Paul Singer, owner of the Beacon, certainly has the resources for a test case.) The former makes sense since these are the people who are actually entitled to vote but, going back to the 3/5ths rule, non-voting eligible residents (slaves) were always (partly) counted . Hofeller noted that there was no really good data on # of citizens in each district and mentioned that it would be nice if the census asked for this so good data would exist. Data is good, right?
Well, data is NOT good, sometimes. Lebanon has not had a census since the 1930s since it would cause political problems to know how the ethnic composition of the country has changed (Muslim (esp. Shia) vs. Christian). Better not to know the truth.
The reason this is an issue now is that the S. Ct. is about to rule on whether the citizenship question can remain on the Census and this is a last minute Hail Mary to change the outcome, which is otherwise an almost sure loser given the composition of the Court. So Stephanie Hofeller is this year’s Christine Blasey Ford. The NY Times, just like in the case of Dr. Prof. Ford, prints a back story for her that presents her as just a “concerned citizen” who came forward as her patriotic duty and not someone who has been carefully prepared and groomed by Leftist activist organizations. The whole thing stinks. Mainly this will excite fund raising by these organizations and be used as a campaign issue – I doubt that it will actually change the outcome in court.
Remember in the summer of 2016 when progressives were setting up various organizations and systems to monitor and destroy pro-Trump "fake news." And then in the space of only a couple of months Trump co-opted the phrase, using it to refer to CNN and its ilk. And you started seeing headlines like "How The Right Co-Opted ‘Fake News'" and "Why I'm done saying 'fake news'"?
Today for the first time I saw the word "woke" being used in the sense of having a heightened awareness of a right-wing related topic. Yes! I think it is time to co-opt "woke," to use it in contexts the opposite of how it has been used. For a start, "woke to" might be best, "He's woke to the truth of HBD," "She's woke to the lies of pro-choice activists." As the word is diluted, the "to" can be dropped it can become more subtly context sensitive.
Language control is how the left keeps the right on a short leash. Co-opting is a good counter tactic.
You could even just randomly misuse words. Call Ta-Nehisi Coates a white supremacist, without explanation. See how it's interpreted. Maybe it will go somewhere interesting.
You could call it, say, the Great Awakening, or if you like The Enlightenment.
Did they ask some respondents?
Yes, this is of course the NY Times being weasel wordy. Good reading between the lines. Pretty soon all non-woke Americans will have Pravda level reading-between-the-lines ability – that’s the only way you can read the NY Times nowadays as other than a propaganda rag.
The answer is that the Census usually has TWO forms. There is a short form questionnaire that is sent to most of the population and then there is a long form which a much smaller percentage gets that has more detailed questions, including citizenship.
https://www.census.gov/dmd/www/pdf/d3239a.pdf
If you send the long form to a truly random cross section of the population then you can extrapolate the data in a statistically valid way. The whole census is kind of dumb in that it predates statistical sampling – you really don’t have to count every single person in order to know how many people there are.
Important to note that the population size of each district is about the same: 710,000.
the Democrat, Lucille Roybal-Allard looks quite white, but likely identifies as Hispanic and wears the Roman Catholic badge. Pretty typical.
Democrats are really just steamed that Republican controlled State legislatures don't cave to media pressures and create Districts that are 52-48 Democrat instead of 52-48 Republican with the remainders.
Reporter Michael Wines begins the quoted article with
> Thomas B. Hofeller achieved near-mythic status in the Republican Party as the Michelangelo of gerrymandering
Makes sense to the NYT’s target audience! Republicans evil, gerrymandering evil, combine to get a gerrymandering Republican supervillian (a dead one, fortunately).
Of course there is that other part to the story that, Pravda style, we only discuss by omission. Inner Party members have no need for a reminder, so we can spare Outer Party members from the confusion it would cause.
“Majority minority” congressional districts drawn to meet the goals of the Voting Rights Act(s). Google searches bring up plenty of good-citizen type complaints about gerrymandering, including racial gerrymandering. And plenty of good-woke-citizen type websites on how to expand this idea to further build NAM power. Example, publicmapping.org.
From that site, here is a map of two VRA-inspired Chicago districts.
Warhol didn't get it quite right for the world we live in now. In future America, everyone (at least every white male) will be Emmanuel Goldstein for 15 minutes.
