RSS
Peter Beinart repeats in The Atlantic in “The Republican Party’s White Strategy the conventional wisdom about how California Republicans shot themselves in the foot by supporting immigration restrictionist Proposition 187 in 1994:
From 1994 to 1998, in other words, California Republicans rebelled against Latino immigration in many of the ways Ann Coulter now hopes America as a whole will. What has happened since is instructive.
When Pete Wilson announced his presidential campaign [in 1995], California was a Republican-leaning state. Between the end of World War II and the end of the Cold War, it had gone to the Republican presidential candidate nine out of 11 times and elected a Republican governor seven out of 11 times.
Mr. Beinart is being disingenuous with the history when he writes “9 out of 11 times” to suggest a steady reality. In truth, California went Republican in 9 out of 10 elections from 1952 thru 1988 (often by narrow margins, and often by having a Republican superstar on the national ticket), but, beginning spectacularly in 1992, two years before Proposition 187, went Democratic six times and counting.
The New York Times’ John Harwood attempts a similar ruse in
In California, a Lesson for Donald Trump and the G.O.P.
By JOHN HARWOOD JUNE 21, 2016… [Proposition 187] worked in the short run. Mr. Wilson won re-election handily.
Yet California Republicans have struggled ever since. The signal Mr. Wilson and his party sent in 1994 alienated Latino and other nonwhite voters as their political clout was swelling.
Before 1994, Republican nominees had carried California in six of seven presidential contests. Since then, they’ve lost all five, averaging 40 percent of the vote.
Beinart and Harwood are both covering up the fact that California had turned into a Democratic leaning state several years before 1994’s Proposition 187. California’s switch over from red-purple to blue happened at the polls in 1992, two years earlier.
A more straightforward NYT paragraph would have read:
Before 1992, Republican nominees had carried California in six straight presidential contests. Since then, they’ve lost all six, averaging 40 percent of the vote.
But then they would been reduced to arguing that 1994’s Proposition 187 caused the GOP’s very bad 1992 in California (the Republicans lost not just the Electoral College but two Senate elections in one day that year) by sending back Bad Karma Waves from the Future, or something.
I realized that Beinart and Harwood are just repeating the Conventional Wisdom, but they’re smart enough to have looked up the actual numbers and noticed that the Conventional Wisdom is wrong.
California had voted Republican in 9 out of 10 Presidential elections between 1952 and 1988. But George W. Bush had been crushed in 1992 in California, winning only 32.6% of the vote and losing to Bill Clinton by 13.4 percentage points. Nationally, Bush won 37.0% and lost to Clinton by 5.6 points, so the Bush margin of defeat in California was 7.8 points worse than in the whole country.
So, the disastrous effect of Prop 187 in 1994 should have made the 1996 GOP candidate Bob Dole do even worse in Calif0rnia relative to the whole country than poor Bush did in 1992, right?
Yet in 1996, after Proposition 187, the GOP margin of defeat in California was down to 12.9 points from 13.4 points in 1992. And that’s relative to a worse national margin of defeat for the GOP candidate of 8.5 points in 1996 versus a 5.6 point national margin in 1992.
So Bush in 1992 did 7.8 points worse in California than in the whole country, while Dole in 1996, running against the same opponents, Clinton and Perot, did only 4.4 points worse in California than in the whole country.
So, between 1992 and 1996, rather than 1994’s Proposition 187 destroying the GOP in California, the GOP presidential candidate improved by a net-net-net of 3.4 points.
That’s not a huge effect, but it’s a surprising one since it’s the opposite of the endlessly repeated conventional wisdom. The numbers have been calculable for almost 20 years, but it’s so much easier to go with the myth than to do a little arithmetic.
It’s almost as if the Democrats and their media allies keep lying to the Republicans about why they shouldn’t imitate Pete Wilson’s spectacularly successful re-election campaign (from down by 20 to winning by 15 over Jerry Brown’s sister). They don’t keep recounting the same myths because they are genuinely concerned about their dear friends the Republicans hurting themselves, but because they are scared of the strategy.
More than anything else, what doomed the GOP in California was a combination of the end of the Cold War, which had paid for lots of Republican-voting military-industrial complex employees in California, and the big exodus of Republican whites to states with cheaper housing. (The GOP did well in smaller inland West states with cheaper housing due to the influx of Republican ex-Californians.)
What killed the GOP in California after its success under Wilson was its inability to run up big majorities among whites. For example, in 2000 George W. Bush won only 49% of the California white vote in the L.A. Times exit poll. In 2004, GWB won only 51% of the white vote. In 2008, the pro-amnesty John McCain, sponsor of the 2006 Kennedy-McCain amnesty bill, won only 46% of the white vote in California.
Republican candidates can’t win in diverse states like California and Texas without rolling up big white majorities, the way Romney beat Obama in Texas in 2012 by 76-24.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
“George W. Bush had been crushed in 1992 in California”: there’s less vulnerability to an embarrassing typo if you call him Bush the Elder.
By the way, Steve, I plagiarized your Tweet on Hillary being an obscurity without Bill, like GWB or Obama...
I wanted to re-Tweet it for the BernieBros, but with the Obama reference, I knew it wouldn't fly, so I re-wrote it referencing 43 without 41 and no Obama. It got some small attention.
Would that make Jeb, Bro Bush?Replies: @antipater_1, @Alec Leamas
Consider changing George W. Bush to George HW Bush. Otherwise nice post.
Kevin Drum, one of perhaps five American leftists who think for themselves, had a post on this recently:
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/06/california-and-myth-proposition-187
There's five? I wonder if there's even that many sometimes, but today I found a surprising article, and even more surprising set of comments, in the generally-leftish Naked Capitalism. It reads like they've been coming over to Steve's on the down low.
Questioning Immigration is Not Racism
Executive Summary: Immigration is primarily about lowering labor costs. No wonder the proles are upset. Site proprietor Yves Smith sounds like a closeted Trump supporter. She then pastes in an article from Australia that states that support for immigration in the developed world has suddenly collapsed. There's a bunch of multicult bumpf, then a demand that decisions about immigration should be made in the interests of existing Australians. The comments are 95% in favor.
I remember reading articles in the New York Times, pre-Proposition 187, where Clinton visited California something like 35 times in 18 months in order to solidify his win there and to develop deeper Democrat roots in the state. The point being that the Democrats saw it as fertile ground prior to 187.
How does it feel? Knowing that people like you guys will have no institutional power and you’ll have to play on a level playing field?
"People like you guys" have no institutional power and haven't for a very long time. Who do you think runs this country?
How’s things at home Tiny? Two cats & cuck porn must be pretty lonely.Replies: @Tiny Duck
Pretty impressed by how the author danced around the fact that both Sanchez and Rubio are significantly Whiter than the average Hispanic…..
Yeah, but the 3rd generation is less impressive:
Yeah, and by writing “most Latinos haven’t looked or sounded like Rubio or Sanchez” you actually mean that most of them are heavily Amerind in terms of ancestry….
The last paragraph presents the problem quite accurately.