I see no Constitutional bar--though, of course, the litigation would thunder down--to any state abolishing single-member districts in favor of some sort of single-transferrable-vote proportional represenation.
Would be fine by me. I'd like a more ideological politics. I'd vote for the nationalist/close-the-border Republican slate.
You argue like a woman.
-de facto open borders
- to be the party White people vote for
- to not be seen as the White people's party
- to raise their future estranged daughters to celebrate a colourblind AmericaPerhaps it's for the best that this house of cards is finally falling? Maybe we Anglosphere Whites need to drop these roundabout techniques and oblique messages and simply work for what we want? Our White cousins in Eastern Europe, Latin America and Quebec seem to have far fewer estranged daughters snitching on their fathers and brothers.
How DO you keep your children from being “estranged”? Rebellious children are an ancient problem. Conservative parenting sometimes only leads to more rebellion. Even the Amish have children who rebel. Having a broader culture that is antithetical to your values only makes the problem worse, but fixing the broader culture is a hell of a tall order.
Here I fixed it for you:
These two areas now have among the lowest birth rates in the world. I really don’t know of any area left outside of religious fanatic communities were daughters stay home and devote themselves to Kinder, Küche, Kirche anymore.
-- blank slatism
-- minoritarianism -- diversity is our strength
-- multiulturalism
-- nation of immigrants-ism
-- feminism
-- deviantism (the LGBQWERTY freakshow--a subset of minoritarianism)People, groups of people, have evolved in different environments and hence evolved differently--enhanced because humans alter their environment so you actually have gene-culture co-evolution. People of different races, cultures, ethnic groups are not on-average "the same", but differ widely in important ways. Do not take what your people do/think/behave and project it onto everyone.White European peoples have built the world's most free and productive civilization. Sure we'd done all the usual bad stuff--war, slavery, genocide, murder, rape, slaughter. But more positive contributions than anyone else, including the greatest human achievement yet--modern science; rationally, empirically investigating reality.
Men and women are different--physically and mentally. Not better/worse but complementary--joyously complementary. Neither men nor women are entitled to anything from the other. (What feminism demands--that men be forced to give women stuff, without women giving them anything.) Rather men and women only succeed, only "win"--long term--by joining together and voluntarily sharing with each other our respective gifts and strengths. "Conservatism" is--by default--the correct view. What exists ... exists for a reason: because it worked for our ancestors, helped them survive and pass on their civilization. There may be a need to reform this or that ... but be careful pitching stuff out you think is "out of date". It's probably more useful, more important than you think--perhaps even critical!
My surmise is that rebellious children are a product of formal/compulsory K-12 education and mass communications creating a saleable "youth culture." Without these the youth have no idea of a common interest.
https://www.herald-dispatch.com/news/recent_news/couple-in-w-va-torture-case-accused-of-taking-son/article_c501a7ff-d873-5792-ac95-695fa083dd3b.html
> Thomas B. Hofeller achieved near-mythic status in the Republican Party as the Michelangelo of gerrymandering
Makes sense to the NYT's target audience! Republicans evil, gerrymandering evil, combine to get a gerrymandering Republican supervillian (a dead one, fortunately).
Of course there is that other part to the story that, Pravda style, we only discuss by omission. Inner Party members have no need for a reminder, so we can spare Outer Party members from the confusion it would cause.
"Majority minority" congressional districts drawn to meet the goals of the Voting Rights Act(s). Google searches bring up plenty of good-citizen type complaints about gerrymandering, including racial gerrymandering. And plenty of good-woke-citizen type websites on how to expand this idea to further build NAM power. Example, publicmapping.org.
From that site, here is a map of two VRA-inspired Chicago districts.
http://www.publicmapping.org/_/rsrc/1554732362543/what-is-redistricting/redistricting-criteria-the-voting-rights-act/IL-04.png?height=228&width=400
Not just the NYT. Just like with Blasey Ford this is a well coordinated push. “JournoList” is not dead, it’s just gone underground. Be prepared for this story to be flogged day and night on CNN, in the WashPo, even by Colbert from now until the S. Ct. decision. Thomas B. Hofeller is going to be Emmanuel Goldstein for this week. Then once the court decides, he (and his “estranged” daughter) will never be heard of again.
Warhol didn’t get it quite right for the world we live in now. In future America, everyone (at least every white male) will be Emmanuel Goldstein for 15 minutes.
Two thing of note:
In an actual constitutional republic what’s on some guys computer files can have no relevance to the constitutionality of anything. The President either does or does not have the power to put this question on the census. Constitutionally, a clear reading–there is no barrier. Whether there’s some barrier in federal law i don’t know. But i doubt very much that there is, or we’d have heard about it.
But we once again have lawyers and judges ripping at republican governance trying to govern us themselves.
Yet another woke white woman, a traitor to her father, her lineage, her race, her civilization.
Hate to say it but … cue Whiskey.
After the 2018 elections they hold only 7 of 53. Mass immigration has utterly devastated the Republican Party in that state. But let’s worry about a little gerrymandering here and there.
Yeah, and the cucks have been, and still are, enthusiastically supporting this mass replacement. Not only do they betray us, but they are too stupid to look after their own hides. Screw 'em. Just say no to cucks.
I don’t buy that. I think they know exactly what they are doing. They’ll get a nice, well compensated donor prepared gig with a think tank or corporate board after they adopt post-Cold War GOP platforms and predictably lose.
As Republicans generally believe that the primary purpose of the government is to serve the Job Creators, this doesn’t cause any cognitive dissonance.
Prior to that? Well, uh, we won't talk about that. Why? Because the Democrats held control of the House for 40 straight years, all through most of the Eisenhower era and through all of the Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush I presidencies. Control of the House never changed. Not once. Why not? In large part because of Democratic Party gerrymandering.
And of course during that era the Democrats managed to come up with the ultimate gerrymander of all: electing a completely new American people.
I mean I can totally understand why the Dems are worried about gerrymandering. It is kind of evil. So in the spirit of compromise why don't end one evil beneficial to the Democrats and one evil beneficial to the Republicans: we'll end both gerrymandering and mass immigration/open borders. Sound like a compromise?
It is terrifying that the Democrat “answer” appears to have gone through without resistance: nominally apolitical “anti”-gerrymandering councils.
If you read the article, Hofeller was hired by The Washington Free Beacon to figure out how Congressional districts would look if districting was done based upon American citizens of voting age rather than by total population as it is done now. (It's not clear whether the latter is a Constitutional requirement but billionaire Paul Singer, owner of the Beacon, certainly has the resources for a test case.) The former makes sense since these are the people who are actually entitled to vote but, going back to the 3/5ths rule, non-voting eligible residents (slaves) were always (partly) counted . Hofeller noted that there was no really good data on # of citizens in each district and mentioned that it would be nice if the census asked for this so good data would exist. Data is good, right?Well, data is NOT good, sometimes. Lebanon has not had a census since the 1930s since it would cause political problems to know how the ethnic composition of the country has changed (Muslim (esp. Shia) vs. Christian). Better not to know the truth. The reason this is an issue now is that the S. Ct. is about to rule on whether the citizenship question can remain on the Census and this is a last minute Hail Mary to change the outcome, which is otherwise an almost sure loser given the composition of the Court. So Stephanie Hofeller is this year's Christine Blasey Ford. The NY Times, just like in the case of Dr. Prof. Ford, prints a back story for her that presents her as just a "concerned citizen" who came forward as her patriotic duty and not someone who has been carefully prepared and groomed by Leftist activist organizations. The whole thing stinks. Mainly this will excite fund raising by these organizations and be used as a campaign issue - I doubt that it will actually change the outcome in court.
Hofeller was 75 years old. He knows his estranged daughter is his heir and if he even suspects she is a lefty zealot, he should have taken legal precautions to make sure she didn’t end up with his computer hard drives when he died. Even one of the few smart guys they have helps the stupid party earn that moniker.
Again, read the articles about this woman in the West Virginia papers published in 2012 and 2015. She is damaged goods.
Hofeller's wife survived him. She's his heir unless he left a will naming his crazy daughter. The NYT buys the daughter's made up story (likely coached by Common Cause lawyers) that she packed up and took the drives when helping her mother clean up and organize his effects. Effectively, that his life's work was discarded - trash. That's a lie: when she removed the drives, she committed a theft. And the NYT also accepts w/o question that in a search for an estate lawyer to assist her mother, she visited the Common Cause offices in Raleigh. Right, that's the first place you'd look for an estate lawyer.