I would only add that we (conservatives in particular and the “right” in general) continue to struggle because we are failing to formulate and communicate a clear political platform. In its absence, the “left” sneaks in with hardly anything and keeps stealing elections… to then achieve nothing good with the offices it occupies.
kinda on topic:
California’s Newest Fault Line
As Republicans decline, Golden State Democrats divide over race.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/californias-newest-fault-line-14583.html
If they want to play racial games then the rest of us can too.Replies: @newrouter, @(((Owen)))
It is difficult to believe R’s are just that stupid, so venality might explain it. But stupidity is more charitable, so I’m assuming stupidity is the explanation.
or just 41/43…
By the way, Steve, I plagiarized your Tweet on Hillary being an obscurity without Bill, like GWB or Obama…
I wanted to re-Tweet it for the BernieBros, but with the Obama reference, I knew it wouldn’t fly, so I re-wrote it referencing 43 without 41 and no Obama. It got some small attention.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/06/california-and-myth-proposition-187Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @H. Ross, @CJ
His conclusions are quite different from Steve’s.
“level playing fields” are located near where the unicorns roam
The 187 nonsense sort of functions as the template for “let in voluminous numbers of Muslim MENA refugees or Muslims will get angry and kill you.”
You won’t like living in Brazil either.
California’s Newest Fault Line
As Republicans decline, Golden State Democrats divide over race.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/californias-newest-fault-line-14583.htmlReplies: @The most deplorable one, @Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta, @Uncle Peregrine
Yes, all Republicans should vote for Harris’ opponent in November.
If they want to play racial games then the rest of us can too.
The Sandersistas will eventually break against her in the general.
Sanchez, on the other hand, is a grassroots pol committed to her constituency. That isn't just Latinxs; it's always mostly been aspirational Orange County working class and nouveau riche. She's never had much party support and has been willing to be an old fashioned horse trader in the House, working with both parties.
So, yes. Republicans should—if they know what's good for them—break hard for Sanchez.Replies: @Olorin, @Richard
Beinart’s article is rather persuasive, and deserves a better response than this, which relies too much on understanding details of California politics history. (For example, I always forget what “Proposition 187” means.)
Unrelated: I wish Unz’s excellent commenting system had an extra checkbox: “Not for publication (typo reporting)” that would allow compulsive proofreaders to send corrections without polluting the comment section. Examples for this article: “two you years earlier.”, “it’s inability”. And to get fancy, some form of standardization of typo reporting would eliminate what must be a tedious steady stream of duplicate error corrections.
Also, I imagine on the Unz side, the inside knowledge of who whitelists whom might in some way be useful to Unz.Replies: @Veracitor
Unrelated: I wish Unz's excellent commenting system had an extra checkbox: "Not for publication (typo reporting)" that would allow compulsive proofreaders to send corrections without polluting the comment section. Examples for this article: "two you years earlier.", "it's inability". And to get fancy, some form of standardization of typo reporting would eliminate what must be a tedious steady stream of duplicate error corrections.Replies: @European-American, @Dissident, @Almost Missouri
PS: I’ve already forgotten what “Proposition 187” was and I looked it up 10 minutes ago! 😀
Does anyone recall news reports from the 1980s claiming that republicans had had an advantage in California presidential elections in part because the election was called before polls closed in the state? Also, apparently, the republican advantage in absentee ballots began to lessen in the late 1980s . . .
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2245&dat=19900410&id=o94zAAAAIBAJ&sjid=MDIHAAAAIBAJ&pg=5992,5433193&hl=en
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19870909&id=EdwxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=P-UFAAAAIBAJ&pg=4382,7016002&hl=en
An Ilegal Immigrant from England tried to steal a police officer’s gun in order to murder Donald Trump at his rally. He must be extremely happy with the DIEversity in Londonstan. Talk about a true believer of the Left Wing cause.
An Ilegal Immigrant from England tried to steal a police officer’s gun in order to murder Donald Trump at his rally. He must be extremely happy with the DIEversity in Londonstan. Talk about a true believer of the Left Wing cause, since he was willing to either spend life in prison or get the death penalty to advance Left Wing causes.
How does it feel to be a human being who can’t pass the Turing test?
All Latinos are the same, silly. How dare you suggest Rubio might be of different racial stock than George Lopez? What, are you trying to make white Latinos think they’re white or something?
Genetically George Lopez is more European than he is Amerindian. That's true for a lot of Brown Mexicans. Which shows just how weak European genes can be when it comes to phenotype and racial miscegenation.Replies: @syonredux
I always pay very careful attention when “progressives” lecture conservatives on what conservatives should do to win elections. (sarc/)
I always pay very careful attention when “progressives” lecture conservatives on what conservatives should do to win elections. (/sarc)
So, everyone would naturally prefer a world of left-liberal Cultural Marxism, but some of us are "selfish".
Given that philosophical foundation, its not surprising that the left routinely lectures us. While we are their cosmic enemy, we are also the cosmic janitor. They need to keep the cucks around to provide stability and prevent reaction.
Another example is Dalrock's "weak men are ruining feminism".
If they want to play racial games then the rest of us can too.Replies: @newrouter, @(((Owen)))
a latino-white coalition doesn’t occur to the proggtarded?
Harris is their darling person of color.
Stick it to Harris and vote for Sanchez.Replies: @newrouter
Nobody reads The Atlantic. Nobody reads The New Republic. Nobody read TNR when Beinart was editor there.
The GOP doesn’t need to be tricked into when it has guys like John McCain, Lindsay Graham, and Paul Ryan. On the other hand, liberal journalists seemed to be worried and upset the Trump phenomena could open up the immigration issue to serious debate.
In fact what passes for climbing the political ladder is in reality a vetting process that the party bosses use to evaluate whether or not a candidate deserves their support.
This is why all GOP candidates say the same set of lies. Trump doesn't because he isn't one of them. He's a outsider, a heretic, a threat to the system.
The astounding thing about the GOP is the white people's loyalty to a party that hates their guts. When you look at the party, it's openly anti-working and middle-class. It preaches a nasty form of social Darwinism for the white lower classes while encouraging big business to screw them over relentlessly while allowing the wealthy to loot the government and people.
The lower class whites don't get there is no "we are in this together" nonsense. The upper class whites who run the GOP detest the blue collars and middle-class and want them dead. TNR makes that clear.
Really whites should be burning down the offices of GOP officials and kicking their pols out of office if they understood what the GOP is really doing to them.
And the same could be said for the Democrats.
They're both full of evil people intent on making our lives hell while enriching themselves.Replies: @jill
Unrelated: I wish Unz's excellent commenting system had an extra checkbox: "Not for publication (typo reporting)" that would allow compulsive proofreaders to send corrections without polluting the comment section. Examples for this article: "two you years earlier.", "it's inability". And to get fancy, some form of standardization of typo reporting would eliminate what must be a tedious steady stream of duplicate error corrections.Replies: @European-American, @Dissident, @Almost Missouri
Agree with your suggestions concerning typo reporting.
As noted in Beinart’s article, Coulter’s fascination with Prop 187 goes back a ways:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/06/01/ann-coulter-key-trumps-victory-math/
I wonder if that incident will prompt calls for the police to be disarmed.
“All Latinos are the same, silly. How dare you suggest Rubio might be of different racial stock than George Lopez?”
Genetically George Lopez is more European than he is Amerindian. That’s true for a lot of Brown Mexicans. Which shows just how weak European genes can be when it comes to phenotype and racial miscegenation.
Well said, sir!
RT Says the Media is acclimatizing us to pedophilia:
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/347642-pedophilia-uk-media-norms/
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2016/04/galen_baughman_seemed_like_an_ideal_spokesman_for_sex_offenders_civil_rights.html
When do you think order Obama will issue an executive order requirement this behavior in schools?
Why the big interest in pedophilia cases from 30+ years ago? Normalizing pedophilia is one explanation, but I think it's more to deflect attention from the present-day scandals involving Pakistani immigrants. Savile's case and others came out in the wake of the 2013 report on Rotherham. Like a big "whites do it too" conflation. Media had no trouble condemning pedophilia when it concerned Catholic priests, but the left distracts from Pakistani rape gangs. Even the words typically used -- "grooming" rather than sexual slavery, murder and torture -- distract from the horrific abuse these immigrants inflicted.
2014
http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/sov/2014-general/pdf/2014-complete-sov.pdf
Edmund G. “Jerry” Brown*, DEM 4,388,368 60%
Neel Kashkari, REP 2,929,213 40%
1994
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_gubernatorial_election,_1994
Pete Wilson (incumbent) 4,781,766 55.18%
Kathleen Brown 3,519,799 40.62%
Wilson received more votes in 1994 than Brown did in 2014, and way more than the Republican Kashkari.
The goal here is to cause maximal damage to the coalition of the fringes.
Harris is their darling person of color.
Stick it to Harris and vote for Sanchez.
If they want to play racial games then the rest of us can too.Replies: @newrouter, @(((Owen)))
Harris is a Democratic machine pol. She’s a leftist in some sense but committed only to spoils politics. In no way is she a liberal or principled at all. Her interests are sectional extraction of benefits from the productive class of California. In short, another Feinstein.
The Sandersistas will eventually break against her in the general.
Sanchez, on the other hand, is a grassroots pol committed to her constituency. That isn’t just Latinxs; it’s always mostly been aspirational Orange County working class and nouveau riche. She’s never had much party support and has been willing to be an old fashioned horse trader in the House, working with both parties.
So, yes. Republicans should—if they know what’s good for them—break hard for Sanchez.
So far as politicians go, Loretta Sanchez is on the more honest, straight dealing side, and between her and Kamala Harris that's enough.
What a lame reply.
“People like you guys” have no institutional power and haven’t for a very long time. Who do you think runs this country?
Good to see you’ve expanded your repertoire from the usual ‘daughters having babies of color’ routine. Corvinus must be very pleased with your progress.
How’s things at home Tiny? Two cats & cuck porn must be pretty lonely.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/06/california-and-myth-proposition-187Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @H. Ross, @CJ
I believe Drum is from L.A. People who lived in the state during the Prop 187 campaign tend to have a different, accurate recollection of it (i.e. it was obviously popular) compared to how it’s remembered by New Yorkers, New Englanders, north Virginians, etc. having watched maybe a 15-second spot on the news with Dan Rather or Peter Jennings. The Arizona drivers license law brought back the same media playbook.
I don’t remember much doubt about the vote, just that Wilson shillied/shallied as a “moderate Republican” before endorsing. The L.A. Times described the measure as Hitler II. The most screeching revolved around a poorly attested putative mandate to emergency rooms to turn away any Central American vibrant people bleeding out at the curb (portraying this as a bad thing). I remember much level-headed debate about exactly how high dead Mexicans would begin piling in the streets after it became law, because of restrictions on the ER docs to be enforced by stormtroopers. It was basically the opposite of “seeking compromise” civic discussion. Also, the number 187 in CHP context had been made famous by gangsta rap recently.
Unrelated: I wish Unz's excellent commenting system had an extra checkbox: "Not for publication (typo reporting)" that would allow compulsive proofreaders to send corrections without polluting the comment section. Examples for this article: "two you years earlier.", "it's inability". And to get fancy, some form of standardization of typo reporting would eliminate what must be a tedious steady stream of duplicate error corrections.Replies: @European-American, @Dissident, @Almost Missouri
If Unz rejiggers the commenting system, my wish would be to have something like the opposite of a “Block this Commenter” button, in other words, a “Highlight this Commenter” button. There are certain commenters who, in theory, I would like to follow all their comments, but in practice it is too much trouble to dig through all the comments looking for them. If there were some way to have a whitelist of preferred commenters and an option to show only that whitelist’s comments, it would much reduce the burden of sifting 200+ comment posts.
Also, I imagine on the Unz side, the inside knowledge of who whitelists whom might in some way be useful to Unz.
Harris is their darling person of color.
Stick it to Harris and vote for Sanchez.Replies: @newrouter
what is amusing is watching the boomer white proggtarded politicians trying to hold together the “coalition of the fringes”
I feel like ordering a Pizza, cracking open a cold beer and watching them being eaten alive.
The Chinese-water-army effort to drum up Cal GOP votes for Sanchez is mystifying. Both candidates are frankly terrible, and I’d expect either one to vote consistently how the (D) whip tells her to. You’re saying I’m supposed to identify with Loretta because she’s not as polished, read: dumber… And by the way, Rob Ford-level tacky. I haven’t checked but it seems like the Sanchez sisters have been in the game of milking the public fisc as long as Harris has.
Though it would feel good to flip off Harris there’s something to be said for not ratifying another incompetent Hispanderer in a state chock full of them at the municipal, county, and capital strata. With each passing year more formerly-major California cities are becoming rotten boroughs a la New Mexico.
If you ever get in a comment exchange with liberal whites over illegals, they always point out that illegals cannot get government benefits precisely because they are illegal. Yet they oppose measures like Prop. 187 and related statutes around the nation tooth and nail.
Question, if liberals believe that illegals are ineligible for government bennies, why do they fight so hard to prevent this fact from being written into law?
Her latest pet peeve is the fact that, though Medicaid doesn't cover most transplants, her hospital is checking the box denoting the procedure "emergency" as opposed to "elective". Her 3-year survey of the records shows 30+ patients of dubious immigration status have had transplants. The real money isn't the cost of surgery, but the aftercare, including a lifetime of anti-rejection drugs.Replies: @jill
http://kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/total-medicaid-spending/
This has to be the most interesting analysis of the GOP racial dilemma I’ve ever seen.
Home run Mr. Sailer.
No doubt that white Republicans have fled California to places like Colorado, Nevada and Texas, but I wonder also how much is just a generational thing? I suspect even when Republicans have families, their kids often turn out to become Democrats. My experience as on the cusp of Millennials / Generation X is that so many of my peers are quite a bit more progressive left than their Boomer parents.
The march of progress is relentless… After they win World War T, what will the next battle front be?
Why did California Republicans drop the immigration issue after the 1994 election despite their major success in 94? What I suspect happened in 94 is that they took a pro 187 position before the moneyed special interests could pull them back. After 94, these same cheap labor interests made it clear they don’t want any serious discussion of the immigration issue–causing many voters to walk away from the Republicans.
I call ’em Papa Bush and Baby Bush.
Would that make Jeb, Bro Bush?
GW Bush = Bush the Punier
Jeb Bush = Bush the PuniestReplies: @syonredux
I go with "Bush the Greater" and "Bush the Lesser."
The Republican gubernatorial candidate in 1998 ran away from Prop. 187 and lost badly, with a low white turnout.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_LungrenReplies: @Juan Valdez
California’s Newest Fault Line
As Republicans decline, Golden State Democrats divide over race.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/californias-newest-fault-line-14583.htmlReplies: @The most deplorable one, @Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta, @Uncle Peregrine
Is California’s racial spoils system the future for the rest of the country?