See @Art Deco's reply on the daughter's history and her estrangement from her parents. The daughter is deranged.
She needs to be arrested and charged with theft and Common Cause needs to be challenged on their use of stolen data and sanctioned by the court where it was introduced.
Here I fixed it for you:These two areas now have among the lowest birth rates in the world. I really don't know of any area left outside of religious fanatic communities were daughters stay home and devote themselves to Kinder, Küche, Kirche anymore.
It’s a good question.
For me the answer has been to try and convey–in word and deed–what is important in life. That it isn’t all the transient b.s. our debased culture throws up, but family–having children and passing on to them one’s civilization. My kids know that this was also easily the most enjoyable and rewarding part of my life. And i’ve let ’em know–also the most complex and interesting experience one can have.
I think in our culture/politics today it’s necessary for based parents to do specific debunking of a lot of the b.s. that’s tossed up:
— blank slatism
— minoritarianism — diversity is our strength
— multiulturalism
— nation of immigrants-ism
— feminism
— deviantism (the LGBQWERTY freakshow–a subset of minoritarianism)
People, groups of people, have evolved in different environments and hence evolved differently–enhanced because humans alter their environment so you actually have gene-culture co-evolution. People of different races, cultures, ethnic groups are not on-average “the same”, but differ widely in important ways. Do not take what your people do/think/behave and project it onto everyone.
White European peoples have built the world’s most free and productive civilization. Sure we’d done all the usual bad stuff–war, slavery, genocide, murder, rape, slaughter. But more positive contributions than anyone else, including the greatest human achievement yet–modern science; rationally, empirically investigating reality.
Men and women are different–physically and mentally. Not better/worse but complementary–joyously complementary. Neither men nor women are entitled to anything from the other. (What feminism demands–that men be forced to give women stuff, without women giving them anything.) Rather men and women only succeed, only “win”–long term–by joining together and voluntarily sharing with each other our respective gifts and strengths.
“Conservatism” is–by default–the correct view. What exists … exists for a reason: because it worked for our ancestors, helped them survive and pass on their civilization. There may be a need to reform this or that … but be careful pitching stuff out you think is “out of date”. It’s probably more useful, more important than you think–perhaps even critical!
> Thomas B. Hofeller achieved near-mythic status in the Republican Party as the Michelangelo of gerrymandering
Makes sense to the NYT's target audience! Republicans evil, gerrymandering evil, combine to get a gerrymandering Republican supervillian (a dead one, fortunately).
Of course there is that other part to the story that, Pravda style, we only discuss by omission. Inner Party members have no need for a reminder, so we can spare Outer Party members from the confusion it would cause.
"Majority minority" congressional districts drawn to meet the goals of the Voting Rights Act(s). Google searches bring up plenty of good-citizen type complaints about gerrymandering, including racial gerrymandering. And plenty of good-woke-citizen type websites on how to expand this idea to further build NAM power. Example, publicmapping.org.
From that site, here is a map of two VRA-inspired Chicago districts.
http://www.publicmapping.org/_/rsrc/1554732362543/what-is-redistricting/redistricting-criteria-the-voting-rights-act/IL-04.png?height=228&width=400
If people really do not like gerrymandering … they can get rid of it.
I see no Constitutional bar–though, of course, the litigation would thunder down–to any state abolishing single-member districts in favor of some sort of single-transferrable-vote proportional represenation.
Would be fine by me. I’d like a more ideological politics. I’d vote for the nationalist/close-the-border Republican slate.
The "Gerrymandered" Districts favoring Republicans are that way because Republicans in those states have won multiple elections including in the off years.
In my view voting is an expression of two possible factors - choice, but also intensity. The only way for intensity in the election to be measured is a matter of who shows up for all of the elections.
Of course, Democrats could move their platform back to the center and recruit and field candidates who are competitive in those Districts - that's not what they want. The fringe is in control, and it wants hundreds of Districts which are numerically quite balanced between R voters and D voters to elect doctrinaire left wing Democrats and they want it now.
That was a little before my time. First time I heard it was this version:
Here I fixed it for you:These two areas now have among the lowest birth rates in the world. I really don't know of any area left outside of religious fanatic communities were daughters stay home and devote themselves to Kinder, Küche, Kirche anymore.