Even with CA being one of the most social-liberal and welfare-statist states in the US, its non-Asian minorities are still underperforming.
For the rest of the country, the welfare state needs WCMs to pick up the tab. I doubt any Plains state could survive economically with CA taxation, demographics and values.
How’s things at home Tiny? Two cats & cuck porn must be pretty lonely.Replies: @Tiny Duck
Whatever emptiness I experience is alleviated by the knowledge of the fact that white girls are having their bellies filled with strong Black seed
Myth is easier than math. That’s the root of the problem.
You can make many poor economic decisions when you have the pleasant climate of Coastal California.
Even with CA being one of the most social-liberal and welfare-statist states in the US, its non-Asian minorities are still underperforming.
For the rest of the country, the welfare state needs WCMs to pick up the tab. I doubt any Plains state could survive economically with CA taxation, demographics and values.
Well, I lightly skimmed over Beinert’s piece, and offhand his analysis looks completely correct, though I’d guess that the impact of any national “Trump Effect” would be probably be far smaller than what happened in California.
Just as Beinert mentions, CA Latinos typically voted 40+ Republican prior to the 1994 Prop. 187 campaign, with Pete Wilson getting 47% of the Latino vote in 1990 victory and ultra-rightwing Bruce Herschenson getting about 40% in his narrow loss to Barbara Boxer in 1992. At the time, no one paid much attention to these results since they were so typical in CA elections. Meanwhile, Asians often voted more heavily Republican than did whites, while blacks usually voted about 80-85% Democratic.
As for Bush’s poor showing in the 1992 Presidential race, California was in the middle of an extremely deep recession due to the post-Cold War collapse of the aerospace industry, and Bush was therefore extremely unpopular as a result, with rightwing populist Perot getting over 20% of the vote, making CA one of his better states.
But after the Prop. 187 campaign, Latino support for Republicans almost totally collapsed (with Asian support also collapsing), and except for Schwarzenegger (who was a special case) Republicans have been lucky to break 25% since then.
Over the years, I’ve written very extensively on these exact topics and indeed I’m the main individual who originally *established* the national narrative that Beinert is currently repeating. I don’t have the time or inclination to regurgitate my analysis, but here’s a long article of mine from 2011 which covers all these issues in considerable detail:
https://www.unz.com/article/immigration-republicans-and-the-end-of-white-america-singlepage/
And for anyone so inclined, here’s my long article from 1999 that played a major role in originally establishing the “narrative” in question:
https://www.unz.com/article/california-and-the-end-of-white-america/
I’m preoccupied with other things right now, so if anyone wants to argue with me, I’d hope they’d read my own analysis first before they begin disputing it.
It would stand to reckon that several million of the newly enfranchised would have zero reason to ever vote for the GOP, if we consider the percentage of Reagan in '84 to Bush the Elder in '88.
Your article mentions Hawaii as an example where there is no toxic racial politics.
You are aware that only one Republican U.S. Senator was ever elected in Hawaii, right?
That state is one party rule to the hilt. It's an open and shut case of anti-white racism in action.Replies: @Ron Unz
https://www.unz.com/article/california-and-the-end-of-white-america/
Ron, Ron, Ron. You still can’t get over the Ellis Island schmaltz that you’ve been spoon-fed.
An America that isn’t Anglo-European isn’t America.
I'd enjoy an Unz/Sailer debate on this. :)
The left tends to view conservatives in the way that Aquinas defined evil. That it is the absence of substance, rather than a substance in its own right.
So, everyone would naturally prefer a world of left-liberal Cultural Marxism, but some of us are “selfish”.
Given that philosophical foundation, its not surprising that the left routinely lectures us. While we are their cosmic enemy, we are also the cosmic janitor. They need to keep the cucks around to provide stability and prevent reaction.
Another example is Dalrock’s “weak men are ruining feminism”.
Home run Mr. Sailer.
No doubt that white Republicans have fled California to places like Colorado, Nevada and Texas, but I wonder also how much is just a generational thing? I suspect even when Republicans have families, their kids often turn out to become Democrats. My experience as on the cusp of Millennials / Generation X is that so many of my peers are quite a bit more progressive left than their Boomer parents.
The march of progress is relentless... After they win World War T, what will the next battle front be?Replies: @Jefferson, @Anonymous
“My experience as on the cusp of Millennials / Generation X is that so many of my peers are quite a bit more progressive left than their Boomer parents.”
A Millennial tried to steal a gun from a police officer so that he could murder Donald Trump, so yeah Millennials on average are to the political Left of Baby Boomers.
Just as Beinert mentions, CA Latinos typically voted 40+ Republican prior to the 1994 Prop. 187 campaign, with Pete Wilson getting 47% of the Latino vote in 1990 victory and ultra-rightwing Bruce Herschenson getting about 40% in his narrow loss to Barbara Boxer in 1992. At the time, no one paid much attention to these results since they were so typical in CA elections. Meanwhile, Asians often voted more heavily Republican than did whites, while blacks usually voted about 80-85% Democratic.
As for Bush's poor showing in the 1992 Presidential race, California was in the middle of an extremely deep recession due to the post-Cold War collapse of the aerospace industry, and Bush was therefore extremely unpopular as a result, with rightwing populist Perot getting over 20% of the vote, making CA one of his better states.
But after the Prop. 187 campaign, Latino support for Republicans almost totally collapsed (with Asian support also collapsing), and except for Schwarzenegger (who was a special case) Republicans have been lucky to break 25% since then.
Over the years, I've written very extensively on these exact topics and indeed I'm the main individual who originally *established* the national narrative that Beinert is currently repeating. I don't have the time or inclination to regurgitate my analysis, but here's a long article of mine from 2011 which covers all these issues in considerable detail:
https://www.unz.com/article/immigration-republicans-and-the-end-of-white-america-singlepage/
And for anyone so inclined, here's my long article from 1999 that played a major role in originally establishing the "narrative" in question:
https://www.unz.com/article/california-and-the-end-of-white-america/
I'm preoccupied with other things right now, so if anyone wants to argue with me, I'd hope they'd read my own analysis first before they begin disputing it.Replies: @Maj. Kong, @syonredux, @syonredux, @European-American
The 1986 amnesty, when did those who gained (stole) citizenship from that Act become a noticeable trend in voting?
It would stand to reckon that several million of the newly enfranchised would have zero reason to ever vote for the GOP, if we consider the percentage of Reagan in ’84 to Bush the Elder in ’88.
Your article mentions Hawaii as an example where there is no toxic racial politics.
You are aware that only one Republican U.S. Senator was ever elected in Hawaii, right?
That state is one party rule to the hilt. It’s an open and shut case of anti-white racism in action.
Given Wilson's championing of Amnesty, the millions of illegals who were gaining citizenship right around 1994 might have even leaned a bit towards him if not for his Prop. 187 campaign.
As for the ideological politics of 25% white Hawaii, my impression is that it's very similar to that of 95% white Vermont. When was the last time a conservative Republican was elected in Vermont?Replies: @syonredux, @Jefferson, @JohnnyWalker123
Just as Beinert mentions, CA Latinos typically voted 40+ Republican prior to the 1994 Prop. 187 campaign, with Pete Wilson getting 47% of the Latino vote in 1990 victory and ultra-rightwing Bruce Herschenson getting about 40% in his narrow loss to Barbara Boxer in 1992. At the time, no one paid much attention to these results since they were so typical in CA elections. Meanwhile, Asians often voted more heavily Republican than did whites, while blacks usually voted about 80-85% Democratic.
As for Bush's poor showing in the 1992 Presidential race, California was in the middle of an extremely deep recession due to the post-Cold War collapse of the aerospace industry, and Bush was therefore extremely unpopular as a result, with rightwing populist Perot getting over 20% of the vote, making CA one of his better states.
But after the Prop. 187 campaign, Latino support for Republicans almost totally collapsed (with Asian support also collapsing), and except for Schwarzenegger (who was a special case) Republicans have been lucky to break 25% since then.
Over the years, I've written very extensively on these exact topics and indeed I'm the main individual who originally *established* the national narrative that Beinert is currently repeating. I don't have the time or inclination to regurgitate my analysis, but here's a long article of mine from 2011 which covers all these issues in considerable detail:
https://www.unz.com/article/immigration-republicans-and-the-end-of-white-america-singlepage/
And for anyone so inclined, here's my long article from 1999 that played a major role in originally establishing the "narrative" in question:
https://www.unz.com/article/california-and-the-end-of-white-america/
I'm preoccupied with other things right now, so if anyone wants to argue with me, I'd hope they'd read my own analysis first before they begin disputing it.Replies: @Maj. Kong, @syonredux, @syonredux, @European-American
Ron, Ron, Ron. You still can’t get over the Ellis Island schmaltz that you’ve been spoon-fed.
An America that isn’t Anglo-European isn’t America.
Just as Beinert mentions, CA Latinos typically voted 40+ Republican prior to the 1994 Prop. 187 campaign, with Pete Wilson getting 47% of the Latino vote in 1990 victory and ultra-rightwing Bruce Herschenson getting about 40% in his narrow loss to Barbara Boxer in 1992. At the time, no one paid much attention to these results since they were so typical in CA elections. Meanwhile, Asians often voted more heavily Republican than did whites, while blacks usually voted about 80-85% Democratic.
As for Bush's poor showing in the 1992 Presidential race, California was in the middle of an extremely deep recession due to the post-Cold War collapse of the aerospace industry, and Bush was therefore extremely unpopular as a result, with rightwing populist Perot getting over 20% of the vote, making CA one of his better states.
But after the Prop. 187 campaign, Latino support for Republicans almost totally collapsed (with Asian support also collapsing), and except for Schwarzenegger (who was a special case) Republicans have been lucky to break 25% since then.
Over the years, I've written very extensively on these exact topics and indeed I'm the main individual who originally *established* the national narrative that Beinert is currently repeating. I don't have the time or inclination to regurgitate my analysis, but here's a long article of mine from 2011 which covers all these issues in considerable detail:
https://www.unz.com/article/immigration-republicans-and-the-end-of-white-america-singlepage/
And for anyone so inclined, here's my long article from 1999 that played a major role in originally establishing the "narrative" in question:
https://www.unz.com/article/california-and-the-end-of-white-america/
I'm preoccupied with other things right now, so if anyone wants to argue with me, I'd hope they'd read my own analysis first before they begin disputing it.Replies: @Maj. Kong, @syonredux, @syonredux, @European-American
Round two
https://www.unz.com/article/california-and-the-end-of-white-america/
Ron, Ron, Ron. You still can’t get over the Ellis Island schmaltz that you’ve been spoon-fed.
An America that isn’t Anglo-European isn’t America.
I never forget Proposition 187. Ever. i’m rather single-minded.
It was a brief moment of sanity. For a little while, it looked as though Anglo-America (the land of Benjamin Franklin, Edison, the Wright Brothers, etc) was actually going to resist the Hispanic invasion.
Will you idiots please quit responding to Tiny Duck? Steve, could you just ban that knucklehead, or maybe make an informative post about not feeding trolls, or something. It’s sad, and it makes the comment section look like it’s full of suckers.
Just as Beinert mentions, CA Latinos typically voted 40+ Republican prior to the 1994 Prop. 187 campaign, with Pete Wilson getting 47% of the Latino vote in 1990 victory and ultra-rightwing Bruce Herschenson getting about 40% in his narrow loss to Barbara Boxer in 1992. At the time, no one paid much attention to these results since they were so typical in CA elections. Meanwhile, Asians often voted more heavily Republican than did whites, while blacks usually voted about 80-85% Democratic.
As for Bush's poor showing in the 1992 Presidential race, California was in the middle of an extremely deep recession due to the post-Cold War collapse of the aerospace industry, and Bush was therefore extremely unpopular as a result, with rightwing populist Perot getting over 20% of the vote, making CA one of his better states.
But after the Prop. 187 campaign, Latino support for Republicans almost totally collapsed (with Asian support also collapsing), and except for Schwarzenegger (who was a special case) Republicans have been lucky to break 25% since then.
Over the years, I've written very extensively on these exact topics and indeed I'm the main individual who originally *established* the national narrative that Beinert is currently repeating. I don't have the time or inclination to regurgitate my analysis, but here's a long article of mine from 2011 which covers all these issues in considerable detail:
https://www.unz.com/article/immigration-republicans-and-the-end-of-white-america-singlepage/
And for anyone so inclined, here's my long article from 1999 that played a major role in originally establishing the "narrative" in question:
https://www.unz.com/article/california-and-the-end-of-white-america/
I'm preoccupied with other things right now, so if anyone wants to argue with me, I'd hope they'd read my own analysis first before they begin disputing it.Replies: @Maj. Kong, @syonredux, @syonredux, @European-American
Clever article. Spoiler alert: the simple solution is to raise the minimum wage to a high level, thereby drying up the demand for low-skill labor. Generous relocation deals would encourage illegals to self-deport. Problem solved, automatically! And much of the fuel for a potentially destructive white identitarian movement would be eliminated.
I’d enjoy an Unz/Sailer debate on this. 🙂
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/06/california-and-myth-proposition-187Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @H. Ross, @CJ
Kevin Drum, one of perhaps five American leftists who think for themselves…
There’s five? I wonder if there’s even that many sometimes, but today I found a surprising article, and even more surprising set of comments, in the generally-leftish Naked Capitalism. It reads like they’ve been coming over to Steve’s on the down low.
Questioning Immigration is Not Racism
Executive Summary: Immigration is primarily about lowering labor costs. No wonder the proles are upset. Site proprietor Yves Smith sounds like a closeted Trump supporter. She then pastes in an article from Australia that states that support for immigration in the developed world has suddenly collapsed. There’s a bunch of multicult bumpf, then a demand that decisions about immigration should be made in the interests of existing Australians. The comments are 95% in favor.
I just can’t get over how, on immigration (as with so many other areas), the ones who are constantly being put on the defensive are those who take a sane, non-suicidal position that puts the interest of Americans (and, esp., American workers–including black American workers…) first.
This, when H. (Rodham)-Clinton and B.H. Obama have presided over a rabidly interventionist foreign policy that has brought incalculable carnage, suffering and misery (to populations that are overwhelmingly Muslim, no less) and made us decidedly less safe. That’s deemed well within the boundaries of respectability. But Trump’s eminently sensible statements on immigration? Beyond-the-pale.
The whole premise, that we are supposed to accept without question, that immigration to a sovereign nation is somehow a right and not the privilege that it is. As if any of these self-righteous, preening scolds would ever open the doors of their private homes to the “wretched refuse” of the world.