Rebellious children are an eternal problem but hostile and subversive mass media and mass education systems are not. Those things are only about forty or fifty years old. Both mass media and mass post-secondary education are right now in well-earned crises of legitimacy. Will White children, child-like adults and women become less alienated from their own communities and families once the mass culture megaphone loses its strength? Most likely they will, if history is any guide. Having people settle down to the normal human level of alienation and rebelliousness would be enough to change everything. Once TV and crappy universities die off, the sky’s the limit.
Here I fixed it for you:These two areas now have among the lowest birth rates in the world. I really don't know of any area left outside of religious fanatic communities were daughters stay home and devote themselves to Kinder, Küche, Kirche anymore.
Are they? I don’t see much support for this, since for most of human history the stakes of displeasing one’s parents were rather high.
My surmise is that rebellious children are a product of formal/compulsory K-12 education and mass communications creating a saleable “youth culture.” Without these the youth have no idea of a common interest.
The US once had state-wide districts in some states – there is no Constitutional bar. As recently as the early 1960s, 22 of the 435 representatives were elected at-large. However, this was outlawed (by statute) in 1967. Of course this statute could be repealed.
http://archive.fairvote.org/reports/monopoly/mast.html
However, there have been suits in some cities barring at-large city councils on the basis that they were racially discriminatory – in a say 40% black/ 60% white city with all at-large seats there might be zero blacks elected but with districting 4 out of 10 council seats would be black. That argument would likely be made here. If at large districting was a Republican proposal it would be assumed (by the Left if not necessarily the courts) that it was being done for racist reasons.
-- blank slatism
-- minoritarianism -- diversity is our strength
-- multiulturalism
-- nation of immigrants-ism
-- feminism
-- deviantism (the LGBQWERTY freakshow--a subset of minoritarianism)People, groups of people, have evolved in different environments and hence evolved differently--enhanced because humans alter their environment so you actually have gene-culture co-evolution. People of different races, cultures, ethnic groups are not on-average "the same", but differ widely in important ways. Do not take what your people do/think/behave and project it onto everyone.White European peoples have built the world's most free and productive civilization. Sure we'd done all the usual bad stuff--war, slavery, genocide, murder, rape, slaughter. But more positive contributions than anyone else, including the greatest human achievement yet--modern science; rationally, empirically investigating reality.
Men and women are different--physically and mentally. Not better/worse but complementary--joyously complementary. Neither men nor women are entitled to anything from the other. (What feminism demands--that men be forced to give women stuff, without women giving them anything.) Rather men and women only succeed, only "win"--long term--by joining together and voluntarily sharing with each other our respective gifts and strengths. "Conservatism" is--by default--the correct view. What exists ... exists for a reason: because it worked for our ancestors, helped them survive and pass on their civilization. There may be a need to reform this or that ... but be careful pitching stuff out you think is "out of date". It's probably more useful, more important than you think--perhaps even critical!
But did it work? Are your children, esp. your daughters, honestly as conservative as you are, all of them? Would they publicly and wholeheartedly endorse all of the principles that you stated above and advocate for them?
I see no Constitutional bar--though, of course, the litigation would thunder down--to any state abolishing single-member districts in favor of some sort of single-transferrable-vote proportional represenation.
Would be fine by me. I'd like a more ideological politics. I'd vote for the nationalist/close-the-border Republican slate.
Drawing Congressional District boundaries is inherently political.
The “Gerrymandered” Districts favoring Republicans are that way because Republicans in those states have won multiple elections including in the off years.
In my view voting is an expression of two possible factors – choice, but also intensity. The only way for intensity in the election to be measured is a matter of who shows up for all of the elections.
Of course, Democrats could move their platform back to the center and recruit and field candidates who are competitive in those Districts – that’s not what they want. The fringe is in control, and it wants hundreds of Districts which are numerically quite balanced between R voters and D voters to elect doctrinaire left wing Democrats and they want it now.
But we once again have lawyers and judges ripping at republican governance trying to govern us themselves.Yet another woke white woman, a traitor to her father, her lineage, her race, her civilization.
Hate to say it but ... cue Whiskey.
The Supreme Court is not a trial court. It is not a court of first impression (except in certain extremely narrow circumstances of which this is not one). The S. Court only works from what is called “the record on appeal” (it accepts the facts as determined by the lower courts as a given) and only rules on questions of law, not fact. This means that newly uncovered evidence cannot generally be admitted before the Court, period. The anti-citizenship lawyers may try to get this in somehow, on some emergency exception (mainly as a PR stunt but also because the theory in litigation is you throw everything that you got up on the wall and see what sticks) but the Court will rule against them and won’t accept the “evidence”. But the MSM (in the bag for the Dems) is not bound by any such rules.
My surmise is that rebellious children are a product of formal/compulsory K-12 education and mass communications creating a saleable "youth culture." Without these the youth have no idea of a common interest.
Wasn’t Cain being “rebellious” when he killed Abel? Wasn’t he “estranged” from his family afterward?
Here I fixed it for you:These two areas now have among the lowest birth rates in the world. I really don't know of any area left outside of religious fanatic communities were daughters stay home and devote themselves to Kinder, Küche, Kirche anymore.
This family had some peculiar problems, and it doesn’t look like the source was the late Mr. Hofeller.
https://www.herald-dispatch.com/news/recent_news/couple-in-w-va-torture-case-accused-of-taking-son/article_c501a7ff-d873-5792-ac95-695fa083dd3b.html
http://jimfishertruecrime.blogspot.com/2012/07/peter-lizon-hillbilly-husband-from-hell.html
https://www.herald-dispatch.com/news/recent_news/couple-in-w-va-torture-case-accused-of-taking-son/article_c501a7ff-d873-5792-ac95-695fa083dd3b.html
Holy cow. No wonder many people worry about falling out of the middle class. “Smash patriarchy!” they said.
Apparently his wife let her in. She said the daughter told her she was looking for family photos, not realizing that she was really a Democrat party operative.
No.
I’m AnotherDad, not SuperDad.
It takes a special kind of stupid to fail to comprehend why 11 years after the Holocaust Jews wouldn’t want to be identified in a government census.
He was married and had other children. It sounds like she was extended some courtesy by her mother and or siblings and took the opportunity to ransack his computer.
Again, read the articles about this woman in the West Virginia papers published in 2012 and 2015. She is damaged goods.
The uber-feminist I’m best acquainted with is the daughter of an anthropology professor who was in his prime a conventional academic in his dispositions, though not aggressive about it. She’s had periods of estrangement from him.
did they oppose other racial groups being identified in a census?
“… he should have taken legal precautions to make sure she didn’t end up with his computer hard drives when he died. Even one of the few smart guys they have helps the stupid party earn that moniker.”
Hofeller’s wife survived him. She’s his heir unless he left a will naming his crazy daughter. The NYT buys the daughter’s made up story (likely coached by Common Cause lawyers) that she packed up and took the drives when helping her mother clean up and organize his effects. Effectively, that his life’s work was discarded – trash. That’s a lie: when she removed the drives, she committed a theft. And the NYT also accepts w/o question that in a search for an estate lawyer to assist her mother, she visited the Common Cause offices in Raleigh. Right, that’s the first place you’d look for an estate lawyer.
See ’s reply on the daughter’s history and her estrangement from her parents. The daughter is deranged.
She needs to be arrested and charged with theft and Common Cause needs to be challenged on their use of stolen data and sanctioned by the court where it was introduced.
I am gonna have to agree with the commenter who came in from the cold here with regard to adolescent revolt not being a timeless or universal phenomenon. I seem to recall reading that for much of recorded history, filicide has been legal in a lot of societies, including in Greece, Rome and a good chunk of the Near and Far East. That pre-Islamic tradition probably lies at the root of many Muslim honor killings in the Near East. I expect we don’t hear much about honor killings in places like Malaysia, Indonesia or Muslim sub-Saharan Africa because they don’t have a pre-Islamic tradition of filicide.
https://archive.org/details/ReviloOliverOnHomosexuality
Hofeller's wife survived him. She's his heir unless he left a will naming his crazy daughter. The NYT buys the daughter's made up story (likely coached by Common Cause lawyers) that she packed up and took the drives when helping her mother clean up and organize his effects. Effectively, that his life's work was discarded - trash. That's a lie: when she removed the drives, she committed a theft. And the NYT also accepts w/o question that in a search for an estate lawyer to assist her mother, she visited the Common Cause offices in Raleigh. Right, that's the first place you'd look for an estate lawyer.