(I start to veer considerably off-topic below but I hope people will continue to read nonetheless, as I deal with a question that may prove critical as to whether Trump can win or not.)
In his speech just after the Orlando massacre, Trump was quite good in making the case against “Invite The World”. But about “Invade The World”, he said very little. I thought his critique of “nation-building” was good but not nearly enough.
My instinct is to encourage Trump to make explicit, emphatic opposition to “Invade The World” a major part of his campaign. To repeatedly and consistently tell the American people,
“If you elect me as President, I will not send your children to bleed and die in endless, unwinnable and utterly reckless and destructive invasions that only make us less safe and more hated!”;
“I will put an end to the squandering of American lives, money, diplomatic capital, general credibility and moral authority on these internecine quagmires!”
Imagine if Trump were to do that, contrasting himself in this area with his opponent by citing her extensive record both in the Senate and as Secretary of State– including doing so every time he is called nasty names like “racist”, “Islamophobic”, “xenophobic” and “nativist”. Could that be anything but a winning strategy?
But can Trump campaign on such an explicitly anti-war platform? Would the donors and the GOP establishment figures that he now seems dependent-upon allow him to do so? If only Trump could self-fund. Can he? I realize that doing so would mean sacrificing a not inconsiderable portion of his personal wealth (and that it is all too easy for me to sit here and tell someone else to do that.) But think, if Trump were to self-fund– which itself would bolster his credibility, allowing him to go back to fulfilling his original promise to do so– and campaign on an anti-war message such as I outlined above, could he not win?
I would think that if Trump wants to win badly enough, he would find the sacrifice of self-funding a worthwhile price to pay. (And, if elected, think of all the money that he would most likely be able to make after finishing his term.)
I would like to see Steve Sailer, John Derbyshire, Patrick J. Buchanan and other intellectual assets of the Dissident Right put their minds together to consider campaign strategies for Trump such as those that I have outlined above and possible ideas for influencing the candidate to adopt said strategies.
The GOP gubernatorial candidate in 1998, Attorney General Dan Lungren, had been along with Wilson one of the most vociferous boosters of 187 in 1994 and used it to get re-elected. I don’t know if Lungren’s turnabout on 187 had anything to do with his defeat, but his support for gun control made Republicans less enthusiastic about supporting him.
Also, I imagine on the Unz side, the inside knowledge of who whitelists whom might in some way be useful to Unz.Replies: @Veracitor
The commenter’s name at the top of the comment is a link. Click on it to see others comments by the same commenter.
In other words, in true HBD spirit, not all commenters are equal. And I would like to reduce the friction between me and getting to the better comments.
That would be Dan Lungren who was Attorney General when Wilson was Governor. I’ve often wondered how much of prop 187 failure to make it through the courts can be traced to him dragging his feet. Lungren is a strong supporter of guest worker programs. As a Californian, I voted third party in the 98 general election on my belief that Lungren has always been awful on the immigration issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Lungren
Uhh politicians like McCain, Graham and Bush aren’t bugs, they’re features of the GOP. People don’t get that these are the sorts of pols the party elite want to run for office. All of them are fully vetted self-serving sociopaths whose loyalty to the establishment is unquestioned.
In fact what passes for climbing the political ladder is in reality a vetting process that the party bosses use to evaluate whether or not a candidate deserves their support.
This is why all GOP candidates say the same set of lies. Trump doesn’t because he isn’t one of them. He’s a outsider, a heretic, a threat to the system.
The astounding thing about the GOP is the white people’s loyalty to a party that hates their guts. When you look at the party, it’s openly anti-working and middle-class. It preaches a nasty form of social Darwinism for the white lower classes while encouraging big business to screw them over relentlessly while allowing the wealthy to loot the government and people.
The lower class whites don’t get there is no “we are in this together” nonsense. The upper class whites who run the GOP detest the blue collars and middle-class and want them dead. TNR makes that clear.
Really whites should be burning down the offices of GOP officials and kicking their pols out of office if they understood what the GOP is really doing to them.
And the same could be said for the Democrats.
They’re both full of evil people intent on making our lives hell while enriching themselves.
Whatever emptiness I experience is alleviated by the knowledge of the fact that young african slave girls are having their bellies filled with strong Arab Bedouin seed
The Sandersistas will eventually break against her in the general.
Sanchez, on the other hand, is a grassroots pol committed to her constituency. That isn't just Latinxs; it's always mostly been aspirational Orange County working class and nouveau riche. She's never had much party support and has been willing to be an old fashioned horse trader in the House, working with both parties.
So, yes. Republicans should—if they know what's good for them—break hard for Sanchez.Replies: @Olorin, @Richard
Actually, Owen, she’s more like another Willie Brown.
Who gave her her start in politics, to put it delicately.
Almost enough to make a guy believe in telegony at the political level….
It really is, its like watching a dam just about to burst or and a building start to fall in upon itself. I feel no pity for the leftist progtards, they create this horde, the import its members..
I feel like ordering a Pizza, cracking open a cold beer and watching them being eaten alive.
Because leftist understand their lies are being exposed and want to fight to insure their non white future voters are not kicked out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_LungrenReplies: @Juan Valdez
Lungren is one of those lifelong politicians who seems to never go away. The CA GOP has a small stable of them. As the A.G. in the early 90s he went after “violent video games” — which I guess is a policy I’d remember, as a suburban male teenager fond of violent games — but a dozen years later it was a surprise after moving to outer Sacramento County to discover he was that district’s U.S. Congressman (not for long, in one of the few 50/50 CDs on the west coast). Doug Ose is another. Steve has noted how the top CA Democrats tend to be stodgy relics in their 70s and 80s but on the other side, for an abject failure as a state party, it’s largely the same group of nondescript idiots in charge. The 2 guys thrown up for the Senate race were unknown to me, and remain so. Meanwhile lightweight blow-dry dandies like Eric Garcetti and Gavin Newsom would get laughed out of their primaries anywhere east of the Sierra. I don’t see any national political talent coming out of California soon. Somehow it lacks the ferment necessary for that to develop; maybe institutional reasons too, thanks to “the Progressive Era” reforms. People with something on the ball don’t run for office which just means refereeing government unions anyway.
Probably it's the same the world over.
Indeed, one of the republic’s longstanding unsolved mysteries. Bonus round, try getting a straight answer from a liberal on why he or she opposes voter ID laws.
Home run Mr. Sailer.
No doubt that white Republicans have fled California to places like Colorado, Nevada and Texas, but I wonder also how much is just a generational thing? I suspect even when Republicans have families, their kids often turn out to become Democrats. My experience as on the cusp of Millennials / Generation X is that so many of my peers are quite a bit more progressive left than their Boomer parents.
The march of progress is relentless... After they win World War T, what will the next battle front be?Replies: @Jefferson, @Anonymous
What’s the point of being a Republican on the Left Coast? By design it’s too expensive to own a house and raise kids anywhere the local school district isn’t a war zone; and if you were well off enough to afford either that or private school, the bourgeois advantages go to the More Liberal Than Thou anyway. To the median millennial’s mind, why not just stay a Democrat and regularly bitch out everyone else’s disturbing lack of >[Current Year] piety? It’s the sleep of the socially just
A question to the immigration cheerleaders should always be "How many people do you want? We're headed to 400million by mid-century, and if we continue your policy we'll be at half a billion before the century is over. Do you want a billion? You want us to be packed in like India and China? Where does it end? Do we never get to shut the border? Does immigration only stop when America is so crowded and unpleasant that no one wants to come?"