See @Art Deco's reply on the daughter's history and her estrangement from her parents. The daughter is deranged.
She needs to be arrested and charged with theft and Common Cause needs to be challenged on their use of stolen data and sanctioned by the court where it was introduced.
The daughter’s story reeked of being phony and of having been a carefully tailored lie, polished by the Common Cause liars (oops I mean lawyers) and Dem. Party PR experts. The same treatment that Dr. Prof. B-F got, and Jackie Coakley too. The only thing missing is some fake story about how she was “estranged” because her late father molested her – waiting for the shoe to drop on that. And then the NY Times prints it word for word with no skepticism – no attempt by their reporters to poke holes in her story.
Prior to that? Well, uh, we won't talk about that. Why? Because the Democrats held control of the House for 40 straight years, all through most of the Eisenhower era and through all of the Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush I presidencies. Control of the House never changed. Not once. Why not? In large part because of Democratic Party gerrymandering.
And of course during that era the Democrats managed to come up with the ultimate gerrymander of all: electing a completely new American people.
I mean I can totally understand why the Dems are worried about gerrymandering. It is kind of evil. So in the spirit of compromise why don't end one evil beneficial to the Democrats and one evil beneficial to the Republicans: we'll end both gerrymandering and mass immigration/open borders. Sound like a compromise?
Jesus K. Rist. Have you ever SEEN some districts? My own has 5 unconnected sections sort of salamandering jaggedly around cities. They are ABSURD. It’s so painfully obvious what they are for.
My god, first of all, why would you guys support Republicans? I thought you were all “different” and all that.
And here’s the inarguable fact. Were districts allotted fairly, randomly, contiguously, there would be no more Republican party.
This, you may surprised to learn, does not make me happy. It frightens me. Republicans are bribed thieves and idiots. But Democrats are bribed insane incompetent foam at the mouth warmongers and simultaneously hypocritical and naive identity politickers.
The only reason the overwhelming majority of Americans vaguely support them is because the overwhelming majority of Americans are basically socialists (the real kind–the kind who, for instance, oppose immigration), and they think (wrongly) that Democrats are the best they can do in view of their actual beliefs.
The US Census was instituted for the practical purpose of allocating seats in the US House.
The only allowable (constitutional) question is “How many folks live at this address?”
This census question about citizenship is a big load of crap; *US* citizenship is perhaps the *worst* part of that ridiculous, Reconstruction Era, lawyers dream #14.
But then, how would all of those six-figured, government bureaucrat-statisticians ever justify their existence?
The [“long”] census form is just [very] Big Government.
Mine always goes straight into the trash.
Every ten years, I disable the doorbell.
My surmise is that rebellious children are a product of formal/compulsory K-12 education and mass communications creating a saleable "youth culture." Without these the youth have no idea of a common interest.
Intergenerational respect goes both ways though. It’s laughable to see parents with irresponsible and chaotic personal lives – especially serial infidelities and divorces – demanding respect from their children. It’s not just the kids that are broken.
The most surprising thing in the article to me was this:Can this be right? I thought that the census had a citizenship question for most of the censuses. Was it not asked of all respondents?
They absolutely asked. Columns 15 and 16 of the 1910 census form asked the year of immigration and the year the person had become naturalized or had “taken out papers”, i.e. had started the naturalization process. There was only one form that year and everyone was asked to enter data in those columns.
A “hillbilly” from Czechia. Well, certainly very very unlikely to be one of the snake-handling fundamentalists of lib nightmares.
If you read the article, Hofeller was hired by The Washington Free Beacon to figure out how Congressional districts would look if districting was done based upon American citizens of voting age rather than by total population as it is done now. (It's not clear whether the latter is a Constitutional requirement but billionaire Paul Singer, owner of the Beacon, certainly has the resources for a test case.) The former makes sense since these are the people who are actually entitled to vote but, going back to the 3/5ths rule, non-voting eligible residents (slaves) were always (partly) counted . Hofeller noted that there was no really good data on # of citizens in each district and mentioned that it would be nice if the census asked for this so good data would exist. Data is good, right?Well, data is NOT good, sometimes. Lebanon has not had a census since the 1930s since it would cause political problems to know how the ethnic composition of the country has changed (Muslim (esp. Shia) vs. Christian). Better not to know the truth. The reason this is an issue now is that the S. Ct. is about to rule on whether the citizenship question can remain on the Census and this is a last minute Hail Mary to change the outcome, which is otherwise an almost sure loser given the composition of the Court. So Stephanie Hofeller is this year's Christine Blasey Ford. The NY Times, just like in the case of Dr. Prof. Ford, prints a back story for her that presents her as just a "concerned citizen" who came forward as her patriotic duty and not someone who has been carefully prepared and groomed by Leftist activist organizations. The whole thing stinks. Mainly this will excite fund raising by these organizations and be used as a campaign issue - I doubt that it will actually change the outcome in court.
Wow, thanks for the info!
You reminded me of this gem, from the entertaining Revilo P Oliver
https://archive.org/details/ReviloOliverOnHomosexuality
When we are ruled by President Harris for life be sure to thank White women.
A white woman will end Republican chances? This woman embarrassed herself and her family for what. The revelation that her party operative father wanted to win elections… ?
Literally nobody gives a shit about this. It was top story for half a day, two days ago, because some media fags decided to push it. That’s what she ransacked her father’s possessions for.
You “argue” like a cuckold and write like a fag.
Nothing in the world signals your devotion to the dictatorship of the proletariat than picking over the dead bones of your father.
-de facto open borders
- to be the party White people vote for
- to not be seen as the White people's party
- to raise their future estranged daughters to celebrate a colourblind AmericaPerhaps it's for the best that this house of cards is finally falling? Maybe we Anglosphere Whites need to drop these roundabout techniques and oblique messages and simply work for what we want? Our White cousins in Eastern Europe, Latin America and Quebec seem to have far fewer estranged daughters snitching on their fathers and brothers.
Yep.
> Thomas B. Hofeller achieved near-mythic status in the Republican Party as the Michelangelo of gerrymandering
Makes sense to the NYT's target audience! Republicans evil, gerrymandering evil, combine to get a gerrymandering Republican supervillian (a dead one, fortunately).
Of course there is that other part to the story that, Pravda style, we only discuss by omission. Inner Party members have no need for a reminder, so we can spare Outer Party members from the confusion it would cause.
"Majority minority" congressional districts drawn to meet the goals of the Voting Rights Act(s). Google searches bring up plenty of good-citizen type complaints about gerrymandering, including racial gerrymandering. And plenty of good-woke-citizen type websites on how to expand this idea to further build NAM power. Example, publicmapping.org.
From that site, here is a map of two VRA-inspired Chicago districts.
http://www.publicmapping.org/_/rsrc/1554732362543/what-is-redistricting/redistricting-criteria-the-voting-rights-act/IL-04.png?height=228&width=400
Ah yes, the condom district. Mme and I live in it.
Here I fixed it for you:These two areas now have among the lowest birth rates in the world. I really don't know of any area left outside of religious fanatic communities were daughters stay home and devote themselves to Kinder, Küche, Kirche anymore.
Women feel nothing but contempt for weakness in men. Head your household and you’ll have devoted daughters who follow your lead and advice. Fail and they’ll rebel and should.
After the 1986 elections - the elections held the same year as the passage of Simpson-Mazzoli (aka the 1986 amnesty) - Republicans held 18 of Calfiornia's 45 House seats.
After the 2018 elections they hold only 7 of 53. Mass immigration has utterly devastated the Republican Party in that state. But let's worry about a little gerrymandering here and there.
Republicans held 14 seats last year. Nearly all the change you see is a result of anti-Trump sentiment among white professional class Californians. Only four of those seats (the drop from 18 to 14 between 1986 and 2017) were lost to demographic replacement. Seven were lost to Trump’s idiot shambling and lying offending professional white voters.
http://archive.fairvote.org/reports/monopoly/mast.html
However, there have been suits in some cities barring at-large city councils on the basis that they were racially discriminatory - in a say 40% black/ 60% white city with all at-large seats there might be zero blacks elected but with districting 4 out of 10 council seats would be black. That argument would likely be made here. If at large districting was a Republican proposal it would be assumed (by the Left if not necessarily the courts) that it was being done for racist reasons.
The primary purpose of the law in question was to legalize an immigrant. The provision to require every congressional election to be in a single member district was an amendment to that.