Calling Donald Trump ... Donald Trump ... are you home?
Fun Fact…
Who invented the slogan “Make America Great Again” ?
Answer: Peter Beinart; see the subtitle of
The Sandersistas will eventually break against her in the general.
Sanchez, on the other hand, is a grassroots pol committed to her constituency. That isn't just Latinxs; it's always mostly been aspirational Orange County working class and nouveau riche. She's never had much party support and has been willing to be an old fashioned horse trader in the House, working with both parties.
So, yes. Republicans should—if they know what's good for them—break hard for Sanchez.Replies: @Olorin, @Richard
I completely agree. To add to your post, just do a google search on “Kamala Harris ballot language” to see a cascade of examples of how Harris abused her position as Attorney General to doctor the language of California ballot referendums in order to manipulate the voting. She represents partisanship in its most decadent state.
So far as politicians go, Loretta Sanchez is on the more honest, straight dealing side, and between her and Kamala Harris that’s enough.
Would that make Jeb, Bro Bush?Replies: @antipater_1, @Alec Leamas
GHW Bush = Bush I
GW Bush = Bush the Punier
Jeb Bush = Bush the Puniest
Spend any time at my girlfriend’s hospital and you’ll see the lie in that particular lib trope.
Her latest pet peeve is the fact that, though Medicaid doesn’t cover most transplants, her hospital is checking the box denoting the procedure “emergency” as opposed to “elective”. Her 3-year survey of the records shows 30+ patients of dubious immigration status have had transplants. The real money isn’t the cost of surgery, but the aftercare, including a lifetime of anti-rejection drugs.
I don’t get why people respond either.
Hard to take you seriously about a topic you have to look up.
You left out that the guy was also an illegal alien.
He is an English hooligan.
It would stand to reckon that several million of the newly enfranchised would have zero reason to ever vote for the GOP, if we consider the percentage of Reagan in '84 to Bush the Elder in '88.
Your article mentions Hawaii as an example where there is no toxic racial politics.
You are aware that only one Republican U.S. Senator was ever elected in Hawaii, right?
That state is one party rule to the hilt. It's an open and shut case of anti-white racism in action.Replies: @Ron Unz
Actually, as a U.S. Senator Pete Wilson had been one of the leading backers of the 1986 Amnesty legislation. He’d also always been one of the top supporters of illegal immigration since that was what the growers who funded him wanted. His arch-opponent during that era was liberal icon Cesar Chavez, who was always denouncing Republicans like Wilson for their support of illegal immigration. The history of immigration politics is filled with remarkable ironies.
Given Wilson’s championing of Amnesty, the millions of illegals who were gaining citizenship right around 1994 might have even leaned a bit towards him if not for his Prop. 187 campaign.
As for the ideological politics of 25% white Hawaii, my impression is that it’s very similar to that of 95% white Vermont. When was the last time a conservative Republican was elected in Vermont?
Thanks.
A relative of mine is a NYPD Detective. When he worked narcotics, he told me that every illegal Dominican that he locked up had a Medicaid card. New York city requires no proof of citizenship. All Medicaid applicants merely signs a statement that they are a U.S. citizen. Over 3 million New Yorkers are on Medicaid. It is the single biggest industry in New York state spending over 54 billion per year…
http://kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/total-medicaid-spending/
Her latest pet peeve is the fact that, though Medicaid doesn't cover most transplants, her hospital is checking the box denoting the procedure "emergency" as opposed to "elective". Her 3-year survey of the records shows 30+ patients of dubious immigration status have had transplants. The real money isn't the cost of surgery, but the aftercare, including a lifetime of anti-rejection drugs.Replies: @jill
Any person from anywhere in the world can fly into JFK, take a cab to Jamaica hospital and get any type of care requested.
In fact what passes for climbing the political ladder is in reality a vetting process that the party bosses use to evaluate whether or not a candidate deserves their support.
This is why all GOP candidates say the same set of lies. Trump doesn't because he isn't one of them. He's a outsider, a heretic, a threat to the system.
The astounding thing about the GOP is the white people's loyalty to a party that hates their guts. When you look at the party, it's openly anti-working and middle-class. It preaches a nasty form of social Darwinism for the white lower classes while encouraging big business to screw them over relentlessly while allowing the wealthy to loot the government and people.
The lower class whites don't get there is no "we are in this together" nonsense. The upper class whites who run the GOP detest the blue collars and middle-class and want them dead. TNR makes that clear.
Really whites should be burning down the offices of GOP officials and kicking their pols out of office if they understood what the GOP is really doing to them.
And the same could be said for the Democrats.
They're both full of evil people intent on making our lives hell while enriching themselves.Replies: @jill
A tribe of white people destroying a tribe of white people. Go figure.
California’s Newest Fault Line
As Republicans decline, Golden State Democrats divide over race.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/californias-newest-fault-line-14583.htmlReplies: @The most deplorable one, @Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta, @Uncle Peregrine
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/284065-congressional-black-caucus-keep-superdelegate-system-in-place #TheBigManGetsPaid
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/347642-pedophilia-uk-media-norms/Replies: @jill, @Antonymous, @Antonymous
“Galen Baughman seemed like an ideal spokesman for sex offenders’ civil rights. Then he got arrested for texting a teenage boy.”
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2016/04/galen_baughman_seemed_like_an_ideal_spokesman_for_sex_offenders_civil_rights.html
When do you think order Obama will issue an executive order requirement this behavior in schools?
Genetically George Lopez is more European than he is Amerindian. That's true for a lot of Brown Mexicans. Which shows just how weak European genes can be when it comes to phenotype and racial miscegenation.Replies: @syonredux
Dunno:
https://www.unz.com/gnxp/to-gain-pallor-is-easier-than-losing-it/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2008/05/fear-of-a-white-planet/#.V2qwMfkrLIU
Given Wilson's championing of Amnesty, the millions of illegals who were gaining citizenship right around 1994 might have even leaned a bit towards him if not for his Prop. 187 campaign.
As for the ideological politics of 25% white Hawaii, my impression is that it's very similar to that of 95% white Vermont. When was the last time a conservative Republican was elected in Vermont?Replies: @syonredux, @Jefferson, @JohnnyWalker123
Of course, the future demographics of the USA will not much look like those of either Hawaii or Vermont….
Why not Hawaii?
I put Dan Lungren’s bumper sticker on my car for that election just to generate some heat at the CA State job I had at the time. My boss said, “who’s the Republican in the parking lot?” I laughed at him because immediately several other employees chimed in with support for Republicans. It didn’t work out for us (God bless Day Gravis) but it did expose the stereotypes of political parties. At that office, blacks, Hispanics, Asian Indians were all Democrats. White men were 80% R. Married women with children were about 80% R, white or Asian. Single women were all D. The white-skinned D’s were everything liberals. The dark-skinned D’s were social conservatives (the Indians frighteningly so, with arranged marriages and everything) but liberal about the welfare state, unions, immigration, environmentalism.
From what I can see of CA politicians it’s just largely a function of King-sized egos. Ever met Doug Ose? Dan Lungren? I voted for them because the alternatives were filthy Democrats. But I would never enjoy friendships with those pompous asses.
Probably it’s the same the world over.
I’m banned from the (Disqus) comments at The Atlantic.
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/347642-pedophilia-uk-media-norms/Replies: @jill, @Antonymous, @Antonymous
“RT Says the Media is acclimatizing us to pedophilia:”
Why the big interest in pedophilia cases from 30+ years ago? Normalizing pedophilia is one explanation, but I think it’s more to deflect attention from the present-day scandals involving Pakistani immigrants. Savile’s case and others came out in the wake of the 2013 report on Rotherham. Like a big “whites do it too” conflation. Media had no trouble condemning pedophilia when it concerned Catholic priests, but the left distracts from Pakistani rape gangs. Even the words typically used — “grooming” rather than sexual slavery, torture, even murder — distract from the horrific abuse these immigrants inflicted.
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/347642-pedophilia-uk-media-norms/Replies: @jill, @Antonymous, @Antonymous
“RT Says the Media is acclimatizing us to pedophilia:”
Why the big interest in pedophilia cases from 30+ years ago? Normalizing pedophilia is one explanation, but I think it’s more to deflect attention from the present-day scandals involving Pakistani immigrants. Savile’s case and others came out in the wake of the 2013 report on Rotherham. Like a big “whites do it too” conflation. Media had no trouble condemning pedophilia when it concerned Catholic priests, but the left distracts from Pakistani rape gangs. Even the words typically used — “grooming” rather than sexual slavery, murder and torture — distract from the horrific abuse these immigrants inflicted.
Given Wilson's championing of Amnesty, the millions of illegals who were gaining citizenship right around 1994 might have even leaned a bit towards him if not for his Prop. 187 campaign.
As for the ideological politics of 25% white Hawaii, my impression is that it's very similar to that of 95% white Vermont. When was the last time a conservative Republican was elected in Vermont?Replies: @syonredux, @Jefferson, @JohnnyWalker123
“When was the last time a conservative Republican was elected in Vermont?”
There are not many Conservatives in any state where a high percentage of White people have purple hair, or blue hair, or green hair, or a nose ring, or a lot of the White women have manly looking haircuts, or a lot of White people have dreadlocks, etc.
Vermont looks like a freak show from what I have seen on Watters World. Their state motto should be Keep Vermont Weird. Vermont attracts the weirdest White people.
Libertarians noticed and were trying to accomplish a similar feat with New Hampshire, albeit intentionally, via the "Free State Project." The idea being that a small state like Vermont or New Hampshire has outsized political influence per voter because it sends two United States Senators to Washington, while being able to shape intrastate policy on things like recreational marijuana and whatever else serious Libertarians concern themselves with.
Even this doesn’t capture these “journalists” dishonesty about Prop 187. California wasn’t some Republican lock even during that presidential streak. The Republican candidate often underperformed the national vote:
1992 — Bush -3.8 relative to national
1988 — Bush -2.3
1984 — Reagan -1.3
1980 — Reagan +2
1976 — Ford +1.3
1972 — Nixon -5.7
1968 — Nixon +4.4
1964 — Goldwater +2.2 (still lost California)
1960 — Nixon +0.6
1956 — Eisenhower -2.0
1952 — Eisenhower +1.6
1948 — Dewey +2.0 (still lost California)
Overall California is closely mirroring the national trend–and this is with Californians often on the ballot! (One could argue that Nixon +4.4 is a bit of an outlier because Wallace was a more regional candidate–though in fairness Nixon’s margin over Humphrey is about that much higher in California.)
California seems to get a little more “fed up” with incumbents. (Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Bush’s re-election California vote share all decline relative to national.) I think that is probably a Western state characteristic, not sure.
The very slight Republican edge would be more than accounted for simply by the lower percentage of blacks in California. In fact, the whites would be less Republican than nationally.
And that slight California Republican edge is clearly fading away during the 70s and 80s. By the 90s the Democrat policy of “electing a new people” has paid off enough–with Mexicans and Asians more than compensating for fewer blacks–to make it much more reliably Democrat state than it ever was a Republican one.
The California political story is one that supports the Sailer\Trump policy rather than contradicts it. If Republicans want to win they better keep around the people who actually care about republican government–self-reliance, freedom, low-taxes, limited government, self-government–instead of displacing them with people content to be subjects of the super-state.
With mass immigration it will be too expensive to own a house in a decent school district anywhere. Eventually to simply own a house anywhere. Check out what house prices are like in the big cities in India–they are like here, with average incomes a tiny fraction of ours.
A question to the immigration cheerleaders should always be “How many people do you want? We’re headed to 400million by mid-century, and if we continue your policy we’ll be at half a billion before the century is over. Do you want a billion? You want us to be packed in like India and China? Where does it end? Do we never get to shut the border? Does immigration only stop when America is so crowded and unpleasant that no one wants to come?”
Calling Donald Trump … Donald Trump … are you home?
GW Bush = Bush the Punier
Jeb Bush = Bush the PuniestReplies: @syonredux
An excellent portrait of degeneration in action.
More East Asians, fewer Mestizo/Amerind Hispanics.
Re: Tiny Foul (duck). Our host lets it post; for whatever reason. He controls what we see and have the opportunity? to respond.
My ex was half Hawiian and told me not to talk to or approach the natives; this was back in ’80. She was convinced they were just a twitch away from slitting cauc throat. I ignored her and got along with them just fine. But I guess collectively they don’t like haolies.
Vermont is where a lot of Red Diaper Babies and Burnt-out Hippies went to avoid growing up and getting adult jobs and to live somewhat off the grid (Bernie was unintentionally off the grid on an intermittent basis owing to his inability to pay his electric bills). Think the East Coast’s San Francisco Bay area. They managed to migrate in enough numbers to overwhelm the existing rural farmer’s Rockefeller Republican style politics (remember Jim Jeffords?) and turn the state crazy in about a single generation’s time.
Libertarians noticed and were trying to accomplish a similar feat with New Hampshire, albeit intentionally, via the “Free State Project.” The idea being that a small state like Vermont or New Hampshire has outsized political influence per voter because it sends two United States Senators to Washington, while being able to shape intrastate policy on things like recreational marijuana and whatever else serious Libertarians concern themselves with.
Oh, I really like that riposte. 🙂 Center shot!
Would that make Jeb, Bro Bush?Replies: @antipater_1, @Alec Leamas
Modeled after Papa Doc Duvalier and Baby Doc Duvalier?
I go with “Bush the Greater” and “Bush the Lesser.”
“You left out that the guy was also an illegal alien.”
He is an English hooligan.
The medical staff at the girlfriend’s hospital jokes that there’s a sign at Logan Airport with directions to their ER.
Then count Filipinos as belonging to both categories: problem solved lol
Given Wilson's championing of Amnesty, the millions of illegals who were gaining citizenship right around 1994 might have even leaned a bit towards him if not for his Prop. 187 campaign.
As for the ideological politics of 25% white Hawaii, my impression is that it's very similar to that of 95% white Vermont. When was the last time a conservative Republican was elected in Vermont?Replies: @syonredux, @Jefferson, @JohnnyWalker123
Could you offer your analysis and views on the Brexit?
Thanks.
Yeah, I’m aware of that. But I’m not gonna look up a half dozen commenters comments six times a day, just to keep up. I’m saying I would like to be able to look at a post that interests me, and see the comments from commenters that interest me.
In other words, in true HBD spirit, not all commenters are equal. And I would like to reduce the friction between me and getting to the better comments.